ExKode Forum

Dxtory => Feedback => Topic started by: POOP on February 21, 2014, 09:39:48 am

Title: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: POOP on February 21, 2014, 09:39:48 am
As the title says, since it's open now.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: Tup3x on February 23, 2014, 10:37:22 pm
AMD VCE support would be nice too.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on April 08, 2014, 01:09:25 am
Why is at the moment such a high wave of people who want to record directly lossy at recording ._. (which is always worse quality vs filesize tradeoff if you do lossy encoding while recording...)
and most of you even want to edit the video later and you would re-encode again into another lossy format....

damn whats going on people?
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: ShamisOMally on April 08, 2014, 10:34:45 pm
Why is at the moment such a high wave of people who want to record directly lossy at recording ._. (which is always worse quality vs filesize tradeoff if you do lossy encoding while recording...)
and most of you even want to edit the video later and you would re-encode again into another lossy format....

damn whats going on people?

Maybe you should stop being a colossal fricken dick demon and just let people use the codecs they want

Its amazing, you are literally the console fanboy of codecs on this forum, you only exist here on the forums to trash talk anybody who wants to use anything than the codecs you like

You need your head checked, severely
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on April 09, 2014, 02:19:06 am
Thats a reasonable technical thing to recommend recording in lossless and compressing to lossy later. I told you that often enough and this has nothing to do with a matter of taste.

It is not trash to recommend people to do record lossless. There are lots of people who even dont know that recording lossless is better method. at letsplay forum many people were very thankful that their quality vs filesize got improved as we told them to do the recording lossless.
editing of lossless material is way faster as well.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: ShamisOMally on April 09, 2014, 05:43:14 am
NOBODY CARES!

NOBODY CARES IF YOUR CODEC IS LOSSLESS OR WHATEVER!

THIS THREAD WAS ASKING ABOUT NVENC AND AMD VCE HARDWARE SUPPORT AND IF IT WOULD GET INTO DXTORY, AND THE ONLY REASON YOU JOINED THIS THREAD WAS TO INSULT THE PEOPLE ASKING FOR IT!

Poop and Tupex, post in this forum thread along with the rest of us, we're all tired of Demon trolling/insulting other users here http://forum.exkode.com/index.php?topic=711.0
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on April 09, 2014, 05:52:51 am
lots of people actually do care, but how said dont know it better. How said - lots of people were very thankful for clearing them up, that recording directly at lossy method isnt a good idea for maintain quality and filesize.

If I recommend users not to do this, this has nothing to do with trolling neither is it insulting.

Just a recommendation to not use it

And I wonder about the at the moment high wave of people who tends to use such methods. Maybe its because of shadowplay or such. I dont know.
_
If he still wants to use the lossy recording - then ok. He can say that.

The problem I had with you shamis is: You denied the facts that it is a better method for maintain quality vs filesize at finalized encode and quality outcome at youtube. You even discussed it is wrong and came with absolutely wrong things like youtube codes audio to mp3 and such.

If you would've just said, you want to record in lossy also with the disadvantages it has, because of hdd space saving - ok. no problem. Just say it.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: ShamisOMally on April 09, 2014, 06:48:38 am
Why do you feel the need to go into forum threads that do NOT deal with lagarith lossless to tell people not to use the codecs they want to use?

What is the point of Dxtory allowing any codec then? That's the main feature of the program, to allow custom codecs.

But nah, to you, you want it to have Lagarith Lossless and ONLY that codec.

"If I recommend users not to do this, this has nothing to do with trolling neither is it insulting."

No, you CRAP on users who want to use something else, you tell them its terrible, you tell them not to use it, you go "God people are stupid" etc for not using lagi codec etc.

You are a complete and utter chode. If somebody wants to use x264, LET THEM USE IT, if you feel the "need" to tell these people that lagi is better, do so in a way where you don't come off sounding like a douche like:

"Why is at the moment such a high wave of people who want to record directly lossy at recording ._. (which is always worse quality vs filesize tradeoff if you do lossy encoding while recording...)
and most of you even want to edit the video later and you would re-encode again into another lossy format....

damn whats going on people?"

AND:

"right. It has a sense to record in lossless.." -TRANSLATION- "That's because I think Lagi lossless is superior, which works great with .avi codec, so don't let people be able to use .mp4 container because In my mind I believe "Dxtory only uses .avi because I think it works best with lagi lossless so it has the right sense to only allow .avi because I demand that people use lagi lossless codec"

THIS is why everyone dislikes you Demon, you don't "Recommend", you DEMAND people use Lagi lossless, and you crap all over everyone who doesn't
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: ShamisOMally on April 09, 2014, 07:11:16 am
Oh yeah, youtube doesn't use .mp3 right? RIGHT?

(http://i.imgur.com/c5y3Ruv.png)

HUH, ODD, I WONDER WHY ITS USING A .mp3 CONTAINER?
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on April 09, 2014, 07:22:46 am
either you're converting the audio stream or you download the 240p audio.

http://abload.de/img/unbenannt47eksw5.png
http://abload.de/img/unbenannt48ews6h.png

Jdownloader just downloads them. no conversion.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: ShamisOMally on April 09, 2014, 07:27:18 am
All I know is it uses .mp3, and some of my older youtube files from 5-6 months ago also use .mp3 codec for 1080p footage etc, but when I check the files today by downloading them again they're now .aac codec

I admit I'm wrong on this because now I can't get files with .mp3 audio, even though I have lots and lots and lots of youtube videos where they do have .mp3 audio I've collected over the years. Youtube could be re-encoding its file database, who knows, I got no clue.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on April 09, 2014, 07:30:03 am
How old are these videos.

I have videos of 2010 which are AAC coded as well.

