Personal computing discussed
Moderators: renee, Flying Fox, morphine
drwho wrote:Are you sure the IGP is disabled ? in some intel cpus , the video decode block is separate from the main graphics , also even if vp9 is isn't directly supported, if vp8 is , then it may be partially hardware accelerated..
setaG_lliB wrote:Update: I just finished building a Ryzen 7 machine for a friend and added results to the chart. AMD's latest is not bad at all, easily beating my 4.6GHz i7-4930K in software decode performance. But what I found most impressive was just how much faster it was than the old 4GHz Phenom X6. Yowza!
just brew it! wrote:My home server is still a 1090T. In an AM2+ motherboard (DDR2 RAM), no less. For my use case it is actually overkill; I probably should have something more power-efficient in there, but the 1090T is what I had on hand when I built that server. At least all the cores throttle down to 800MHz under light load, so the idle power isn't that bad.
Welch wrote:Maybe I did have the 1090t, now I'm curious. It's in an AM3 platform with DDR3 ECC though.
End User wrote:3860x2160@60 using a 1950X under Chrome: 4-10%
. Running on an Intel brand board none-the-less. setaG_lliB wrote:It's amazing what 32 threads will do.
Flashback: 4-10% CPU usage is roughly what you'd see playing an MP3 file on a 300MHz K6.
MileageMayVary wrote:setaG_lliB wrote:It's amazing what 32 threads will do.
Flashback: 4-10% CPU usage is roughly what you'd see playing an MP3 file on a 300MHz K6.
Curious if this is spreading the load a little or just stressing 1 or 2 threads.
DancinJack wrote:Did you turn off GPU decoding completely in MPC? Most stuff I use hits the NVEncoder on my GTX 1080 these days.
also, I tried going through some of my stuff to find an HEVC file real fast, god Windows Explorer sucks.
meerkt wrote:Check if newer LAVF helps the older CPUs and C2D. MPC-HC v1.8.4:
https://github.com/clsid2/mpc-hc/releases
Forum thread:
https://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=175209
joselillo_25 wrote:use edge instead of chrome, that activate h264 instead vp9, for YouTube videos.
meerkt wrote:Not sure why YouTube pushes people to VP9 also when there's no hardware acceleration.
meerkt wrote:I think it's Google trying to force the market away from patented stuff. All very nice in theory, but not when in practice it hurts end users.
End User wrote:meerkt wrote:I think it's Google trying to force the market away from patented stuff. All very nice in theory, but not when in practice it hurts end users.
Don't hurt me!
jihadjoe wrote:End User wrote:meerkt wrote:I think it's Google trying to force the market away from patented stuff. All very nice in theory, but not when in practice it hurts end users.
Don't hurt me!
What is love?
I think it's bitrate that's really important. Those old procs will be a lot less happy when given a 50Mbps file (basically UHD Bluray raws). And to complicate stuff further NVENC seems to be capable of partially accelerating video decode even on Kepler era cards. I remember running DXVA checker on a GTX670 and it showed a significant amount of stuff as being hardware accelerated. Will post a screenie when I pull that rig out.
