VideoHelp Forum. Remember Me? Download free trial! Page 1 of 2 1 2 Last Jump to page: Results 1 to 30 of I ran some tests on some clips and decided to post some results. See if you can guess which was encoded with x and which was Quick Sync. The second image is QS. All the small low contrast detail is gone. By the way, you should always post the original image along with the encoded images. Originally Posted by jagabo.
Originally Posted by KarMa. I thought the labels in each photo should be self-explanatory; both source and encoded versions, difference and difference amplified. Encode times: x with an Intel Core iK overclocked to 4. Last edited by ziggy; 10th Oct at Now repeat the x encode at the veryfast preset and you'll see it's almost as fast as the QS encoding and still looks better. Well, not clear on what people are looking at, but from what I see, there is little to no difference save for bias opinions.
Without any explanation or clarification pointing out the details or lack thereofan opinion is just that, an opinion. I could say "the sky looks better today. Saying that x looks better than Quick Sync is pointless.
Hell, even with my lack of experience, I could go on saying that. Show me exactly where there is such a drastic difference?
Suggest some settings, do something Standing on the sidelines and pointing out faults, well, please move on. Present useful information based on results and actual data.
Perhaps I could suggest using a "circle" to point out differences, I don't know, it's much more work than simply typing "x looks better than y" I already told you what the differences were in my first post. Originally Posted by ziggy The Quick Sync settings or other hardware used only become relevant when trying to reproduce the results.
Originally Posted by poisondeathray.
I will try altering the B frames, Look ahead depth and maybe some other settings and see what I can come up with. Just saying something is better than the other, well, that's not useful information. There are several million people, without any encoding knowledge, who could say the exact same thing and mean the same thing.
Yes, I get upset when people answer without actually saying anything. I don't want to read their useless comments, it wastes my time as well as others trying to learn. Wow, all this and a whopping 1 download of the actual Quick Sync video. It's basically the same as the other thread. There are some good tips in that thread on how to "see" differences if your eyes are not used to seeing these types of things, or if your display is hiding things or calibrated differently If you brighten up the encodesyou will see right away, there are significant differences.
The fine details, grain are smoothed away in the QS encode.VideoHelp Forum. Remember Me? Download free trial! And why are they so popular? Results 1 to 24 of What is the difference between x and h? I have a good program which easily cuts out advertisements, and a couple of decent programs which I use for encoding.
Once the file is finished, the picture quality still looks quite good, but whilst the file size is smaller than the original, it's still a little bit too large for my liking. I know there are many other people who capture live sport in HD as well, but most of them seem to be able to make their file sizes much smaller than mine, and also have better quality too. It looks like quite a lot of people use h or x I don't know the difference with the MKV container.
I'm thinking of trying this for the next game that I record, so I have downloaded a program that gives me much more options, and is a lot more advanced than the one I have been using. I know I have written a lot here sorry but my main question is, what is the difference between x and h, and why are they so popular? Is it because they can compress files too a smaller size and at the same time, retain a high picture quality?
Or is there much more to it than that? Once again, sorry for the long post, but I am only a beginner with all this sort of stuff, and I just wanted to give as much information as possible. Thanks in advance to anyone willing to help. All help will be much appreciated. Originally Posted by jagabo. Last edited by KyleMadrid; 4th Feb at Originally Posted by KyleMadrid. So x is what encodes a video into h. If this is the case, why do I see people stating that a file has been encoded with x, rather than just saying that the video is h.
I think I understand it a bit better now.
OBS Development Blog
Also, just to clarify The worst AVC encoders can produce very poor results, maybe worse than xvid. Arguably, x the best overall AVC encoder in most situations. The standards which can be argued ad infinitum for MKV sometimes cause issues for certain computers and media extenders. Basically, if you encode as if you're going to play it on a Color Nook, it will play on almost any device.
See the settings for the iPhone4 or iPad in the Handbrake app and use that as your starting point. Your encoded videos should end up almost the same size as the MKVs. Now I'm confused again. Am I even close to being on the right track? My favourite being VLC. So that's not a problem for me.Games Beat. You can set your CPU to do software encoding. You could alternatively select your Nvidia GPU to handle that task. Each of these have their benefits, but your best bet was to use your CPU.
Livestreaming requires you to compress a video broadcast into a small amount of bandwidth. But X is efficient at smushing visual details into that tiny space. This option rarely hurts performance.
And it is now potentially better than X in a lot of ways. So how do these two encoding standards stack up against one another today? X still does some things better, but I think NVENC may have the edge when it comes to what you want for livestreaming video.