Allgemein
Vollständiger Name                       : D:\JDownloader\downloads\_Manhunt 2_, full walkthrough (Insane difficulty), evil ending - Release Therapy(720p_H.264-AAC).mp4
Format                                   : MPEG-4
Format-Profil                            : Base Media / Version 2
Codec-ID                                 : mp42
Dateigröße                               : 107 MiB
Dauer                                    : 7min 23s
Modus der Gesamtbitrate                  : variabel
Gesamte Bitrate                          : 2 029 Kbps
Kodierungs-Datum                         : UTC 2010-02-20 14:39:11
Tagging-Datum                            : UTC 2010-02-20 14:39:11
gsst                                     : 0
gstd                                     : 443616
gssd                                     : B4A7DDA63MH1389464231737021
gshh                                     : r3---sn-4g57kuez.googlevideo.com

Video
ID                                       : 2
Format                                   : AVC
Format/Info                              : Advanced Video Codec
Format-Profil                            : High@L3.1
Format-Einstellungen für CABAC           : Ja
Format-Einstellungen für ReFrames        : 3 frames
Codec-ID                                 : avc1
Codec-ID/Info                            : Advanced Video Coding
Dauer                                    : 7min 23s
Bitrate                                  : 1 901 Kbps
maximale Bitrate                         : 4 943 Kbps
Breite                                   : 1 152 Pixel
Höhe                                     : 720 Pixel
Bildseitenverhältnis                     : 16:10
Modus der Bildwiederholungsrate          : konstant
Bildwiederholungsrate                    : 30,000 FPS
ColorSpace                               : YUV
ChromaSubsampling                        : 4:2:0
BitDepth/String                          : 8 bits
Scantyp                                  : progressiv
Bits/(Pixel*Frame)                       : 0.076
Stream-Größe                             : 100 MiB (94%)
Titel                                    : (C) 2007 Google Inc. v08.13.2007.
Kodierungs-Datum                         : UTC 2010-02-20 14:39:11
Tagging-Datum                            : UTC 2010-02-20 14:39:14

Audio
ID                                       : 1
Format                                   : AAC
Format/Info                              : Advanced Audio Codec
Format-Profil                            : LC
Codec-ID                                 : 40
Dauer                                    : 7min 23s
Bitraten-Modus                           : variabel
Bitrate                                  : 125 Kbps
maximale Bitrate                         : 180 Kbps
Kanäle                                   : 2 Kanäle
Kanal-Positionen                         : Front: L R
Samplingrate                             : 44,1 KHz
Stream-Größe                             : 6,63 MiB (6%)
Titel                                    : (C) 2007 Google Inc. v08.13.2007.
Kodierungs-Datum                         : UTC 2010-02-20 14:39:11
Tagging-Datum                            : UTC 2010-02-20 14:39:14
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: Tup3x on April 09, 2014, 08:28:22 am
There are times when quality doesn't matter much but performance and file size does. That's when NVENC and VCE would be handy. NVENC quality isn't good but in many situations it does the job. Lossless recording isn't practical if you want record x hours (and in those cases the quality would be enough).

However, h.264 and AVI container is match made in hell so MP4 container support would be vital too though that would pretty much mean built in AAC support would be needed (ACM AAC encoder is basically no go). Dxtory should probably move to media foundation encoders. Another container options would be .ts (for PCM audio and h.264 since AFAIK MP4 container and PCM audio is no go) and matroska.

At the moment NVIDIA ShadowPlay is nice option but it totally butchers the sound and there's no option for higher bit rate audio. It's handy because it causes basically zero performance hit. Quality is not very good but that's not the point. I use lossless RGB codec (utvideo) when I need absolutely the best quality.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on April 09, 2014, 08:32:55 am
You could use OBS ( https://obsproject.com/ ) for this.

Supports x264, supports NVEnc, supports quicksync, supports mp4 container and aac audio.

So if you so highly want this - maybe this is an alternative for you.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: ShamisOMally on April 09, 2014, 10:13:39 am
Kinda defeats the purpose of Dxtory if you're using another product to capture game footage but thanks for telling him about it
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: Tup3x on April 14, 2014, 07:06:05 pm
You could use OBS ( https://obsproject.com/ ) for this.

Supports x264, supports NVEnc, supports quicksync, supports mp4 container and aac audio.

So if you so highly want this - maybe this is an alternative for you.
I know that software. There's a reason why I don't use it. Because I already have DxTory that does it all. NVENC support would be helpful in certain situations. Are you stupid enough to record hours long sessions with lossless codec? Massive waste of CPU cycles and HDD space when quality wouldn't be important in that case.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: RobiePAX on April 14, 2014, 08:17:14 pm
Are you stupid enough to record hours long sessions with lossless codec?
<<< Guilty as charged.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on April 15, 2014, 02:02:04 am
lossy coding takes actually by far more cpu.

Quote
Are you stupid enough to record hours long sessions with lossless codec?
Why I'm stupid when I record lossless and make a more efficient lossy coding after my recording which results in smaller filesize with more quality?
HDD Space - just temporary. As soon as I've encoded the lossless video, I can delete the lossless one. And with better efficient coded lossy files with smaller filesize for same quality I can store more files.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: RobiePAX on April 15, 2014, 03:03:20 am
Why I'm stupid when I record lossless and make a more efficient lossy coding after my recording which results in smaller filesize with more quality?

He possibly is referring to low budget PCs. Personally I have purchased a fast 2TB Hard Drive when I still used Fraps, so I can record over 16 hours of Lossless footages which as you have mentioned is not a bother if you remove the original footage after you finish your encoding of the project. However I see why it could be a problem for people who can't afford fast high capacity Hard Drive.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: ShavedApe on May 12, 2014, 12:49:34 am
I too would like to add my support to this thread. It seems to be getting derailed a little by the codec police so I thought I would try and get it back on track.

Choice of codec in dxtory is one of its greatest selling points and features and the best part is that it is personal choice! lets keep that way shall we instead of being insulted if you choose one someone doesn't like.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: Line40 on October 05, 2014, 06:39:40 pm
I'd like to second this request too.

I think with the release of the high end Maxwell cards, and the need to really be able to do some 4k recording, it's high time for Dxtory to start suppporting a hardware codec that takes some burden off the CPU and hard disk, like NVENC, or Quicksync.
Both do a decent job in other software (Shadowplay, Afterburner, Bandicam), but those all are lacking in one respect or the other, so it would be nice to have the only software that does everything right (Dxtory of course), to fill that one functionality gap.

Cheers

Line40
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on October 06, 2014, 05:06:19 am
hell.. buy a fast hard disk and use a good lossless codec like magicYUV and your fps wont go down with cpu either. --- and you dont need to record lossy.

It can be sooo simple ...
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: Line40 on October 07, 2014, 05:23:24 am
hell.. buy a fast hard disk and use a good lossless codec like magicYUV and your fps wont go down with cpu either. --- and you dont need to record lossy.

It can be sooo simple ...

Do you actually record in 4k using that setup, or is that just a guess? Because the fps drop from magicYUV is just about the same as with utvideo in my experience.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: ShavedApe on January 12, 2015, 01:49:31 am
Would be nice to have some form of official acknowledgement on this, its been available for a while now and while there are alternatives out there I still like dxtory and since I paid for it and it has all the features I want except this one I would like to stick with it.

That is despite recording to SSD's and having GTX780 TI OC and 4790k Overclocked just incase you are wondering Demon but please don't reply i'm not interested in the slightest in anything you have to say i'm perfectly happy with my choices thank you.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on January 12, 2015, 01:57:54 am
Quote
That is despite recording to SSD's and having GTX780 TI OC and 4790k Overclocked

What a bullshit.

I have 2 harddisks set to RAID 0 and a i7 3770k and a gtx 680 and can record with it in 2560x1600, 60fps without any drop or if a more cpu intensive game a slight drop.

Recording lossy kills efficiency for later filters you use in video editors (if you use them) and for later encoder it is bad as well - audio and video - if the source material is already lossy. If you upload it to youtube you have the 3rd lossy encode. Result is a garbage blocky image on youtube. Far more than necessary. But if you're still happy with such a solution - okay.. but hard to believe that this does satisfy you.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: POOP on January 18, 2015, 07:18:20 am
I originally asked because I do not care about the quality of the video so much as it's all going on youtube anyway.
I don't use DXtory anymore as Shadowplay is great for recording in general (rarely use manual record, just shadow), however lots of games it will not hook to but DXtory will, so it'd be nice to have that as a backup.

I have a 3930k OC'd to 4.3GHz, but I would still prefer to use 1%~ of my GPU power to encode.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on January 18, 2015, 07:30:04 am
I originally asked because I do not care about the quality of the video so much as it's all going on youtube anyway.

And? Youtube quality isnt the best, yes. But you can do a lot by yourself to maintain it on a good level. Using lossy recording method and re-encode that and let youtube do the third re-encode is definitely the wrong direction to begin with .. :P
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: astrix_au on January 19, 2015, 06:35:10 pm
You can add AMD VCE support here > https://github.com/jackun/openencodevfw but it's limited to 1080p.

I found Motion JPEG to give amazing quality for file size, 1440p 60fps I recorded at 175Mbps and it looked amazing. I was recording BF4 at 1440p 120hz and 135% resolution scale. I was able to record on a 7200 rpm drive! Below is a screenshot using the Windows print screen button on a paused video I recorded in Bandicam using Motion MJPEG at 170Mbps.

This image looks amazing in the video with the effects, particles and smoke this images doesn't do it justice! Who needs lagarith and it's crazy video sizes, this was recoded with Quality 70 at 170Mbps quality 100 is 250Mbps! I'm pretty sure that can be recorded on a 7200rpm HD! Not sure if screen print is the best way to show it but it looks the same. It's the Adobe, vegas and premier preset in bandicam.

(http://f.cl.ly/items/3J05100d1B2l1i2b0t0h/Screenshot%20(74).png)

(http://f.cl.ly/items/1t1p1d1n2O0Y3O3V1c32/Screenshot%20(73).png)
Bandicam has SDK's available for games but you could ask them if you can use their Motion JPEG codec or get your own, I would love for you guys to add it to DXtory!

Below are the BF4 settings I used to record the video, but it's not perfect as there is some lag but that is DX11, Mantle is the perfect thing, it's will remove the lag and that will be amazing!! My experience with mantle so far it records with no input lag!
http://f.cl.ly/items/040h1u16071X171e3Q0t/ScreenshotWin32-0057.png

Below is a video I uploaded to youtube, I used the settings above, imported it to Adobe Premier pro then I exported the video to 9.2Mbps as that is what youtube will convert 1440p to anyway.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLsKm3CuyDU

DXTory dev can get access to Mantle SDK here > http://developer.amd.com/mantle/ Mantle will be the future of high performance recording!!! :)
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on January 19, 2015, 09:30:35 pm
Quote
then I exported the video to 9.2Mbps as that is what youtube will convert 1440p to anyway.

Thats wrong as well.

The better the input the better the output.

This misassumption using the same bitrate gives the same re-encode - its so just wrong !

Best example is audio : Compress WAV to MP3 160 kbit compared to compress MP3 160 kbit to mp3 160 kbit - which will sound better? Of course the wav source <.<

You can record perfectly fine lossless video on a HDD as well.

Whats your goddamn problem with filesizes? Are HDDs that expensive in other countries than germany? Theyre cheap as hell here. And I cant believe thats else for you
So why you all care so damn much about the filesizes o.O

And rather encode with 10bit x264 instead of that bad NLE encoders with its ~3 settings, only mainconcept, only bitratefixed encoding and so on..
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: mouse on January 21, 2015, 04:22:41 pm
Registered an account just to show my interest in this feature.
I'd really like to see nvenc support in DXTory.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: astrix_au on February 06, 2015, 12:31:04 pm

It is not trash to recommend people to do record lossless. There are lots of people who even dont know that recording lossless is better method. at letsplay forum many people were very thankful that their quality vs filesize got improved as we told them to do the recording lossless.
editing of lossless material is way faster as well.

Some of us want to record 1440p 60fps and this can't be done on a normal HD, only 30fps. I can do it with bandi and M-Jpeg at 170Mbps with minimal sometimes no effect but other times unfortunately it's noticeable.

