With no graphics card specific compilation to the ffmpeg, which among intel or AMD is better for executing

ffmpeg -i input -c:v libx265 -crf 26 -preset fast -c:a aac -b:a 128k output.mp4

Would tight integration between amd cpu + gpu help in this case?

Fyi. Currently i am using intel with cpu only mode for this and its pretty slow.

  • drwankingstein@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    12·
    11 months ago

    none, you aren’t using gpu, just whatever cpu is the fastest. if you want gpu acceleration you have to specify it. and keep note gpu acceleration is less efficient then cpu so your files will be bigger. though at preset fast it might actually be pretty close

    • Disonantezko@lemmy.sdf.org
      31·
      11 months ago
      • Hardware (GPU) encoders are worst than software encoders.
      • GPU Acceleration is good for faster encoding and free CPU to do other things. But you get bigger files at similar quality.
      • Maybe is useful for live streaming or if you really really need CPU do other things.
      • drwankingstein@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        3·
        11 months ago

        Yes this is indeed what I said. but well calling gpu encoders “worse” isnt really fair, it’s all trade offs, they for sure have worse efficiency as we both said, but their speed is significantly faster usually. I would say that doesn’t make the encoder “worse” just different.

      • scholar@lemmy.world
        6·
        11 months ago

        Running on cpu will give you better quality and (maybe) smaller output file size, but will take longer.

        Everything’s a compromise and it all depends on what matters more to you

        • drwankingstein@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
          1·
          11 months ago

          Better quality:Compression ratio you can easily get better quality out of a gpu then a cpu depending on your settings, but it will rarely be better quality AND compression unless you have a quite slow CPU and cant run a sensible preset