Is there any known quality benefit to using software vs Nvidia Cuda when converting Blu Ray content from h.264 to h.265?
I've done a few tests to convert to h.265, but they never look as good as the original, and often banding / blocking can be seen on things like walls in the background of a shot.
I'm trying to understand if I should stick with Cuda but just up the bit rate or if there's something inherent about the two methods that would give one an advantage for final image quality.
(Note: I'm aware of the time difference - Cuda is much faster, but it's final output quality that I'm concerned with)
I've done a few tests to convert to h.265, but they never look as good as the original, and often banding / blocking can be seen on things like walls in the background of a shot.
I'm trying to understand if I should stick with Cuda but just up the bit rate or if there's something inherent about the two methods that would give one an advantage for final image quality.
(Note: I'm aware of the time difference - Cuda is much faster, but it's final output quality that I'm concerned with)