Truth is nothing compares to recording on Mantle...  and I don't mean OBS or windowed i'm talking about full screen and crossfire. No effect and small sizes even though 720p is only working for now but the 1080p bug surely will be fixed soon. Here's hoping DXtory will support it. I shared the link to the SDK so i hope they go that route but the other company should squash the tarring and flickering bug soon on 1080p mantle recording with VCE.

It works so well that I when from capturing 1440p 60fps tp only capturing 720p for now till 1080p is fixed, you guys will know what i'm talking about when DX12 comes out in a few years.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on February 06, 2015, 08:53:31 pm
I record in 2560x1600, 60fps

2 seagate barracuda configured as RAID 0

One HDD should be enough though if its fast as a barracuda and not these slow 100 mbyte ones.

NVEnc in Maxwell cards support Lossless though. That would be more interesting then.
But it may be not the performance like at shadowplay.

See here:

NVEnc in MSI Afterburner has for me the same fps drop at Rise Of The Triad 2013 like with the CPU Encoder. Only if you use Shadowplay directly you lose no fps. But unfortunately Shadowplay is the worst NVEnc implementation in every other way..
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: ShavedApe on April 05, 2015, 02:45:19 am
Quote
That is despite recording to SSD's and having GTX780 TI OC and 4790k Overclocked

What a bullshit.

I have 2 harddisks set to RAID 0 and a i7 3770k and a gtx 680 and can record with it in 2560x1600, 60fps without any drop or if a more cpu intensive game a slight drop.

Recording lossy kills efficiency for later filters you use in video editors (if you use them) and for later encoder it is bad as well - audio and video - if the source material is already lossy. If you upload it to youtube you have the 3rd lossy encode. Result is a garbage blocky image on youtube. Far more than necessary. But if you're still happy with such a solution - okay.. but hard to believe that this does satisfy you.

whats bullshit mr codec police?

The fact that i record using an SSD? how the f*ck would you know if I do or not please feel free to let me know how I can prove it and I will be happy to do so? Or was it that yet again you are jumping in trying to tell people their choices are invalid because bla bla bla lossy bla bla
I find it funny how you know what hardware I am using and call bullshit on it id be happy to provide receipts if you like.

We CHOSE to buy this program and we have a CHOICE how we use it, You don't have to like it but its almost like you feel its your place to tell people they are wrong if they don't do it the way you like. We heard you already, move on its really not that important if someone you don't even know records in lossless format it really doesn't effect you in any way.

Bottom line and excuse me if you have heard this before nobody cares for your opinion because you have expressed it enough already usually in quite an insulting way. We are all allowed freedom of choice just like you choose to reply despite being asked not to we choose use codecs that are lossy and you know what most of us are more than happy with that despite any of your reasons why we shouldn't be so perhaps its time to move on and get over yourself.

Oh btw unless your reply is how I can prove what hardware I use to record I wont be bothering to read it. Ive read your drivel so many times already I wont be wasting my time with you again.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on April 05, 2015, 03:23:20 am
Bullshit is, that you say you need a SSD for recording in 60fps.

2 HDDs are very cheap and give you the need for almost no fps drop while recording and 60fps capture possible.


But yes you love recording lossy. I see.

You love if filter and encoder can work worse with your material. you love worse than possible quality at youtube.

Give me any valid reason why you need it lossy? A HDD of 1TB costs nowadays less than 50 €. I dont get it. sry.


NVEnc would be able to record lossless. But Shadowplay not ...


And NVEnc drops absolutely the same fps down with other software than Shadowplay.

Rise of the Triad:

Lossless Capture with MSI Afterburner: 55fps
Capture with Shadowplay : untouched 80fps like without recording
Capture with MSI Afterburner with NVEnc: 55fps.

The same speed as with the cpu encoders.

The reason is: Shadowplay can capture before the API (DirectX) which a 3rd party program cant.

Please read THIS:

http://forums.guru3d.com/showpost.php?p=4687310&amp;postcount=61
http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?p=4983347
http://forums.guru3d.com/showpost.php?p=4983364&postcount=5


And now I really have to laugh about you to death. its so funny that you request something which cant be faster anyway. Its so ridiculous and funny.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: ShavedApe on April 13, 2015, 02:46:40 am
Bullshit is, that you say you need a SSD for recording in 60fps.

You seem to be having issues with reading let me clarify for you at no point did I say I NEED an SSD for recording at 60fps simply that I use and SSD for recording because I choose to not because I have to. Try reading in future then you wont look so stupid.

As for your questions I have no interest in helping you derail this thread further you have made your point more than once and despite being told nobody cares you still go down this crusaders path to change the way we record and which codec we choose to do it with. How I choose to do things is my CHOICE and it shall remain that way even if you dont like it.

Why is it so important to you that people don't have this choice I wonder. Actually no ignore that I really really don't care.
Feel free to reply though no doubt you will which will be a waste because I wont be bothering to read it but hey if you got time to waste here at least your not bothering others elsewhere with constant droning on.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on April 13, 2015, 02:51:05 am
Read the linked threads. You even dont gain any performance advantage if dxtory will NVEnc. Because the necessary apis for it are locked by nvidia to bypass DirectX - They want that their shadowplay is used if you want more speed. And this means you have with NVEnc the exact same fps drop like with cpu encoder.

It is all detailed written in the links.

So for what do you need NVEnc then?


And why are you so aggressive? Arent you able to discuss normally? You and shamis really act like little aggressive kids. I would write normal as well. But people like you and especially shamis arent people where a discussion would be in the slightest possible.

Quote
Why is it so important to you that people don't have this choice I wonder.

It just is wasted programming work and time for a thing which doesnt improve things, if the necessary API is locked by Nvidia to gain from that.

There are more important things to do - like better OpenGL Performance - there for example is DXTory very slow.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: ShavedApe on April 13, 2015, 02:58:43 am
lol take a look at your fist reply to me then take a step back and ask yourself whos being aggressive. Then do yourself a favour and walk away because nobody cares. I really don't see why you don't get that you've been told enough.

