Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

GPU Transcoding: Nvidia CUDA vs ATI AVT

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
September 18, 2008 5:53:30 AM

I'm getting a new rig as soon as Core i7 is released. I also just got an HD camcorder that produces AVCHD files. I *really really* want my video editing software to take advantage of my GPU. Here is what I have been able to find out so far:

ATI AVT (Accelerated Video Transcoding) will be supported by:
  • Cyberlink PowerDirector

    Nvidia CUDA will be supported by:
  • Pegasys TMPGEnc

    Has any other video editing software announced specific GPU transcoding support? Adobe Premier Elements 7 is coming out shortly but I haven't found anything that claims either ATI AVT or Nvidia CUDA support.

    I hate deciding between ATI and Nvidia based on which of those two programs (PowerDirector / TMPGEnc) I like better. I hope software like Adobe Premier Elements will eventually support both ATI and Nvidia for GPU acceleration - but who knows ? I also wonder which is the faster GPU transcoder... ATI AVT or Nvidia CUDA...
    a b U Graphics card
    a b Î Nvidia
    September 18, 2008 8:25:54 AM

    Well, you do realize that CS4 and it's features come out next week during Photokina, eh! And Ci7 launch afterwards like in Nov, so definitely no point in worrying before CS4 launches.

    Adobe has been very mum on the situation, it's widely expected to have GPGPU support of some kind in the FULL blown CS4 suite at some point, but even that's a question mark because Adobe's backtracked alot of things since their presentation, and said you can't assume anything based on their presentation (after Theo's commments [which also later question the addition of GPU-acceleration]); Adobe even denied that it would be called CS4 for the longest time (despite mention of it, and it already being on the Adobe Bridge beta)! :pfff: 

    I doubt it would be on this fall's version of Elements at launch, and would likely launch after being thoroughly tested in the full environments before going into the apps for their less savy consumers who get the striped down version first.
    September 18, 2008 7:43:41 PM

    I'm leaning toward ATI then since I prefer PowerDirector 7 over what Pagasys offers.

    I may switch to Nvidia only if Adobe announces CUDA support (and not AVT support) for transcoding in Premiere Pro/Elements before Core i7 is launched.

    Adobe may also lose a sale to Cyberlink this year, depending on their GPGPU announcements.

    Related resources
    a b U Graphics card
    a b Î Nvidia
    September 18, 2008 8:39:50 PM

    I understand your reasoning, just make sure that you maintain some of the features and support you want if you're familiar with the Adobe environment.

    Prersonally I'd like great GPU tanscoding offloading, but I also wouldn't trade the features I've come to love in Adobe and other apps for it.

    Currently I do most of my transcoding while sleeping or while watching something else on the TV in the living room, since I don't have tight timelines and basically do all my work leading up to the transcoding, save it, then do a transcode run and let it go.
    That's been my strategy for a while even when I had blazin dual PIII rigs :)  , and unless they can turn a 4-6+ hour job into one under 30mins with the same quality, I likely will still do that even with GPGPU assist although I might start running them during smaller TV shows and while making dinner or even having a morning shower etc.
    To me that's the best thing for GPU acceleration. After someone sends me a file or I down load one off the web, if I get it when I wake up in the morning, and then want to quickly convert it to another format, or even convert mine to something I can show at the office, the option of starting the task, then going and eating & showering, etc and then while dressing burn or synch it, and voila out the door.

    But be sure to compare the quality of the final file. There's some negative feedback on some file types and quality & resolution settings, make sure it's worthwhile for you. When it's free like BadBoom, that's one thing, when you pay for it you want to make sure the final result is worth it, especially if you're buying hardware based on it. Spending $200 on an card and $70+ on software only to find out you should've spent it on the other $200 and $70+ software would kinda suck.
    November 5, 2008 5:02:19 PM

    Why would you want to transcode? AVCHD is just a wrapper around h.264 (mpeg4/v10/AVC) - a codec that every BD/HDDVD device (and thus most software) can support natively. You're not going to get better quality or compression without sacrificing image quality, so why bother? Cut, splice, rearrange and modify to your heart's content, but don't pointlessly transcode.

    For what it's worth, though, I can transcode using CUDA in TMPGEnc and Badaboom today. Badaboom is silly fast, but a crappy application. TMPGEnc is, well, TMPGEnc. The application has grown pretty robust (when gauged on the basis of a simple transcoder), and I feel confident enough in its work to let it do its thing while I work or sleep - this makes the CUDA speed boost much less important.

    Despite NVidia's CUDA hype, the important thing right now isn't the hardware assisted encoding - it's the decoding. A fast machine with software playback performs much much worse (in terms of image quality, dropped frames, system load, heat, and noise) than a slow machine with full hardware acceleration. Right now, the Cyberlink dxVA directShow decoders coupled with a NVidia PureVideo2 capable video card seem to be the best thing going. I'm probably preaching to the choir, but I wanted to share my two cents.