Everything else is default for OBS Studio. To see the best possible comparison, you should watch the video at the top in 4K. NVENC still seems to struggle with shifting from black to white. You can see in the image below that the orange-yellow light on the bottom right of the image has some blocking for the GPU encoding.
At least when it comes to the smoothness of the light source. Again, the CPU maintains an image that is more in-line with the high-bitrate footage. But X falls behind when it comes to fast-moving gameplay. I picked Rocket League because it suffers from a lot of compression due to its intense pace. Take a look at this comparison. This screenshot is from a quick turn where the camera is panning with a lot of speed.
The GPU footage looks sharper overall. The CPU footage, however, has a soft and fuzzy look to it. Look at the teal coloring of the car. On the CPU, you can notice some ugly blotches. Likewise, the basketball court looks blurrier on X, and so does the dark crowd.
NVENC is just a speedier coded. In Rocket League, the playfield has a hexagonal containment grid that you can drive on. It has some frames that look like the one on the right.
Check that out by pausing around this point in the video. But the point is that it happens far more frequently on X At a distance, X smudges words together to the point that you cannot read them.
NVENC, meanwhile, maintains their legibility. Or in something like Rocket League.
NVENC vs. X264 — Does CPU or RTX GPU encoding work best for Twitch?
Having clear text and fewer visual artifacts during fast motion is a big improvement. Of course, exceptions to that will grow as games learn to take more advantage of hyperthreading.
Instead, save your money and get a 6-core-plus recent-generation CPU. It is the better option. VentureBeat Homepage Games Beat.The fact that X and X come to compatible with hardware devices turns out to the strongest evidence.
Provided that you're able to play both x and x videos, x vs x, which is better? And what's the difference between x vs x? Scroll down and you'll find the definition of x and x, differences based on quality, file size, bitrate etc.
Usually we confused x with H. Actually, H. It is almost exclusively used by all the open source video platforms like ffmpeg, gstreamer, handbrake etc. In short, H is a format, and X is a software library to create H files. And x is a free software library and application for encoding video streams into the H.
From the definition, we got to know x is a successor to x Similarly, there are also confusion with x and H. However, in daily life, it's not that exact for x vs x and H. That is to say, we usually lumped together H. And H. Go further to see what x differs with x It is widely used by television broadcasters and ISPs. Drawbacks: Unrealistic for UHD content delivery due to high bit rate requirements.
NVIDIA NVENC OBS Guide
Frame rate support restricted to Drawbacks: Requiring more compute power to decode, devices using batteries will run out of power faster and it is expensive to license. Also See: H. World of Warcraft: Legion alpha 30fps, x resolution, 33 second video. I encode this video file with Handbrake H. File size: 3.You can set your CPU to do software encoding. You could then again choose your Nvidia GPU to deal with that task. Each of these has its advantages, however, your most solid option was to utilize your CPU.
Live gushing expects you to pack a video communicate into a little measure of transmission capacity. In any case, X is proficient at smushing visual subtleties into that minor space.
This choice infrequently harms execution. So how do these two encoding models pile facing each other today? Everything else is the default for OBS Studio. To see the most ideal examination, you should watch the video at the top in 4K. NVENC still appears to battle with moving from dark to white. You can find in the picture underneath that the orange-yellow light on the base right of the picture makes them hinder for the GPU encoding.
At any rate with regards to the smoothness of the light source. You will likewise observe that the white spotlight from the roof makes them obstruct around it for NVENC.
Once more, the CPU keeps up a picture that is more in accordance with the high-bitrate film. In any case, X falls behind with regards to quick moving ongoing interaction. I picked Rocket League since it experiences a ton of compressions because of its serious pace.
Investigate this correlation. This screen capture is from a brisk turn where the camera is panning with a great deal of speed. The GPU film looks more keen by and large. The CPU film, be that as it may, has a delicate and fluffy look to it. That is near the camera and at a separation.
Take a gander at the greenish blue shading of the vehicle. On the CPU, you can see some revolting blotches. In like manner, the ball court looks blurrier on X, thus does the dull group. NVENC is only a speedier coded. That is particularly discernible when you get a ton of slim pieces of detail moving rapidly left or right or here and there.In the next weeks we'll dedicate a couple of articles to game streaming and provide you with a definitive answer on what sort of setup is the best, and what quality settings make the most sense to use.
One of the key things we want to figure out first: whether software encoding on the CPU, or hardware accelerated encoding on the GPU is the better approach A bit of backstory on our test platform before we get into the results This is really one of the key battles, because if GPU encoding is the way to go, what CPU you need for streaming becomes largely irrelevant, whereas if CPU encoding is better, naturally your choice of processor becomes a major factor in the level of quality, not just in terms of consistency of streaming, but game performance on your end.
