婆罗门
精华
|
战斗力 鹅
|
回帖 0
注册时间 2007-11-24
|
引用第47楼sakamoto于2013-07-10 23:48发表的 :
你确定?我翻了一下报告看到这样一段
Conclusion
Comparing all results from Fast encoders comparison part one could say that
x264 and Intel QuickSync are best in terms of speed/quality trade-off.
MainConcept OpenCL is third and MainConcept CUDA is fourth.
So best of hardware encoders Intel QuickSync and best of software encoders
x264 are comparable by speed/quality at very high speed encoding.
.......  Fast encoders on good desktop hardware (Core i7 3770(IVB), 4 Cores CPU
@3.4 GHz with integrated GPU Intel HD Graphics 4000) comparison shown
that x264 and Intel QuickSync are best in terms of speed/quality trade-off.
And it was interesting to compare the same leading encoders at weaker
hardware – laptop with next charactertcics (Core i7 3610QM (IVB), 4 Cores
CPU @2.30GHz with integrated GPU Intel HD Graphics 4000)
The quality of encoders remains the same only encoding speed was
changed.
As one can see at laptop hardware encoding speed for QuickSync is higher
than for x264 because of the fact that CPU (that x264 used) is much weaker
and integrated GPU (that QuickSync used) is almost the same.
This test shows that using Laptop hardware with weaker CPU with basic
integrated GPU hardware encoder QuickSync is better in terms speed/quality
trade-off than best pure software encoder x264 at very high-speed encoding.
所以CPU好的时候INTEL和X264并列,CPU不行的话(笔记本电脑)INTEL碾压X264,说的是这个吧。 |
|