![]() I've done a test, some variance between the runs but the point is made nonetheless. 24 hour gameplay session you want to put on YouTube? I hope you have a large RAID array for all that footage. And you'll have a hard time of storing all your videos. Downside? Your performance tanks if you want good quality. ![]() ![]() The main benefit of QuickSync is that your CPU and GPU have alleviated loads because there's no extra encoding done on them, allowing your tasks such as gaming to run at full speed unimpeded.įraps was useful when it released, it was one of a handful of good recording programs for games that wasn't watermarked and provided performance metrics that were useful. Why deal with that when there's a zero-impact solution that does better? In the case of FRAPS, as will be shown below, for a low end system that will not be the solution. Both Raptor and ShadowPlay still have an impact on performance, not much, but that little bit can make a difference between hitting smooth enough frame rates and starting to get annoying stutters and lag. Good question! A lot of this comes down to personal preference and is based around low level computer hardware in theory. Okay, why does it matter? Why use it compared to Raptor or ShadowPlay and FRAPS? This allows for faster and more power efficient video processing. Unlike video encoding on a general-purpose GPU, Quick Sync is a dedicated hardware core on the processor die. The same encoding took 83 or 86 seconds GPU-assisted, using a Nvidia GeForce GTX 570 and a AMD Radeon HD 6870 respectively, both of which are contemporary high end GPUs. The same encoding using only software took 172 seconds but it is not clear what software encoder was used and how it was configured. A benchmark from Tom's Hardware showed that Quick Sync could encode a 449 MB, four minute 1080p file to 1024×768 in 22 seconds. The eighth annual MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 video codecs comparison showed that Quick Sync is comparable to x264 superfast preset in terms of speed, compression ratio and quality (SSIM) tests were performed on Core i7 3770 (Ivy Bridge) processor. Quick Sync has been praised for its speed. Quick Sync was introduced with the Sandy Bridge CPU microarchitecture on 9 January 2011. The name "Quick Sync" refers to the use case of quickly transcoding ("syncing") a video from, for example, a DVD or Blu-ray Disc to a format appropriate to, for example, a smartphone. I guess they can rollback, but I generally wouldn't recommend it.Intel Quick Sync Video is the name given to Intel's hardware video encoding and decoding technology integrated into some of its CPUs. If a user is okay with those conditions, then. ![]() Users should also understand that many people here may not provide support or troubleshooting for older versions of OBS. There are also lots of other fixes that I didn't mention. If, for some reason, someone absolutely must use Quick Sync to stream, any recommendation to rollback must come with the caution and understanding that older versions may be broken. There are viable alternatives - don't use Quick Sync to stream, use another encoder. Back is generally only acceptable if there is no viable alternatives in the current version or for testing purposes. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |