安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語(日文)
한국어(韓文)
ไทย(泰文)
Български(保加利亞文)
Čeština(捷克文)
Dansk(丹麥文)
Deutsch(德文)
English(英文)
Español - España(西班牙文 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希臘文)
Français(法文)
Italiano(義大利文)
Bahasa Indonesia(印尼語)
Magyar(匈牙利文)
Nederlands(荷蘭文)
Norsk(挪威文)
Polski(波蘭文)
Português(葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙)
Português - Brasil(葡萄牙文 - 巴西)
Română(羅馬尼亞文)
Русский(俄文)
Suomi(芬蘭文)
Svenska(瑞典文)
Türkçe(土耳其文)
tiếng Việt(越南文)
Українська(烏克蘭文)
回報翻譯問題
I mean I can't either, but I don't go around pretending my card is jusasgud.
Hey, I have a question for you. I earlier posted about how my personal main reason for trying to stick with Nvidia is because of Nvenc. Encoding movies is literally like 3x faster than with my cpu and that's with a 2070. I assume 3000 or 4000 would probably do significantly better.
Do you know if AMD offers significant features and if so does it incorporate well I to software? I wouldn't want to go AMD and find that applications can't utilize the gpu encoding (if there is any). And If it is there, is it just as powerful?. I would hate to go AMD and find out their gou encoding is much slower like equivalent to my cpu when my 2070 blows it out of the water.
RTX 3070 encoder would be a decent 5-6X faster over a 2070. RTX 4090 is insanely good at such things, something like 20X faster over a 3090
IIRC, when I do encoding (from large MKV format to 720P format for phones and such) on my desktop, I'd have the option of using AMD acceleration (can't recall what it's called) for encoding, it was pretty fast too.....at least, a fair bit faster than relying purely on CPU (I have an R9 5900X).
The reason why AMD's encoding is bad is because of quality issues with their H.264 encoder compared to NVEC. AMD AMF encoding has been improved so it's about on par with NVEC but support for AMF is extremely limited, so most of the time, AMD's H.264 encoder is the one that's being used, which is noticeably to considerably worse than NVEC for streaming.
AMD has always been more user-friendly, with actively supporting linux drivers, and allowing you to completely disable HDCP, and working on the superior FreeSync.
Though their graphics control panels are a godawful cluttered eyesore.
They have a point, it's not as streamlined as NVIDIA's panel and there aren't as many options, but it's not as bad as they claim in more recent years. The only issue I had with it was the infamous blackscreen issue that was happening for a small percentage of users for years with no fix in sight, and issues specifically with Gigabyte's garbage models because I had to choose between the GPU overheating or sounding like a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ jet engine because of the way Gigabyte made their cooler, and their fans were just too loud above 60% fan speed, louder than my Zotac 3080 at 100%, and louder than my Gigabyte 2080 at 100%. But at 60% and below, the hotspot would run too hot and cause the GPU to shut off.
I try not to be overly biased, but some people on this forum just can't help themselves at all when it comes to trashing a brand but they don't even take the time to explain to people WHY they're supposedly bad in detail. It's just, "[insert brand here] is bad, lol." If you dislike a brand, at least back up your freaking opinion with some actual information if you want people to take you seriously, otherwise you'll just look like a clown. If Steve Burke, Linus Sebastian, or any of these other tech journalists did that crap, they would get torn apart by people on social media.
Try Avidemux. It's much more versatile, without being overwhelming like Blender and Cine.
For your use case AMD would be perfectly suitable and just as good.
AMD's hardware encoder is not *quite* up to NVENC, but where it *specifically* falls short is in high compression low bandwidth qualities. At mid bitrate or higher, its nearly identical to NVENC (some argue actually better then NVENC at high bitrates like 80mbps+).
Simply put, NVENC hold the lead for specifcally *streaming* use. Thats where the quality of the AMD h.264 leacks.
But in h.265 they are pretty equal, and in local-playback quality (read recording gameplay local or remixing movies at local quality bitrates) they are also equal. For streaming AMD is adequate, but software or NVENC will be better.
The streaming lead Nvidia holds could change soon through. AMD is a Diamond Sponsor now for OBS and is directly partnered with OBS on AV1 encoder integration to try and offer a competitive alternative to nvidia options. So we might see change in the streaming leads NV holds soon which would make the field more or less totally even then as AMD already is on parity outside streaming as mentioned above.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/yllp5u/amd_as_the_new_diamond_sponsor_for_the_obs_project/
(Also @Emoticorpse - If you want some comparable performance numbers and such add me on Steam and I will work with you on some type of open-source vid file and can send you some handbrake encoded copies and performance factors re: the encode speeds for you to check out locally and compare to ones you make on handbrake using comparable NV settings so you can make your own judgement!)
I'm definitely interested in this. One video is all it would take. You can pick any video you want and run it through any application you want and just let me know how long it takes you, and I'll do the same on my pc and see how long it takes me.
Definitely interested if possible if you could test a couple different applications that I also use and let me know if the AMD GPU is available as an encoder and what the performance hit is as it's utilizing it.
I mainly use Vidcoder (I know a lot more people use Handbrake but I higly prefer the 2-pass file size limit which Handbrake doesn't offer if I'm not mistaken), OBS studio and Avidemux.