Over the last few months in particular, GPU encoding has become more interesting because Nvidia updated their hardware encoding engine in their new GPU architecture, Turing. The second part of the investigation involves software encoding with x, using a variety of presets. All testing was done with the Core iK overclocked to 4. Both titles present a bit of a worse case scenario for game streaming, but in different and unique ways.
The key bit of interest here is to see how Turing has managed to improve things compared to past GPU encoding offerings, which were pretty much unusable next to CPU encoding options. There are a few other preset options but High Quality produces, as the name suggests, the highest quality output. Both suffer from serious macroblocking effects, and in general there is a complete lack of detail to the image. In Forza Horizon 4 in particular, blocking is very noticeable on the road and looks terrible.
When looking purely at software x encoding presets, there are noticeable differences between each of veryfast, faster, fast and medium. It provides a noticeable quality jump over faster, to the point where blurred fine detail now has definition.
Medium is a noticeable improvement again, but the gap between fast and medium is smaller than the gap between faster and fast. Unfortunately the tight bitrate limit of kbps prevents any preset from doing true justice to the source material, but once again medium gets the closest and provides an improvement over fast. With the Core iK and the RTX playing Odyssey using our custom quality preset, we were only able to encode the game using the x veryfast preset without suffering from frame drops in the stream output.
Veryfast encoding is better visually than NVENC for this type of game, so the performance hit is worth it. With a frame drop rate of 8. And it gets worse with fast and medium, which see frame drop rates of 62 and 82 percent respectively.
One strategy to improve performance might be to cap the game to 60 FPS, as those watching your stream will be limited to 60 FPS anyway. With the K limited to veryfast streaming or GPU streaming in this title, it will be interesting to see how other CPUs stack up in part 2 of this investigation. This caused unpleasant stuttering in the stream. With that cap in place, the fast preset becomes usable with zero frame drops in the output. Games with less motion should be encoded using the veryfast x preset rather than NVENC, and veryfast should be achievable on most PCs that have been built with streaming in mind.
On the AMD front, their encoding engine needs plenty of work to be even considered.
Game Streaming Investigation: Which Quality Settings Are Best?
CPU encoding is obviously a more tricky story as what level of x encoding you can manage will depend on your CPU and, crucially, the type of game you are playing. With our K system we ranged from being stuck with veryfast encoding in a CPU demanding game, to being able to use the fast or even medium preset with a steady 60 FPS game output at decent quality settings in a less CPU demanding title.
Anyone who is streaming professionally or full time should use a second, dedicated stream capture PC with a decent capture card and CPU. This then fully offloads the encoding work, allowing you to comfortably use the medium preset or slower for the best quality streams, without impacting your game performance.
The second part of this series on game streaming we'll investigate which CPUs are capable of encoding at these presets, so stay tuned for that. Masthead credit: Sean Do. If you enjoy our content, please consider subscribing User Comments: 8 Got something to say?So, you want to learn more about video encoding? How to set up your stream for the best quality given your computer's hardware and connection limitations?
Let's start with this video by Tom Scott. He does a great job of giving a quick primer on how video encoding works, and you will hopefully have a better understanding of the topics and terminology that we'll be going over. All done? Let's get started. Before we get into the details, let me explain what this guide is not. This is not intended to be a fully detailed technical explanation of how x works; there are far better guides out there than what I can provide here.
If you're interested in the nitty-gritty, head over to the doom9 forumsFFmpeg docsor the x website and start digging. This is also not intended to be a "best settings" guide, and I will not recommend any specific settings. This is intended to help you understand how video encoding in general works, and how to better identify potential issues with your settings and help you learn where to look to correct them. Let me reiterate that there is no such thing as "best settings". Every single setup, for every single use case, will be different.
As an example, I have 3 different sets of streaming encoding settings for the types of media I stream. One for fast motion games, one for desktop applications, and another for live video. This tool will test your system and your internet connection to determine what it can handle from both an encoding standpoint and a connection stability standpoint.
However, the best way to find your best settings is to test, test, and test again. This guide is focused entirely on streaming with the x encoder. This is what the vast majority of OBS users will be using when they stream. For local recordings, your choice of encoder is far less relevant than your actual settings and in many cases a hardware encoder will be better suited for you. It is important to understand that video encoding is a very resource intensive process, especially when attempting to do so in real-time.
As a trade-off the overall quality per bitrate is lower than the CPU-based x in nearly all cases. For streaming where bitrate is usually a constraining factor, x is currently the best option for getting the most quality out of your stream.