POST A COMMENT

32 Comments

Back to Article

  • Zanegray - Wednesday, March 27, 2013 - link

    I assume no Linux either :/ Reply
  • thefoodaddy - Thursday, March 28, 2013 - link

    Wait...what about OpenCL for those of us without access to QuickSync? I hope that's still in the pipeline! Reply
  • mayankleoboy1 - Thursday, March 28, 2013 - link

    Test build of Handbrake do use opnCL, but poorly.
    I wonder if Handbrake will use AVX2 and FMA3 extensions ?
    Reply
  • A5 - Thursday, March 28, 2013 - link

    Unless Haswell's arch is way different than what I think, I can't imagine the QuickSync block is allowed to use those processor resources since it is technically part of the iGPU. If it has that stuff, it'll be to the exclusion of QS. Reply
  • icrf - Thursday, March 28, 2013 - link

    I don't think Handbrake would use AVX2 or FMA3 so much as x264 would and Handbrake would update to include the updated encoder that does. I assume that'll happen shortly after Haswell launches, considering the bit and int functions added/expanded in AVX2. Reply
  • powerarmour - Thursday, March 28, 2013 - link

    Not until they release the Media SDK at least. Reply
  • Arbee - Friday, March 29, 2013 - link

    Yeah, I wish Anand would stop calling this some kind of open source victory when it's Windows-only and not actually open. Reply
  • loadwick - Thursday, April 04, 2013 - link

    Are we over the days of QuickSync not working in you have another GPU on your PC? Back in the Sandy Bridge days QuickSync only worked when you had a monitor attached to one of its outputs, is this still the case?

    I will be buying a Haswell set up when it's out but will also be using a dedicated GPU, will the GPU on the CPU still function? Will software like Handbrake still have access to QuickSync?

    Also there is often concerns over quality from GPU assisted encoding, is this still the case with Open CL? What would be a better option (mainly quality but also speed) new upper midrange AMD or nVidia card or sticking with QuickSync or disabling all GPU acceleration and purely using x86?
    Reply
  • janderk - Thursday, March 28, 2013 - link

    Who still uses Handbrake these days?

    All the movie and subtitle formats I encounter are played flawlessly on my PC, smartphone, tablet en even 2 year old TV.
    Reply
  • Pjotr - Thursday, March 28, 2013 - link

    I do all the time to shrink large high resolution clips to phone and tablet. Reply
  • HotBBQ - Thursday, March 28, 2013 - link

    Your confusing transcoding with muxing. It's not the formats, but the bit rates. I transcode 1080p content down to 720p for use on my cell phone, tablets, and internet media server. Reply
  • doctorpink - Thursday, March 28, 2013 - link

    are you retarded? do you even know what Handbrake is? LOL Reply
  • trivor - Monday, April 08, 2013 - link

    Chill your jets - Not everyone is a geek - it's our responsibility to help newbies Reply
  • bobbozzo - Monday, April 01, 2013 - link

    My phone (HTC Evo 4g LTE, Android 4.1.1) can play h.264 mkv files (TV shows), but cannot play the audio for some reason.

    My last phone (HTC Evo 4g non-lte) could not recognize mkv at all.
    Reply
  • gun_will_travel - Monday, April 15, 2013 - link

    DVDs play on your smartphone? Must be a big phone. Reply
  • bill.rookard - Thursday, March 28, 2013 - link

    Yay! I hope they get it up and out soon. My UX-31 has QuickSync (i5-2467M) but transcoding takes forever. Likewise, I hope they get the OpenCL working properly (and soon). I have some pretty beefy hardware for doing the transcoding I want to do (AMD Phenom BE @ 4ghz - integrated graphics and dGPU installed) - but again, takes a while because half the hardware sits idle because it's all being done in CPU.

    QuickSync and OpenCL can't come fast enough.
    Reply
  • Sivar - Thursday, March 28, 2013 - link

    I'll care about QuickSync once I see a quality/file size comparison.
    I seriously doubt that it's competitive with x264 in any metric other than encoding speed.
    Reply
  • mevans336 - Friday, March 29, 2013 - link

    Anand has several article with full 1080p res screenshots, just do a search. The quality is virtually identical. At 1024x768 QS encodes at 461fps and x264 only manages 106. We're not talking Nvidia crap here. Reply
  • InternetGeek - Wednesday, April 03, 2013 - link

    The x264 numbers confuse me. I use MeGUI and on my i7 it barely manages 4fps. Should I rebuild my PC? Reply
  • mediaconvert - Thursday, March 28, 2013 - link

    so far quicksync ( ivy bridge ) doesn't come close to X264 in terms of quality at low bitrates. If intel can speed up X264 encoding AND keep the quality of X264 I'll be interested otherwise it's just another feature I won't use. Reply
  • mevans336 - Friday, March 29, 2013 - link

    You are in the vast minority. I watch 1080p movies about 6' from my 47" LED LCD and I don't notice a single difference in 10Mbps x264 MKV or 10Mbps (QS) MP4 that have both been transcoded from the same source. I don't really notice a difference in QS or x264 until I hit 15Mbps ... and even then it's ridiculously minor. Definitely not worth the performance hit. Reply
  • mediaconvert - Friday, March 29, 2013 - link

    At 10Mbps a 1 hour file would be 10Mpbs *3600s/8 ( 8 bit per byte)= 4500MB ( 4.5 GB ) per hour. Thats only 7 hours of hd footage on your average 32gb phone/tablet.