Oh and BTW i already answered your question we want Nvenc because its our CHOICE we should be able to choose it even if as you say there is no performance benefit its still nice to have choice now please exercise your right to choice by choosing not to reply to me as I requested much earlier in the thread.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on April 13, 2015, 03:06:24 am
Read my edit. How said - Its just like how other write to me and shamis started the disaster. not me.

And how said:

Quote from: De-M-oN
It just is wasted programming work and time for a thing which doesnt improve things, if the necessary API is locked by Nvidia to gain from that.

There are more important things to do - like better OpenGL Performance - there for example is DXTory very slow.

A better and configurable overlay would be nice too - like duration of record and much more - timer was requested so many times already.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: mouse on April 18, 2015, 01:31:26 pm
Having tried bandicam with nvenc vs a variety of different codecs and recording software, nvenc definitely saw much better performance, despite using a standard hook.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on April 19, 2015, 02:35:54 am
Dont forget that your HDD limits your fps as well.

With a RAID 0 the advantage is extremely small. For my Rise of the Triad '13 game even zero advantage. Just shadowplay could stay at same fps like without capture. But shadowplay doesnt allow lossless and has much much more shortcomings.

Maxwell would allow lossless encoding.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: zerowalker on April 27, 2015, 09:52:45 am
Interesting, didn't know ShadowPlay bypassed the API.
But how is that even possible and why can't 3rd party do that?
What about AMD Raptr?

And also, i am guessing you only mean FPS drop in the sense of "as long as CPU usage doesn't interfere with the game".

EDIT:

Ah read the topics, so it's pretty much cause they got some hardware features that they can use to simply "copy paste" the buffer without having to tell the API to send a copy.
I hope AMD gets some similar shit, usually they make it all open source.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: JinxSwe on May 19, 2015, 05:21:42 am
Read the linked threads. You even dont gain any performance advantage if dxtory will NVEnc. Because the necessary apis for it are locked by nvidia to bypass DirectX - They want that their shadowplay is used if you want more speed. And this means you have with NVEnc the exact same fps drop like with cpu encoder.

It is all detailed written in the links.

So for what do you need NVEnc then?


And why are you so aggressive? Arent you able to discuss normally? You and shamis really act like little aggressive kids. I would write normal as well. But people like you and especially shamis arent people where a discussion would be in the slightest possible.

Quote
Why is it so important to you that people don't have this choice I wonder.

It just is wasted programming work and time for a thing which doesnt improve things, if the necessary API is locked by Nvidia to gain from that.

There are more important things to do - like better OpenGL Performance - there for example is DXTory very slow.

I had to register a account just to respond to this. And also request the NVEnc.
It seems like u never have used the NVEnc. Im using it on Bandicam and OBS and im getting 0 simply 0 loss of frames with NVEnc and I have never seen another encoder that can record so good quality with 0... I say again 0 loss of frames. And the files size are good for the quality.

I want the NVEnc on DXtory since its one for the few programs that can seperate audio files.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on May 19, 2015, 05:57:52 am
Quote
It seems like u never have used the NVEnc

I have and you see my results. And read the Links I posted as well. And Unwinder isnt silly - he just is the developer of MSI Afterburner.


0 loss of frames is possible with lossless too - just get a fast harddrive.

Or did you mean with it the fps rate? Look my results - its not faster at all compared to cpu encoder - maybe its just an bottleneck which slows your fps down at lossless codecs. The most reason for this is a too slow harddisk (not enough write speed).

And it doesnt matter which game - if no bottleneck (I have RAID 0 and so on - so no bottlenecks at my system) then the cpu encoder arent slower than nvenc at all. Reasons you can read clearly at the urls I've given in my post.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: JinxSwe on May 19, 2015, 07:11:29 am
Quote
It seems like u never have used the NVEnc

I have and you see my results. And read the Links I posted as well. And Unwinder isnt silly - he just is the developer of MSI Afterburner.


0 loss of frames is possible with lossless too - just get a fast harddrive.

Or did you mean with it the fps rate? Look my results - its not faster at all compared to cpu encoder - maybe its just an bottleneck which slows your fps down at lossless codecs. The most reason for this is a too slow harddisk (not enough write speed).

And it doesnt matter which game - if no bottleneck (I have RAID 0 and so on - so no bottlenecks at my system) then the cpu encoder arent slower than nvenc at all. Reasons you can read clearly at the urls I've given in my post.

Nither u or Unwinder show eny proof of the NVEnc is in eny way bad. Unwinder just nags about the NVEnc first been locked to Shadowplay and that his CPU sucks.
And this isn't a debate on what codec is better then the other.
This is about some of us feel that the NVEnc is a good codec and we would like it in DXtory. Not every one can afford new hardware and I my self find the NVEnc to be a good
substitute to lossless becuse it dosn't need the newest CPU or HHD. And producing good quality videos with less file sizes.

If u want to compare codecs do it in another thread.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on May 19, 2015, 07:24:21 am
Quote
Nither u or Unwinder show eny proof of the NVEnc is in eny way bad. Unwinder just nags about the NVEnc first been locked to Shadowplay and that his CPU sucks.

He did with this post:

http://forums.guru3d.com/showpost.php?p=4687310&amp;postcount=61

And a) his cpu doesnt suck at all and b) he even didnt say that his cpu is bad - he said that background encoding isnt a big deal for nowadays cpus. It has another main reason why the fps goes down (if not additional by the HDD - and I'm sure your HDD is just too slow for lossless - thats all)

Quote
substitute to lossless becuse it dosn't need the newest CPU or HHD. And producing good quality videos with less file sizes.

which proves clearly you didnt read:

http://forums.guru3d.com/showpost.php?p=4687310&amp;postcount=61

So now you got it twice.


If you use NVIFR or NVFBC - THEN you'll have a performance gain - but nvidia locked it for other software - so you gain nothing. Because the main fps drop is because of the hook into DirectX API and not because of the actual encoding. But other software can only do the DirectX hook - there is no way around it if nvidia locked NVIFR capture for 3rd party software.

