I actually just got it working, after spending all day yesterday. The speed is magnificent, but the compression rate is absolutely abysmal. When i use the integrated GPU an h264 encoded file end up taking up 5-10% more space when converted to h265, whereas when just use CPU an h264->h265 is around a 45% reduction in size. I have no use for speed if it doesn’t reduce file size at all.
Fair enough, I just saw so many using GPUs and how much faster it was and assumed it was the same size-wise with the files. I’m getting ~40fps with my CPU, so it’s going to take forever to do all of it.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
I actually just got it working, after spending all day yesterday. The speed is magnificent, but the compression rate is absolutely abysmal. When i use the integrated GPU an h264 encoded file end up taking up 5-10% more space when converted to h265, whereas when just use CPU an h264->h265 is around a 45% reduction in size. I have no use for speed if it doesn’t reduce file size at all.
Uh… What?
GPU you are converting from 265 to 264 and expecting smaller file sizes, but CPU you are going from 264 to 265?
If compression methods/codecs are equal, the hardware shouldn’t affect compression
Maybe I worded it poorly, I’m doing h264 -> h265 in both cases, but it increases file size when using iGPU.
Besides maybe confusing the codecs, hardware encoders, especially the AMD ones, are always less space efficient than software encoders.
If you want to convert video for long-term storage, please use a software encoder.
Fair enough, I just saw so many using GPUs and how much faster it was and assumed it was the same size-wise with the files. I’m getting ~40fps with my CPU, so it’s going to take forever to do all of it.