CoreAVC

[ernielee]

I now have CoreAVC how to use?

[Bendit]

Actually, I would also like to know how DVDFab and CoreAVC work together. Is it worth buying CoreAVC? Will it really outperform DVDFab's built-in decoder?????

Who has experience with this? Thanks!

[Blurayfan]

I now have CoreAVC how to use?

To use the CoreAVC codec in DVDFab. You go into the common settings "AV Codec" page and change the H. 264 Video decoding setting to CoreAVC.

[Bendit]

Thanks! But is it worth it? Does it outperform DVDFab's decoder ??

[Johan]

I didn't notice any difference between CoreAVC and CUDA but I didn't try it without any acceleration

[IPopov50]

I made test run, and here's what I've got:
Movie: Indiana Jones 4
Mode: Blu-ray to Mobile (MKV with custom settings)

First run:
General Settings:
Decoder H.264 - CoreAVC
PathPlayer - disabled

Conversion took about 3hr 50 min with average 12-13 fps
Only one GPU were engaged (I have duoGPU nVIDIA GTX295 card) for about 20% load in average.

Second run:
General Settings:
Decoder H.264 - CUDA
PathPlayer - disabled

Conversion didn't took long. About 1hr 10 min into the process I found my computer frozen.
However, during the conversion process, I observe same, average 12-13 fps speed.
Both GPUs were engaged, one for about 20% load in average, and another - for about 2-3%

Looks like both options (speedwise) are about the same. What was revealing for me that a quality with CoreAVC decoding far greater than CUDA codec. But again, there is an obvious codec conflict in my machine, and I can't confirm this statement. Maybe there is a need for some tweaking in CUDA codecs.

[Bendit]

do you mean to say that the video quality on the final disk is much better with CoreAVC ? That is quite a statement. Please confirm? Thanks!

[IPopov50]

Bendit,
it's my observations. So far, IMO, CoreAVC does better job than CUDA codec. However, It doesn't mean it's codec's fault, but settings. I pulled out a command line (after conversion was done) with MediaInfo, and can tell that some of the settings are out of reasonable range for this source. Also, I said that CoreAVC decoded material quality is better than CUDA codec. It doesn't mean that quality was good - lets say with CoraAVC quality was bad, when with CUDA - quality was unacceptable. I did another experimental run however, using one of my old ways to create .mkv - I converted BD into BD9 using DVDFab v6, demuxed streams with HdBrStreamExtractor, and remuxed them back with MKVMerge. That gave me an excellent result, and I have near perfect .mkv on my HDD. It was possible because codec on Blu-ray to BD9 is set correctly and produced good quality. Unfortunately, we can't tweak codec in DVDFab, and have to wait until developers will get to the point of fine tweaking.

[Johan]

I did another title last night to a BDDVD9 at 1080p. With CUDA my process rate was hovering around 7MB/s and my CPU was topped out at 100%. When I tried the same title with CoreAVC my process rate was around 5MB/s but the CPU was only running at 60%. So there is some room for improvement here. I did not test the load on my GPUs will do in the future. I've never done a burn with both on the same title but CUDA has alwys produced a good quality backup for me. No complaints but it might just be my eyes can't tell the difference anymore.