It depends on the GPU model, I have an AMD Radeon and it shows close to 0% utilisation when encoding as the media engine uses a different part of the GPU. Storage speed and memory will make almost no difference to encoding, even the slowest HDD will feed the encoder fast enough.
Anyone into video conversions?
- Thread starter icowden
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
It depends on the GPU model, I have an AMD Radeon and it shows close to 0% utilisation when encoding as the media engine uses a different part of the GPU. Storage speed and memory will make almost no difference to encoding, even the slowest HDD will feed the encoder fast enough.
lazybloke
Considering a new username
- Location
- Leafy Surrey
Interesting, but no harm in checking available info for bottlenecks.
I learned in IT support in the 90s it was best to confirm expectations than make assumptions.
Yeah, for sure, and for a lot of things you'd be spot on but with video encoding, although the files themselves are huge and transcoding does use quite a bit of memory whilst it's being done, because each frame takes quite a bit of time to encode it's less of an issue.
This can change at the high end when you have hardware that can do the work much faster - my gpu is a lot quicker than older ones I've had - but still a long way off more dedicated hardware. For professional video editors storage can definitely be a bottleneck.
lazybloke
Considering a new username
- Location
- Leafy Surrey
Otherwise, careful choice of encoder and quality settings will make considerable difference to encoding time.
At the moment I've gone for H265 encoding with very high quality settings - I want to preserve as much as possible. The 2Gb DV files are reducing to around 250Mb which for me is manageable.