Come on - unwinder clearly said it in the post - and very detailed - and you still try to argue about it?


Its really sad that the detailed explanation of him isnt enough. I even gave you my prove that its correct. So why you still try to debate this?

It even sounds that you try to say that unwinder has no knowledge. He just programmed the whole afterburner program and he has lots of knowledge.

Its really ridiculous how you still try to argue about it...


edit2: A good lossless capable HDD costs nowadays about 40 € with 1 TB and 2TB isn't much more expensive too.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: zerowalker on May 19, 2015, 04:20:51 pm
Simply put, it's pretty much.
If your system isn't bottle-necked by the performance hit from Encoding/Capturing in itself (HDD, CPU etc).
Then there is no gain.

If it's limited by the API forcing to flush all the time for each capture, then you will gain (pretty much) same fps no matter the Encoding/Capturing tool.

That's if i understand things correctly. Nvidia simply has a Hardware tool for this. You can simply read what the GPU is currently showing on the screen directly without using the API.
That's superfast with no additional cost.

Though i wonder, shouldn't any capturing be possible then, like Desktop, opening games etc. Can't it continue to capture all things that's beeing shown on screen?
And why doesn't it capture the mouse, is that added later on the frame? (I think it doesn't show mouse, maybe be wrong about this).
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: mouse on August 21, 2015, 02:40:36 am
Having tried bandicam with nvenc vs a variety of different codecs and recording software, nvenc definitely saw much better performance, despite using a standard hook.

Repeating this.
Real world testing. Windowed recording. Large performance improvement over using standard codecs using nvenc. Was able to record close to 100fps without issue.

Is bandicam some kind of voodoo magic? Because it seems more like a shoddy recording program with a lack of features and an obnoxious interface, and somehow still the only software to record from a window and encode with nvenc.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: icez on October 19, 2015, 10:36:45 pm
Well, recording with lossless codec and with shadowplay\NVECN then encoding and I can't tell the quality difference between both after uploading them to youtube. To me recording lossless is just a waste of time, hard disk and cpu performance. Really the diference is not noticeable after uploading to youtube...

Mirillis Action record in 1080P with NVENC and I have less than 5% perfomance hit, very close to what Shadowplay offers and the audio can be record in 320kbits.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x687IwpXbHw
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on October 20, 2015, 09:03:18 am
errrr .. its getting boring and I'm getting a bit tired of this :(

a) CPU usage is with lossless actually much lower than with lossy mechanics - thats logic. And for nowadays cpu lossless compression is a side task for the cpu. The real performance drop happens while disturbing the rendering pipeline of Direct3D / OpenGL.

Hell I gave you even a URL in this thread, so here again:

http://forums.guru3d.com/showpost.php?p=4687310&amp;postcount=61

and nvidia reacts to it like this:
http://forums.guru3d.com/showpost.php?p=4983364&postcount=5

So no cpu overwhelmed here...

Your whole bottleneck is slow harddisk drives, wrong settings by user, and how said the framecapturing out of graphics API.

I have a RAID 0, record now with the Capture Card Datapath Vision DVI-DL which records lossless. I record in 2560x1600 @ 50fps and do you know what? No FPS Drop when recording with lossless. But yes of course I see now how the cpu is overwhelmed by using lossless capture  :P - this just proves that the developer of MSI Afterburner didnt say anything wrong (and would've been highly strange for such a person who writes this capture- and graphiccard tuning application.

Your problem relies simply here:

Quote
Your whole bottleneck is slow harddisk drives, wrong settings by user, and how said the framecapturing out of graphics API.

That re-encoding of lossy sources is bad for quality should even be well known for mp3 files. There at least it should be known, that its absolutely not recommended to re-encode them. But why you do it with videos then? And for the audio you dont seem to care as well.

You sure also will say the 50mbit by Shadowplay is an awesome bitrate. There is more than enough games which are THAT hard to compress, that you see a difference between lossless and 50mbit. This happens especially with the ultra fast encoding settings which Live h.264 compression uses - this includes shadowplay.

Here a local comparison with 50mbit vs lossless:

Lossless:
http://abload.de/img/720plossless68umt.png

50 mbit:
http://abload.de/img/720p50.000kbitsqjumh.png

Difference already on local side clearly visible by every human eye on earth.

Quote
Really the diference is not noticeable after uploading to youtube...

Youtube result by using Mirillis Action for capturing:
http://abload.de/img/bild17zu94.png

Youtube result by using Lossless for capturing:
http://abload.de/img/bild2luuhp.png


... and you really want me to say, there is no difference? Come on...

If you could speak german I could show you a video which explains very well some basics about compression and then you would by yourself avoid re-encoding of lossy, because you then would realize what you are doing to the encoders.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: icez on October 20, 2015, 09:28:43 am
errrr .. its getting boring and I'm getting a bit tired of this :(

....

Can you please tell me what codec do you use, what settings for it and Dxtory and the render settings of your software? Thanks.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on October 20, 2015, 09:38:12 am
how said - now I use a capture card.

But:

UTVideo RGB (Dividor @ 3, (x) optimized for decoding speed), 2560x1600 @ 50fps.

I switched to MSI Afterburner though, because it's framecapturing code causes for me a bit less fps drop and a more stable fileFPS at HFR (High Framerate)


For a single HDD I would try rather UTVideo 4:2:0 or 4:2:2 (4:2:2 may be faster with utvideo if the HDD is not a bottleneck then)
If you need 4:2:0 for your HDD, try MagicYUV with for example 3 compression threads and set to 4:2:0 mode.


Further coding information you can see here:

http://paste2.org/kpFvPLmh
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: icez on October 20, 2015, 10:08:57 am
how said - now I use a capture card.

But:

UTVideo RGB (Dividor @ 3, (x) optimized for decoding speed), 2560x1600 @ 50fps.

