What do you mean you're disappointed in the compression of the RTX 2080? I just jumped from a GTX 1080 Ti to an RTX 2080 and the compression is awesome.
Correction: The Atomic Blonde was 15.5Gb using the GTX 1080 Ti, so by using the RTX 2080 the file size was significantly smaller.
So if you're disappointed in the RTX 2080 and the compression then your not doing something right. I'm almost getting close to software compression size, only about a 2Gb - 3Gb difference. With the GTX 1080 Ti the gap between hardware and software compression was quite significant.
Also all this talk about how the Turing is worse than Pascal because the Pacal cards have two seperate chipsets for encoding and decoding. The Turing have combined that into one chip making it more efficient and even faster and able to compress video quite substantially compared to the Pascal. So that discussion should be moot.
Correction: The Atomic Blonde was 15.5Gb using the GTX 1080 Ti, so by using the RTX 2080 the file size was significantly smaller.
So if you're disappointed in the RTX 2080 and the compression then your not doing something right. I'm almost getting close to software compression size, only about a 2Gb - 3Gb difference. With the GTX 1080 Ti the gap between hardware and software compression was quite significant.
Also all this talk about how the Turing is worse than Pascal because the Pacal cards have two seperate chipsets for encoding and decoding. The Turing have combined that into one chip making it more efficient and even faster and able to compress video quite substantially compared to the Pascal. So that discussion should be moot.
Comment