Intel QuickSync vs Nvidia CUDA

RedJamaX

My System:

Processor - Intel Core i5 2500K
Graphics - Nvidia 560 Ti
Asus Motherboard with Lucid Virtu

Lately, Lucid Virtu has not been working with DVDFab properly. The Intel QuickSync just gets stuck and even after 4 or 5 hours it stays at less than even 3%. CUDA processing seems to work fine however. I've tried using older and newer versions of Lucid with older and newer versions of DVDFab and I'm tired of spending HOURS and HOURS of testing if I'm going to get the same results with CUDA deconding and encoding... So here are my questions...

Performance:
Has anybody seen any significant performance increase with Intel QuickSync vs Nvidia CUDA? From what I can tell there is no significant difference...

Quality:
I've not compared quality but I am curious if anybody else has? Is there a noticable difference between CUDA and QuickSync (when comparing equivilant processors and GPUs with my hardware)??

Anybody have any insight? Would it be worth continuing troubleshooting to get the Intel QuickSync working? Or is CUDA image quality just as good with a 560 Ti?

kicken

See my response in another thread you started ... but basically I have a 2600K and Z68 mobo.

From BDISO file to mkv file:
Fastest CUDA encode/decode, 18 mins - Output Quality average
* Next Fastest QuickSync decode / Software encode, 40 mins - Output perfect
Next Slowest Software decode / Software encode, 90 mins - Output perfect
Slowest Anything decode / QuickSync encode, 3 hours - Output perfect

* My preference.

martythebrit

I got fed up with VIRTU and I'm not a gamer, except for those darn birds :),
so I uninstalled VIRTU and pulled my GTS450 out. No more problems now.

rcottle1

QuickSync VERY fast

I can't explain why but here was my take on it. I have long had intermittent issues with my 660GTX driver crashing during encoding, never have been able to isolate the cause. Anyway on standard Blu-ray movies conversions it would take 40-45 minutes for a full movie decode/encode to .mkv at about 70fps. I just removed my Nvidia card last week and tried out the integrated HD4000 on my i7-3770k cpu. Using Quicksync i am now getting a solid 165FPS decoding/encoding the same movie and the total conversion time is 16-22 minutes depending on the movies length. I wish I could game with the integrated graphics because it's amazing for video transcoding.

Intel i7-3770k at 4GHZ, 16GB DDR3-1600, Windows 7 Pro x64, Using HD4000 on CPU

MERX2006

thanks you helped me understand

[QUOTE=rcottle1;131675]I can't explain why but here was my take on it. I have long had intermittent issues with my 660GTX driver crashing during encoding, never have been able to isolate the cause. Anyway on standard Blu-ray movies conversions it would take 40-45 minutes for a full movie decode/encode to .mkv at about 70fps. I just removed my Nvidia card last week and tried out the integrated HD4000 on my i7-3770k cpu. Using Quicksync i am now getting a solid 165FPS decoding/encoding the same movie and the total conversion time is 16-22 minutes depending on the movies length. I wish I could game with the integrated graphics because it's amazing for video transcoding.

Intel i7-3770k at 4GHZ, 16GB DDR3-1600, Windows 7 Pro x64, Using HD4000 on CPU[/QUOTE]

Do you know if the 4770 is an upgrade from the 3770?

glenns

Don't forget quick sync and cuda will work with lightning shrink making it even faster in version 9 for conversions so don't compare with version 8 as it doesn't have it.
Also Cuda depends on the card some have less cuda cores than others.

Intel i7-3770k at 3.4GHZ, 8 GB DDR3-1700, Windows 7 home premium x64, Using HD4000 on CPU is lightning fast using quick sync about 16-22 mins. depending on disk for regular blu rays converting from 50 gigs to 25 gigs.

4770 processor is just a overclocked 3770 and you can do the same with the 3770k theirs program to tweak it.The i7-3770k overclocks anyway by itself when it's called for from 3.4 to 3.9 turbo.

martythebrit

The 4770 isn't an overclocked 3770, that's just wrong.

The 3770 is based on the older Ivy bridge technology, while the 4770 is based on the newer Haswell technology.

The 4770 is almost the same price as the 3770, but it's Quick Sync is faster, I would definitely buy it rather than the 3770.

90312

I'm not terribly impressed by Haswell's speed improvement but for 5 or 10 bucks why not? They did add a video quality segment to the GPU that could be interesting.

glenns

Ok your right I was thinking about a different processor here's a link to the 2 processors difference.http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/440/Intel_Core_i7_i7-3770_vs_Intel_Core_i7_i7-4770.html

signals

Users and Guests: Please note that the information in this thread is old and dated, please don’t rely on it. The thread is closed.