I switched to MSI Afterburner though, because it's framecapturing code causes for me a bit less fps drop and a more stable fileFPS at HFR (High Framerate)


For a single HDD I would try rather UTVideo 4:2:0 or 4:2:2 (4:2:2 may be faster with utvideo if the HDD is not a bottleneck then)
If you need 4:2:0 for your HDD, try MagicYUV with for example 3 compression threads and set to 4:2:0 mode.


Further coding information you can see here:

http://paste2.org/kpFvPLmh

Thanks! I weas using UT Code but yes, HDD is a problem. I have only a 2TB HDD with 180mb\s speed. Sometimes I record 40 min of gameplay and I will use only 2 minutos of it (montage)... So in time my HDD get full... And render settings, because it seem that my footage is in very good quality after I render it but when it goes to youtube gets blocky, blurry and low quality.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on October 20, 2015, 10:18:57 am
Use 2048x1152 for 16:9
or 1920x1200 for 16:10

and use 41fps or higher. 41 to 60 is a trade off between video quality and smoothness. I decided to use 50 for a compromise of both.

At 2048x1152 you'll get encode ID #308 instead of 303. 308 is their 1440p encode, but since it is not native 1440p it will replace the 1080p label on the player and the 1080p label will run the good 308 encode then.

But 2 things:

No Firefox
No Flash Player

Both dont support VP9. But their vp9 videos have much better quality than their h.264 ones and 1440 and 4k HFR are only offered as vp9.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: icez on October 20, 2015, 10:24:05 am
Use 2048x1152 for 16:9
or 1920x1200 for 16:10

and use 41fps or higher. 41 to 60 is a trade off between video quality and smoothness. I decided to use 50 for a compromise of both.

At 2048x1152 you'll get encode ID #308 instead of 303. 308 is their 1440p encode, but since it is not native 1440p it will replace the 1080p label on the player and the 1080p label will run the good 308 encode then.

But 2 things:

No Firefox
No Flash Player

Both dont support VP9. But their vp9 videos have much better quality than their h.264 ones and 1440 and 4k HFR are only offered as vp9.

Thanks a lot. Really good to talk with someone who understand about this. But what container\codec to use when rendering? MP4 AVC or WMV QVBR? I already use the 1440p method with the resoltuin that you mentioned with aspect ratio of 16:9. I`m using as reference the Threatty videos, from youtube. When you mentio the browser are you talking about sending the file throught it or playback? Should I upload the file only through chrome\ie?
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on October 20, 2015, 10:30:48 am
In the paste2 link you can see what I use.

x264 at 10bit mode, with CRF16 and YV24 colorspace. CRF16 and YV24 arent good for small filesizes. I go all for quality, because I have very good upload speed.

I would start with normal YV12 colorspace (which is 4:2:0) and a CRF of 21.
Audio I personally use FLAC, it is lossless and makes it possible that youtube gets at least audio lossless and does make only as a last step the lossy conversion (the optimal method)
If you want lossy I would recommend you Opus or Nero AAC. Only the MKV Container supports FLAC or Opus. NeroAAC would be usable with MP4 as well. But I would prefer MKV. Supports more codecs and is in general the best Container for H.264 AVC files.

Quote
When you mentio the browser are you talking about sending the file throught it or playback? Should I upload the file only through chrome\ie?

I meant of course playback.

Because Firefox and Flash Player as well dont support VP9. So Flash Player and Firefox would play the worse looking h.264 encodes by them. Also ensure that you dont have any addon in usage, which force using flash or h.264. For example "Magic Actions" does force h.264 playback as default, if I remember right.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: icez on October 20, 2015, 11:15:18 am
In the paste2 link you can see what I use.

x264 at 10bit mode, with CRF16 and YV24 colorspace. CRF16 and YV24 arent good for small filesizes. I go all for quality, because I have very good upload speed.

I would start with normal YV12 colorspace (which is 4:2:0) and a CRF of 21.
Audio I personally use FLAC, it is lossless and makes it possible that youtube gets at least audio lossless and does make only as a last step the lossy conversion (the optimal method)
If you want lossy I would recommend you Opus or Nero AAC. Only the MKV Container supports FLAC or Opus. NeroAAC would be usable with MP4 as well. But I would prefer MKV. Supports more codecs and is in general the best Container for H.264 AVC files.

Quote
When you mentio the browser are you talking about sending the file throught it or playback? Should I upload the file only through chrome\ie?

I meant of course playback.

Because Firefox and Flash Player as well dont support VP9. So Flash Player and Firefox would play the worse looking h.264 encodes by them. Also ensure that you dont have any addon in usage, which force using flash or h.264. For example "Magic Actions" does force h.264 playback as default, if I remember right.

Ok so you encode it with MeGUI. So what should I do? Edit the video in the editor like Vegas, render as uncompressed AVI and then encode with MeGUI, right? Or should I just encode right away from vegas to h264 with AVI container? Another question: Since the file is too big and I only need some minutes of it, can I just crop it on Vegas and reenconde in UT codec since it`s lossless?
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: icez on October 21, 2015, 09:52:24 am
In the paste2 link you can see what I use.

x264 at 10bit mode, with CRF16 and YV24 colorspace. CRF16 and YV24 arent good for small filesizes. I go all for quality, because I have very good upload speed.

I would start with normal YV12 colorspace (which is 4:2:0) and a CRF of 21.
Audio I personally use FLAC, it is lossless and makes it possible that youtube gets at least audio lossless and does make only as a last step the lossy conversion (the optimal method)
If you want lossy I would recommend you Opus or Nero AAC. Only the MKV Container supports FLAC or Opus. NeroAAC would be usable with MP4 as well. But I would prefer MKV. Supports more codecs and is in general the best Container for H.264 AVC files.

Quote
When you mentio the browser are you talking about sending the file throught it or playback? Should I upload the file only through chrome\ie?

I meant of course playback.

Because Firefox and Flash Player as well dont support VP9. So Flash Player and Firefox would play the worse looking h.264 encodes by them. Also ensure that you dont have any addon in usage, which force using flash or h.264. For example "Magic Actions" does force h.264 playback as default, if I remember right.

