"H.264 Encoding - CPU vs. GPU: Nvidia CUDA, AMD Stream Intel

[Limule8]

Hello,

On this site you can find in French a comparative test with your program.
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/828-1/e ... -test.html

Title:
"H.264 Encoding - CPU vs. GPU: Nvidia CUDA, AMD Stream Intel MediaSDK and x264 in test "

Conclusion for your program :
MediaCoder on its side is the fastest, most configurable and most efficient encryption software GPU. But if you can spend on its advertising, the fact that it produces files with missing images is still boring. It is at least free. From a qualitative point of view, again the encoder Nvidia takes precedence over that of Intel, which tends to blur a bit the results.

Cordially

[Kitsune]

I tried both, GPU and CPU, same configuration and bitrates and CPU wins so far.

While with GPU it encoded at 40fps HD videos, CPU encoded at 36 fps. But the quality of the GPU video is worst than the CPU one with a really high difference besides the GPU file have a bigger size than the CPU one (266MB vs 188MB).

So is better to get a good CPU than a good GPU (unless your using an nvida quadro last generation or some kind of tesla workstation lol.

Intel core i7 950 3.02Ghz 12GB of RAM vs nVidia GTX570 1.28GB of VRAM.