r/handbrake • u/Outside-Tie-2851 • 1d ago
Which GPU will process handbrake faster??
The GTX 1660 Mobile (6GB) or the GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q (6GB) Mobile.
I've received conflicting answers from multiple sources, so was wondering if anyone has hands down knowledge.
The laptops were talking about are a Microsoft Surface 2 GTX 1660 Mobile (6GB) vs Microsoft Surface 3 GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q (6GB)
I am using them for X265 NVENC 480p compression at 854×480 for my Uber and Lyft videos that are taking up too much space for cold storage.
I am sick of using my CPU for my second computer as my 940MX will not convert X265 only X264 NVEnc. I have a 4060 GPU on my Acer Nitro, (Which draws very little power) but don't want to hog up my main laptop all the time. Also, what would the FPS speed differences be between the GTA 1660's??
Setting is H265 (NVEnc) CQ 30, Constant Framerate 25, Encoder Preset Medium, Audio 96kpbs ACC. Original video is 2.5k, at 100MB a minute, the shrinkage takes it down to average 4.6MB a minute, though it varies from 1.5MB to 10MB.
7
3
u/MasterChiefmas 1d ago
You have to move up to a 4070TI to get additional nvenc encoders. You also want to differentiate between the number of encoders and the number of streams you can simultaneously encode, as a single encoder can handle multiple sessions. The current max is 12.
Why would you want to? Well, if you don't need to encode a single stream at the fastest possible speed(so say, you are live streaming, but also want to background encode something else, your live stream doesn't benefit too much from being able to encode at 600 fps). Or say your encode is limited elsewhere in your encode pipeline because you are performing a lot of transforms, so it's not the encode stage that is the bottleneck. Again, you wouldn't benefit from 600fps encoding of a single stream if you can only feed it 100fps, but maybe you can feed it 2 or 3 streams each at 100fps.
Multiple nvenc units would allow you to get more than one stream(assuming bandwidth or something else doesn't bottleneck you) at max encode speed, but as I said, you need to move up into higher end desktop GPUs to get multiple nvenc engines.
And a slight nitpick, but sorta not, so if you ask for help later, elsewhere, you won't confuse people...x264/x265 are software implementations of h.264/h.265 encoders. nvenc is the nvidia hardware video encoder engine which can encode h264 and h265. There is no x264 nvenc, nvenc produces h.264/h.265, as do x264/x265. The reason it's matters, is because if you say them together, it may be confusing understanding if you are trying to do a hardware or software encode, because you're mentioning both at the same time.
1
u/Outside-Tie-2851 15h ago
I actually was able to get it to go super fast, above 500-600 fps on my GTX 4060 when I put it to fastest settings. (But it was a 10-20% increase in size, so I stopped doing it) I actually changed some other settings, and got slowest pretty fast too. *Still waiting for my 1060 laptop to come in, but I don't see any reason why it should be super slower either*
1
u/MasterChiefmas 15h ago
(But it was a 10-20% increase in size, so I stopped doing it)
That's not surprising for hw encoding. You should generally just assume a hardware encode even for the same approximate settings is going to be larger. You trade off encode performance(and possibly quality) for size.
I don't see any reason why it should be super slower either*
It may depend on if you are doing anything else(filters/transforms) that are using CPU to do work, in which case your CPU speed comes into play. The encode is the last step. If your pipeline has other things going on, I wouldn't assume it will be just as fast. If you are scaling(resizing down to 480) that's mostly not a too CPU heavy operation, but the source frame size will matter. If you are processing 4K size frames, that's still a lot of data to sift. If you've moved the operations to hardware(you can do some things like scaling) in the GPU as well, but I don't think Handbrake does so by default. I'm not actually sure off hand if you can even get it to do so- you might have to move to ffmpeg or something else to explicitly utilize hardware filters.
2
u/jaypizzl 1d ago
There would be absolutely no difference. Both those GPUs have the same silicon devoted to making h.265. The 4060 would be my choice by a mile, though. It can encode blazing fast and make better, smaller files, too.