    Cheers,
    Achoo
    November 26, 2008 1:56:13 PM

    Hi guys.
    I'm following this carefully for some robust software that can transcode a big library of Divx to AVC (whatever is needed) to a portable media player.
    I'm guessing the GPGPU (Ati & Nvidia ) will accerate much better than the i7 can (because of high offloading)- so I'm not looking to upgrade the CPU anytime soon. -Spending >$500 on the card and <$99 on the software- This will be a huge boon to be able to convert in minutes rather than 1-2 hours with resonable quality.
    As Achoo2 said, there needs to be hardware decoding as well.
    I've heard of CS4, Badaboom, etc. However, I'm waiting for something more mainstream. Such as Divx 7, Nero Recode 10, Mainconcept, TMPGEnc etc - Using a standard, like OpenCL,DX11. Not a proprietary CUDA , CTM, etc.
    So, I'm guessing it will be a year before this environment becomes a reality.
    Can I just be thinking too far ahead? Thanks..
    November 27, 2008 1:51:56 AM

    enewmen said:
    Hi guys.
    I'm following this carefully for some robust software that can transcode a big library of Divx to AVC (whatever is needed) to a portable media player.
    I'm guessing the GPGPU (Ati & Nvidia ) will accerate much better than the i7 can (because of high offloading)- so I'm not looking to upgrade the CPU anytime soon. -Spending >$500 on the card and <$99 on the software- This will be a huge boon to be able to convert in minutes rather than 1-2 hours with resonable quality.
    As Achoo2 said, there needs to be hardware decoding as well.
    I've heard of CS4, Badaboom, etc. However, I'm waiting for something more mainstream. Such as Divx 7, Nero Recode 10, Mainconcept, TMPGEnc etc - Using a standard, like OpenCL,DX11. Not a proprietary CUDA , CTM, etc.
    So, I'm guessing it will be a year before this environment becomes a reality.
    Can I just be thinking too far ahead? Thanks..


    I don't understand this. DivX is basically an alias for MPEG4, part 3. AVC is MPEG4, part 10. I've never seen a standalone or portable media player that can play one and not the other (not saying they don't exist, but I've never seen them). Even the new DivX container format can be used on an XBox if you rename them to .avi (the main movie - the menus and such doesn't work).

    Chances are, the most you're going to have to do to get your files to play is possibly demux and remux them - perhaps resizing as you go. The speed of this operation is going to be limited by disk speed, not CPU or GPU, and you're talking minutes instead of hours.

    Cheers,
    Achoo2
    November 27, 2008 5:14:06 AM

    Thanks for the post.
    I understand what you're saying.
    But some Divx features like motion compensation and quarter pixel search just don't work in portable players.
    Another major task I have is re-compressing the old MPEG1 and Divx to a newer pure H.264/AVC (MPEG4, part 10 like you said). This is not just for compatability, but to make files smaller to take less space. This is why I'm searching for GPU trasnscoding that uses standard APIs (like the OpenCL/DX11 so I can use any modern GPU).

    Back to your point. If I don't need to compress further, what cheap "stripping" (or demux/remux) software will you suggest to remove Divx wrapping to a "pure" H.263 or remove AVCHD wrapping to a pure H.264 for greater compatability? Or perhaps make ANY MPEG4 video/audio compatible with ALL MPEG4 parts?
    Please don't clarify terminology, I think you understand what I'm saying.
    Ok, thanks!
    November 27, 2008 10:52:01 AM

    enewmen said:
    Thanks for the post.
    I understand what you're saying.
    But some Divx features like motion compensation and quarter pixel search just don't work in portable players.
    Another major task I have is re-compressing the old MPEG1 and Divx to a newer pure H.264/AVC (MPEG4, part 10 like you said). This is not just for compatability, but to make files smaller to take less space. This is why I'm searching for GPU trasnscoding that uses standard APIs (like the OpenCL/DX11 so I can use any modern GPU).

    Back to your point. If I don't need to compress further, what cheap "stripping" (or demux/remux) software will you suggest to remove Divx wrapping to a "pure" H.263 or remove AVCHD wrapping to a pure H.264 for greater compatability? Or perhaps make ANY MPEG4 video/audio compatible with ALL MPEG4 parts?
    Please don't clarify terminology, I think you understand what I'm saying.
    Ok, thanks!


    Which portable media players are you targeting? This is probably going to be the biggest deciding factor in making subsequent choices.

    You can't demux/remux to go from Divx to AVC, AFAIK. They are both MPEG4, but are substantially different. The muxing/demuxing would be for the case that you need to change containers - i.e., demuxing from 264 in mkv and remuxing to 264 in a pmp container (for PSP). The demux/remux tactic assumes that the players you are interested in support both part 2 and part 10 of the MPEG 4 format (again, I've never seen a device that supports h264 and not Divx/Xvid).

    For AVCHD, you can just grab the file(s) from the stream directory of the filestructure. It is already coded as 264.

    Cheers,
    Achoo2
    November 27, 2008 1:36:00 PM

    i have to go with ati, its not that brook is better its that ati usually give there encoders away for free
    February 19, 2010 3:22:13 AM

    i will go for nvidia....becoz it usually gives a better encoding performance as I use the video editing softwares like cyberlink power ditector ,roxio media show convertor.....generelly it use well with ncuda technology by nvidia
    a c 271 U Graphics card
    a c 168 Î Nvidia
    February 19, 2010 5:25:55 AM

    This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey
    !