GPU for HTPC video decoding (nvdec)

[qvowie]

Hi!

 

I'm planning a htpc build for streaming and local video playback on a 4k tv (no gaming) and have a question about nvidia video hardware decoding.

I'm looking at a gtx 1660 super as a good alternative for my build as it support most formats and is pretty affordable. But to my question:

Does it matter which current nvidia gpu i get only for the video decoding features? Would I get better performance with a 2060 super or would that just be unnecessary?

Is the video decoding hardware the same on all Turing gpu's?

 

Thanks! 

[Noah0302]

10 minutes ago, qvowie said:

Hi!

 

I'm planning a htpc build for streaming and local video playback on a 4k tv (no gaming) and have a question about nvidia video hardware decoding.

I'm looking at a gtx 1660 super as a good alternative for my build as it support most formats and is pretty affordable. But to my question:

Does it matter which current nvidia gpu i get only for the video decoding features? Would I get better performance with a 2060 super or would that just be unnecessary?

Is the video decoding hardware the same on all Turing gpu's?

 

Thanks! 

To be honest I think dedicated GPUs are already unnecessary.

 

A Ryzen 5 with an APU should be enough already.

[xAcid9]

Check here.

 

https://developer.nvidia.com/video-encode-decode-gpu-support-matrix

[Jurrunio]

1650S will do, the encoding and decoding work are all done by ASICs implemented into the GPU, not the CUDA cores we talk about for compute and gaming. Before Turing bigger GPUs actually have more NVDEC and NVENC units, but I dont think Turing has such difference anymore.

[WereCatf]

1 hour ago, qvowie said:

Does it matter which current nvidia gpu i get only for the video decoding features? Would I get better performance with a 2060 super or would that just be unnecessary?

Is the video decoding hardware the same on all Turing gpu's?

You don't need a Turing GPU at all just for H/W-decoding. A Geforce GT1030, for example, can do plain decoding just fine. GTX1050 can handle encoding as well. Both choices are cheaper than a 2060 and can be found used really easily.

[WereCatf]

20 minutes ago, Jurrunio said:

1650S

1050 would be far cheaper.

[WereCatf]

1 hour ago, Noah0302 said:

A Ryzen 5 with an APU should be enough already.

Depends on whether OP is planning to use Plex or not. Plex apparently still doesn't support HW-decoding with AMD GPUs.

[papajo]

32 minutes ago, WereCatf said:

Plex apparently still doesn't support HW-decoding with AMD GPUs

I can not find a reason for that to be true and googling around I found that it works https://forums.plex.tv/t/amd-for-hw-transcoding-or-intel-nvidia-only/234695/13

 

Also it doesnt matter its better to use software acceleration especially if you have so many cores to work with (incase of a ryzen 5)

[WereCatf]

5 minutes ago, papajo said:

I can not find a reason for that to be true and googling around I found that it works https://forums.plex.tv/t/amd-for-hw-transcoding-or-intel-nvidia-only/234695/13

It used not to work for years and years.

 

5 minutes ago, papajo said:

Also it doesnt matter its better to use software acceleration especially if you have so many cores to work with (incase of a ryzen 5

Hardware-encoding is much more efficient, thereby meaning less power wasted and possibly lower noise due to the CPU-fan not having to work that hard.

[papajo]

15 minutes ago, WereCatf said:

It used not to work for years and years.

 

Hardware-encoding is much more efficient, thereby meaning less power wasted and possibly lower noise due to the CPU-fan not having to work that hard.

nah a ryzen 5 at stock speeds full load will use like 65 watts from the wall but full loading 12 threads at 100% wont happen even for 4k... maybe on 8k footage but i did not test that... so power efficiency is fine.

 

Hardware acceleration is faster but the quality of picture is worse. if eye candy is what you are going for you need to go software acceleration. 

 

As for the fan noise the stock fan isnt noisy... water cooling exists (and at this TDP passive cooling is also an option although it would take kinda lot of space)and last but not least it wont get hot enough to need high fan speeds in the first place unless he  will game or whatnot

[Jurrunio]

7 hours ago, WereCatf said:

1050 would be far cheaper.

if price has not inflated that is, in PCPP 1050 and 1050ti are matching 1650 and 1650S in pricing

 

6 hours ago, papajo said:

nah a ryzen 5 at stock speeds full load will use like 65 watts from the wall but full loading 12 threads at 100% wont happen even for 4k... maybe on 8k footage but i did not test that... so power efficiency is fine.

You can't beat a GPU that pulls 10w (idle at around 5w) for decoding with a CPU, that's the power of dedicated hardware

 

and besides, with a Ryzen 5 that has 12 threads, you need some sort of graphics card in order to use the system in the first place.

[papajo]

1 hour ago, Jurrunio said:

You can't beat a GPU that pulls 10w (idle at around 5w) for decoding with a CPU, that's the power of dedicated hardware

I am talking realistically, its not a game to see who has more points... 

 

Realistically speaking he wont feel any difference in his pocket  even if he was burning 65 watts that's my point (and he is not coming close to that figure in a home cinema scenario) 

But you are right he could get the APU 8 thread version to save even more 

 

https://forums.plex.tv/t/hardware-transcode-on-the-new-ryzen-apus/227191/9

 

On the link above  you can see that both during encoding and decoding the CPU is used less than 8%  and the GPU less than 40%

 

and on this video you can see the GPU (the apu vega 11 cores) @ 35watt performing the same as in full TDP setting 

 

 

 

and you can assume that the cores are close to 100% performance... so if the cores are less than 40% the power draw is even lower.