No it doesn’t. QSV transcoding occurs on a dedicated Quick Sync Core - separate from the standard compute CPU cores/threads.
Both comparisons have the same stress being placed on the CPU cores/threads.
Quick Sync
Video - QSV Core
Audio - CPU Core
NVENC
Video - GPU Core
Audio - CPU Core
Right, but the iGPU is part of the CPU. It’s a shame you won’t just try it, I’m not saying it’s the issue, but you seem more interested in proving a point than actually testing it.
The iGPU is a part of the die - but the processing is separate from the standard compute cores. Processing on the QSV core has no impact on the standard CPU cores - the same as if NVENC is transcoding.
So the two scenario’s tested are equal in terms of the stress being placed on the CPU cores.
I’m happy to test it - I’m as curious as you are. Problem is, I can’t find a h264 video file that requires video transcoding but direct plays audio.
It seems as soon as you force transcode video, it’ll also transcode audio.
I think the scenario of “transcoded video - direct play audio” is rare enough that it’s not worth testing.
Almost all users that are transcoding video will also be transcoding audio.
Is your setup transcoding audio even while video is direct?
Have you tried files that are stereo audio only, not surround?
No when video is direct, audio is direct.
But when you force a video transcode (for testing purposes), Plex will also transcode the audio. Regardless of whether your client can direct play the audio.
So the scenario of “Transcode Video, Direct Play Audio” would be quite rare- particularly with h264 content.
In summary- Quick Sync Video is a fantastic solution, if you need less than 18 or so simultaneous transcodes (that’s when IOWAIT gets too high).
If you need more than 18 transcodes, a dedicated NVIDIA GPU with more than 8GB of VRAM is still the way to go.
If running windows you’ll need a Quadro however in Linux the hacked drivers to unlock multiple transcodes in GTX cards works fine (my testing was with a GTX1080 in Linux)
Your experience is an anecdote at this point. It may be valid, but without more data it’s only a point and not a trend or necessarily a representation. You’re also using hardware that’s not covered in this guide, I wonder if that has anything to do with it.
Huh? I’ve presented more data than you have.
The only data you’ve provided is a single screenshot from Plex saying “21 transcodes” - not showing the file types, transcode types or transcode speeds. For all a reader knows, half of these could have been buffering.
Post a detailed screen shot of 20+ simultaneous 1080p transcodes showing detailed transcode information for each stream (in particular transcode info and transcode speeds).
Also the hardware I’ve used is significantly higher quality than what’s being recommended in this thread.
Huh? I’ve presented more data than you have.
The only data you’ve provided is a single screenshot from Plex saying “21 transcodes” - not showing the file types, transcode types or transcode speeds. For all a reader knows, half of these could have been buffering.
Post a detailed screen shot of 20+ simultaneous 1080p transcodes showing detailed transcode information for each stream (in particular transcode info and transcode speeds).
Also the hardware I’ve used is significantly higher quality than what’s being recommended in this thread.
I’m new here and no expert but in my real world testing, I’ve had plenty of my movies and TV shows will transcode video while direct playing audio or vice versa, I always thought it was player that was the deciding factor if something got transcoded not nessasarily the source.
I’d assume if you could get 18 transcoded of both video and audio in your testing, do you not assume you could get well over 21 if you were just transcoding video?
Like I said, I’m a noob here but the argument seems weak, further testing probably nessesary.
If you have your player set to direct play - there are rare occasions where video will transcode with direct play audio.
Audio transcoding requires minimal CPU compute.
If you refer to both tests - you’ll see that user/system CPU usage is at most 25%. That’s the result of 24 DCA DTS 5.1 audio transcodes. Audio isn’t a deciding factor in this test case.
The cause of the buffering on Quick Sync is IOWAIT - not CPU usage as a result of audio transcoding.
I disagree about the argument being weak - in that both tests were like for like:
But I agree that more testing can only be a good thing.
I’d love to see evidence that Quick Sync can transcode 20+ 1080P h264 files with a healthy transcode buffer. I’m all for Quick Sync over Nvidia. It’s cheaper and less power hungry and I can ditch my GPU.
The issue I’m facing is I’m unable to perform more than 20 1080P transcodes with Quick Sync, with modern, powerful hardware and an ideal test environment. Furthermore, I haven’t seen any evidence that proves it’s achievable on any hardware. I’m hoping that evidence exists!
I even ran the same test on another machine I have available (i7 7700k, 64GB RAM) and experienced the same buffering and 60% IOWAIT at about 18-20 1080P h264 transcodes.
Hello,
Been a while since using my hardware etc as been away. I have two questions:
I am currently using a i3 8100 CPU, Gigabyte B360M H Motherboard & Adata XPG 8GB DDR4 RAM under Ubuntu Server with Webmin and Plex which is fed from my Unraid storage server. I’m sure I read somewhere that Ubuntu Desktop can be better suited plus I would get to grips with Linux better maybe? Or is Windows 10/Hackintosh a option nowadays in terms or reliability and quality?
Also…I have forgotten the second question so will ask later!
Cheers
I recommend Ubuntu 20.04 desktop, it works great!
Cheers, any benefits over server apart from ease of use?
So are we arguing over 18 vs 21 here ?
Even if this is the case, wouldn’t two qs boxes running plex be a better option than a gtx 1080?
Not arguing at all, I’m sure I read on the transcode build guide that the desktop version was a little better? Maybe I’m mistaken?
What about Ubuntu Server/Desktop vs Windows 10 vs Hackintosh?
JDM_WAAAT I have an existing plex server on Windows. I just got my HP 290 do I have to use Unraid? I have a Nas already serving content.
The guidance is to use ubuntu 20.04 on the HP 290 for plex tanscode box. You can serve the files however you want as long as you can mount it in ubuntu. I use freenas.
Yes. I have gotten that far and installed ubuntu 20.04. I was able to install plex server, but I don’t know how to set up the nfs shares from the Nas. I have a ReadyNas214 I have been trying things but am hitting a roadblock. I followed the guide and soon realized that it only created directories on my HP 290… I have content that is accessible by my Windows Plex server…but not my HP 290.
I don’t have a ReadyNAS, but it looks like this page goes over how to set up network access for shares.
https://kb.netgear.com/26453/ReadyNAS-OS-6-Set-Network-Access-Rights-to-Shared-Folders
I think you’d want to create a user with the same credentials as your Ubuntu account. Then select the shares you’re trying to pass to the transcode box and go to Settings → Network Access → NFS and provision that user to access the share.
Do this in place of the “1. Configure Unraid” step in the Software Installation & Configuration section of this guide and the rest should be the same.