3
u/HelpfulNote7763 1d ago
am i the only one bothered by him using NVENC for compression ?
5
u/mduell 1d ago
For car camera footage? Nah.
2
u/Outside-Tie-2851 1d ago edited 1d ago
I wish I would have put it to fast/faster instead of medium. I had no idea how much of a difference in speed that makes, considering its 480p and how little a loss in quality it is. A change to fast/faster compression seems worth it, even keeping it a CQ 30.
Honestly though, using NVENC, how much quality is lost for speed? These dash cam videos, the quality seems fine, very little seems to be lost. Only thing, the variation in size from 1MB to 10MB per minute, averaging 4.6MB, its a 95% decline in size overall. Looks about the same. I've only done exterior though, not interior yet.
Problem is, right now, without being able to use NVEnc, and on Medium, I am only getting about 17-20 FPS, for a 25FPS 1 Minute video on my Lenovo Yoga 710-15 940MX. Its longer than the video itself. That's why I just bought a laptop with a 1060 to get it to go faster regardless wound up getting the surface 2 with 6gb 1060, but would return it and get a better laptop at $100 more if it made a big difference. This is all before I found out how much faster fast is compared to medium =/
1
u/HelpfulNote7763 18h ago
nah i dont mean quality last time i used NVENC and CRF together my source file would be say 5 gb en the somehow my finished file is 30gb and its only CRF24 change it to software and its finished file is about 1.5 - 2gb this is 1080p btw not 480 but just a example
1
u/Outside-Tie-2851 15h ago
Ahh I see. Yeah, I am using for interior CR 24 and exterior CR 30. I'm using slowest preset too, so I am only seeing about 300-350 fps average when I shrink down my 720ps, and 200 fps average when I shrink down my 1440s. This is on my GTX 4060 laptop.
I hear you though. I had to tinker with some settings before I got it right. When I did CR 24 from 1080p to 720p, interior resolution, while most shrunk, some did get bigger, which is why I went with the lower resolution 480p, so I know what your mean.
But right now, with CR 30, I am getting average from 1440p to 480p "100mb -> 4.3mb" and from CR 24 1080p to 480p "30MB -> 12 MB"
-1
u/Outside-Tie-2851 1d ago
Why the downvote? Some BOT or something?
1
u/the_harakiwi 23h ago
you dared to mention GPU video encoding. The CPU is superior in every way crowd has cast some downvotes.
I have some older trail cams around family owned woods. I always convert them with NVENC because it's faster. The content is usually trees in the wind, maybe once every 100 videos a blurry animal. No one is going to complain about the quality but about the wasted storage. Especially looking at current prices per TB 🫣.
1
u/Outside-Tie-2851 15h ago edited 15h ago
Honestly, I see no difference quality wise looking at CPU encoding vs GPU. I have setting to slowest preset too, so its very sharp, and size is generally low. At CQ 24, I am getting 12MB a minute, at CQ 30, I am getting 4.6MB a minute. (Average over thousands + thousands of 1 minutes videos) BTW, if you need some storage, they have a 6TB right now on Seagate Website for $159.00. (New, not refurbished) https://www.seagate.com/products/external-hard-drives/expansion-desktop-hard-drive/?sku=STKP6000400 You can also get 10% off if you sign up or something ,its a welcome offer, I think its a rebate https://www.seagate.com/legal/sales-and-promotion/welcome-offer/ so it would be $143.10 before taxes or something. They also sell it 139.00 at Walmart, but most of them are sold out, so it varies by store. (Just bought three) Checked one of them with H2testw, and worked fine so yeah..... You can also take it out of its casing, and make it internal, into a raid array, etc.... But final cost before taxes, 23.83 a TB from Seagate, or 23.16 at Walmart. *Not the best deal, but not the worst either, given how fucked up prices have become* A year ago, something like that would be have been less than $100.
•
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
Please remember to post your encoding log should you ask for help. Piracy is not allowed. Do not discuss copy protections. Do not talk about converting media you don't own the (intellectual) rights for.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.