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
Priest of the cult of Chris Rea
- 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
Priest of the cult of Chris Rea
- 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.