Ok so you encode it with MeGUI. So what should I do? Edit the video in the editor like Vegas, render as uncompressed AVI and then encode with MeGUI, right? Or should I just encode right away from vegas to h264 with AVI container? Another question: Since the file is too big and I only need some minutes of it, can I just crop it on Vegas and reenconde in UT codec since it`s lossless?

I found your video on youtube while looking for MeGUI tutorials... I followed the exact same settings that you used on MeGUI encoder and the result is horrible for me, on 1080P looks more like SD 360P I don`t know whats wrong  :-\ :-\ :-\. Here`s a sample:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frZ-kMSckhw

And here is the type of quality that I want to achieve on youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgdUAQPEPZo


Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on October 21, 2015, 09:56:52 am
The video looks fine for me.
Are you sure you watched it at ID #308 ?
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: icez on October 21, 2015, 02:01:42 pm
The video looks fine for me.
Are you sure you watched it at ID #308 ?

Well, I encoded at 2048x1152 and watched it at the label 1080P on Youtube... Is that right?
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on October 22, 2015, 03:45:38 am
Yes but for that short video : Pause the video, select 1080p by yourself (automatic still considers 303 not just 308) and wait until it has switched and then continue watching.

switching while playback takes some time to switch.

Anyway - the video looks as expected. Maybe you really watched accidentally the wrong encode ID.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: icez on October 22, 2015, 04:00:06 am
Yes but for that short video : Pause the video, select 1080p by yourself (automatic still considers 303 not just 308) and wait until it has switched and then continue watching.

switching while playback takes some time to switch.

Anyway - the video looks as expected. Maybe you really watched accidentally the wrong encode ID.

I'll take a look at that and test it. Anyway, can you see any difference between my video and the second one from Threatty that I sent in the other post?
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on October 22, 2015, 04:03:54 am
cutscenes/trailer will always look better than real gameplay.

They're much easier to compress.

Additionally: He used the 2048x1152 resolution as well. But only at 30fps. The HFR ones will look even better.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: icez on October 22, 2015, 04:05:54 am
cutscenes/trailer will always look better than real gameplay.

They're much easier to compress.

Additionally: He used the 2048x1152 resolution as well. But only at 30fps. The HFR ones will look even better.

Yeah but I can see a huge difference even in the gameplay parts. Whats HFR?
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on October 22, 2015, 04:09:07 am
Quote
Yeah but I can see a huge difference even in the gameplay parts.

You save bitrate at the non-complex parts. Thats how VBR works. Saving bitrate on non-complex parts, to have more on complex parts without exceeding the average limit.
He used 2048x1152, and your 4second video looked good too.
HFR = High Framerate ..
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: icez on October 22, 2015, 03:02:41 pm
Quote
Yeah but I can see a huge difference even in the gameplay parts.

You save bitrate at the non-complex parts. Thats how VBR works. Saving bitrate on non-complex parts, to have more on complex parts without exceeding the average limit.
He used 2048x1152, and your 4second video looked good too.
HFR = High Framerate ..

So it`s better to use VBR instead of CRF while configuring x264 codec in MeGUI? And just to be sure these are the steps that I should follow?

Edit with Vegas > render as AVI Uncompressed > Encode with MeGUI in MP4 conatiner using H264 codec, right?
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: Malix on October 22, 2015, 03:29:04 pm
crf has constant image quality, it uses as many bits as needed to achieve the desired quality. Therefore it is a vbr method as well.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on October 23, 2015, 06:22:54 am
Youtube uses a combination of both (CRF + max average Bitrate) - and I meant youtube.

Why uncompressed? just use again the same lossless codec you used for the video capture.

You can also use a frameserver. This would skip this step:

www.debugmode.com/frameserver/


Or edit with Avisynth & MeGUI alone (leave vegas away). Qualitywise and speedwise the best solution. But editing is then via avisynth script and not timeline.

I would use MKV at MeGUI. MKV supports much more audio codecs, like FLAC, Opus etc.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: icez on October 24, 2015, 01:10:04 am
Youtube uses a combination of both (CRF + max average Bitrate) - and I meant youtube.

Why uncompressed? just use again the same lossless codec you used for the video capture.

You can also use a frameserver. This would skip this step:

www.debugmode.com/frameserver/


Or edit with Avisynth & MeGUI alone (leave vegas away). Qualitywise and speedwise the best solution. But editing is then via avisynth script and not timeline.

I would use MKV at MeGUI. MKV supports much more audio codecs, like FLAC, Opus etc.

Got it, thanks. I use Vegas because is where I edit the clips, mix them, etc... Some people said that MKV is not a good container to Youtube and that I should always encode as MP4, is that true?
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on October 24, 2015, 06:14:40 am
Got it, thanks. I use Vegas because is where I edit the clips, mix them, etc...

How said:

Quote
Or edit with Avisynth & MeGUI alone (leave vegas away). Qualitywise and speedwise the best solution. But editing is then via avisynth script and not timeline.
You decide.


Quote
Some people said that MKV is not a good container to Youtube and that I should always encode as MP4, is that true?

And what reason did they give?

Anyway: This is pure bullshit.
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: icez on October 24, 2015, 11:02:03 pm
Got it, thanks. I use Vegas because is where I edit the clips, mix them, etc...

How said:

Quote
Or edit with Avisynth & MeGUI alone (leave vegas away). Qualitywise and speedwise the best solution. But editing is then via avisynth script and not timeline.
You decide.


Quote
Some people said that MKV is not a good container to Youtube and that I should always encode as MP4, is that true?

And what reason did they give?

Anyway: This is pure bullshit.

I still have to use Vegas to make slowmotion, video effects and other things that are only possible through a video editor, vegas or premiere...
Title: Re: [Request] NVEnc support in the future?
Post by: De-M-oN on October 25, 2015, 06:10:35 am
Quote
I still have to use Vegas to make slowmotion, video effects and other things that are only possible through a video editor, vegas or premiere...

This is possible with Avisynth too.