    Besides any encoder can look okay at those bit rates. If you know the Handbrake settings can get great HD results at sub 4Mbps bit rates with X264. At LOW and really low bit rates ( and hence smaller file sizes) quicksync just looks an aweful mess but X264 still looks really good. IMO quicksync is only good if you need to get something on you phone quickly. If I'm keeping the file I use X264 and handbrake to preserve the quality.
    Reply
  • Wolfpup - Thursday, March 28, 2013 - link

    So would this support Sandy Bridge (and Ivy) or only Haswell?

    If I were the Handbrake guys, personally Quicksync support is the LAST thing I'd work on. I'd much sooner support OpenCL since it's...open, works on multiple platforms, mulitple CPUs, multiple GPUs, etc. Quicksync is IMO a really terrible idea Media on here is saying it can't actually compete with CPU transcoding, it's limited to just some CPUs from one company, it keeps changing with every CPU, and there's no guarantee it'll stick around. And IMO it shouldn't exist to begin with-the transistors used on Intel's video should be spent towards more CPU, let alone the transistors spent on hard wired transcoding...
    Reply
  • Novulux - Thursday, March 28, 2013 - link

    Their nightly builds split into two branches, one of which is OpenCl supported. You can check it out yourself Reply
  • JarredWalton - Friday, March 29, 2013 - link

    Considering Quick Sync is several times faster than the best alternative encoding method (even using GPU resources), I have to disagree. Not to mention NVIDIA (NVENC) and AMD (Video Codec Engine) have both tried to do the same thing, though neither has yet attained the speed and quality of Quick Sync. If you're just trying to get something ready for a YouTube upload, or transcoding for use on a smartphone or tablet (where max quality on such a small screen really doesn't matter), Quick Sync is awesome. Reply
  • ericore - Thursday, March 28, 2013 - link

    Unfortunately, quality will be reduced with quicksync. Haswell should suffer less from this, but really until broadwell hits quicksync won't be x86 quality. Really, you'd be much better off with an AMD 8 core (whatever the next one is called); it improves performance quite a bit, and handbrake will thrive on this CPU. Or get at 6 core Intel CPU 599$ with plenty of smiles, or wait until they perfect OpenCL, another year away. On Budjet, i3 and i5 just aren't worth it. Better off going with (next gen AMD 8 core 200$, Penitum 45-70$ or Xeon 240$ ) Reply
  • mevans336 - Friday, March 29, 2013 - link

    The AMD 8-core doesn't even beat the i7-3770k. You have no idea what you're talking about. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Friday, March 29, 2013 - link

    Not to mention Quick Sync performance is largely tied to the CPU architecture and whether you have dual-core or quad-core matters very little. Case in point, a ULV IVB Core i5 with Quick Sync is about 80% of the speed of the fastest desktop i7-3770K at transcoding. (Of course, if you use other features of Media Espresso or Media Converter that hit the CPU more, you'll see a bigger difference.) Reply
  • piroroadkill - Sunday, March 31, 2013 - link

    Guess it can be a pain when your videos are >4GiB and you only have FAT32 support on your phone, maybe. Reply
  • loadwick - Thursday, April 04, 2013 - link

    Are we over the days of QuickSync not working in you have another GPU on your PC? Back in the Sandy Bridge days QuickSync only worked when you had a monitor attached to one of its outputs, is this still the case?

    I will be buying a Haswell set up when it's out but will also be using a dedicated GPU, will the GPU on the CPU still function? Will software like Handbrake still have access to QuickSync?

    Also there is often concerns over quality from GPU assisted encoding, is this still the case with Open CL? What would be a better option (mainly quality but also speed) new upper mid-range AMD or nVidia card or sticking with QuickSync or disabling all GPU acceleration and purely using x86?
    Reply
  • emperius - Saturday, July 06, 2013 - link

    I'd like to know this also. Previous articles talked over this. Reply
  • trivor - Monday, April 08, 2013 - link

    I guess I'm in the minority because I stopped using Handbrake when I needed to encode WMVs for my XBox 360 (it plays MP4s BUT only in stereo). I'm currently using Freemake which also lets me edit out all the crap at the beginning and end of most DVDs/Blue Rays. If anyone has something better than Freemake I'd love to hear about it (not as quick as Handbrake - many, many more formats and plenty of settings to optimize it). Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now