Best CPU for Rendering & Video Encoding: Spring 2021 – Techgage
On this page, we’re going to be tackling a few additional encoding-type projects. Since the beginning of its life, we’ve benchmarked with Adobe’s Lightroom, but dropped it for about a year or two a few years back because it wouldn’t reliably scale. Over time, things changed, and now the application seems pretty efficient on multi-core CPUs.
In addition to Lightroom, we’ve also tested Blackmagic RAW Speed Test, which acts as a simple way to see how a CPU can handle playback of BRAW footage at different compression levels. Finally, we’re also testing with LameXP, an open-source music encoder that can take advantage of many-core CPUs, as well as the super-popular HandBrake transcoder.
Adobe Lightroom Classic
As hard as it is to believe sometimes, we’ve been benchmarking Adobe’s Lightroom for nearly 14 years. For most of that time, we used the same photo set that came out of our Nikon D80. Recognizing the aging set, a friend of the website provided us with a new set of higher-resolution RAW files from a Canon DSLR. To our surprise, scaling hasn’t changed much, but the bigger files make for a more strenuous test.
To date, we’ve only tested Lightroom’s JPG export, which involves a resize and also an application of a matte finish. This time around, we added DNG export, and are glad we did, because as you can see from the results above, the scaling changes up quite a bit.
With the JPG export, the Threadripper chips take the top spots, but fail to do the same with the DNG export. With DNG, it seems as though there is such thing as a perfect blend of cores and clocks, something that helps propel the 16-core 5950X to the top spot. Amusingly, the Threadrippers that dominated the JPG export fall to the absolute bottom in the DNG export. If you need a many-core chip that performs great in Lightroom, you either want the Ryzen 9 5950X or Core i9-10980XE.
Blackmagic RAW Speed Test
BRAW is a format that can take great advantage of CPUs and GPUs alike, something proven in the results here. Once again, the 64-core 3990X doesn’t dominate as much as it should, with the 32-core 3970X placing in front of it. Aside from those top results, the rest scales pretty much as expected all the way down. On a budget, a CPU like the 8-core 5800X or 10-core 10900K looks to offer a decent value overall, but you will definitely see improvements if you opt for a bigger model.
HandBrake
With our HandBrake transcode tests, the 32-core 3970X yet again hits the top spot. It should be clear by now that while the 64-core 3990X is all sorts of impressive in its own way, most encoding software will scale better on the smaller models. We’re really eager to see how the next-gen Threadripper, based around the Zen 3 architecture, changes things up.
In this lineup, the 12-core Ryzen 9 5900X stands out as a good value for the money. It effectively goes toe-to-toe with Intel’s much bigger 18-core i9-10980XE.
LameXP
As someone who’s encoded tens of thousands of music tracks over the years, a test like this LameXP one hits close to home (even if I don’t encode too much anymore thanks to streaming services). LameXP won’t use every single thread the top-end Threadrippers give it, but they still manage to scale better than the mainstream counterparts.
The 5950X continues to look strong here, but everything aside from Threadripper essentially scales as we’d expect. In time, it’d be great to see how this test would scale if all cores/threads were utilized. With enough threads, a test like this could make for a good storage test, as well.
Support our efforts! With ad revenue at an all-time low for written websites, we’re relying more than ever on reader support to help us continue putting so much effort into this type of content. You can support us by becoming a Patron, or by using our Amazon shopping affiliate links listed through our articles. Thanks for your support!
Handbrake video encoding performance, hardware assist edition | Page 2
#41
-
Add bookmark
-
#41
orionquest said:
Maybe not but the file isn’t very demanding. I’ve a lowly Haswell Core i7
with 264 videotool box it was like a 1 minute
with 265 software was 2:40 sec’s // chip doesn’t support 265 videotool box.Try something 4K with 265.
Click to expand…
Ok then. Let’s try the official Handbrake forum test. https://forum.handbrake.fr/viewtopic.php?t=40721
Using the 4K30 «Big Buck Bunny» file, transcoding to H.265 MKV 2160p60 with VideoToolbox takes …
[21:22:45] Starting work at: Thu Feb 24 21:22:45 2022
.. lots here …
[21:26:20] Finished work at: Thu Feb 24 21:26:20 2022
… 4 mins 25 seconds at an average speed of 89.02fps.
(fyi this was my home M1 Max, not my work M1 Pro)
#42
-
Add bookmark
-
#42
If your source if not interlaced you can disable the comb detect and decomb filters. Built-in presets have these filters enabled by default by they are not needed in most cases.
#43
-
Add bookmark
-
#43
algebraist said:
Ok then. Let’s try the official Handbrake forum test. https://forum.handbrake.fr/viewtopic.php?t=40721
Using the 4K30 «Big Buck Bunny» file, transcoding to H.265 MKV 2160p60 with VideoToolbox takes …
[21:22:45] Starting work at: Thu Feb 24 21:22:45 2022
.. lots here …
[21:26:20] Finished work at: Thu Feb 24 21:26:20 2022… 4 mins 25 seconds at an average speed of 89.02fps.
(fyi this was my home M1 Max, not my work M1 Pro)
Click to expand…
Nice thanks for sharing. If you are up to 1 more test do the same file and settings but 265 without VideoToolbox.
#44
-
Add bookmark
-
#44
That’ll be much later tonight. I did try one but it was late and only averaging 12fps before I stopped it.
#45
-
Add bookmark
-
#45
galad said:
If your source if not interlaced you can disable the comb detect and decomb filters. Built-in presets have these filters enabled by default by they are not needed in most cases.
Click to expand…
Yes but I’m just following the Handbrake benchmark forum post where you take their preset and just change the video output as required. At least this way it’ll be consistent with what you can find there too.
I will say the videotoolbox stuff is one hell of a speed up. I have not checked for quality however.
#46
-
Add bookmark
-
#46
So is it using the ProRes cores on M1? I’m looking at an M1Pro with bonus money and it’s always chapped my hide that performant acceleration solutions take money. ..or I’m just looking in the wrong places.
ETA: Autodesk Fusion 360 has spoiled me…as a hobbiest, it’s my toolpath for 3d printing and I’m never going to be in a place where I need to pay for it.
#47
-
Add bookmark
-
#47
Matey-O said:
So is it using the ProRes cores on M1? I’m looking at an M1Pro with bonus money and it’s always chapped my hide that performant acceleration solutions take money. ..or I’m just looking in the wrong places.
Click to expand…
No. Please see https://github.com/HandBrake/HandBrake/issues/4028 where they say VideoToolbox is using dedicated video encoding engines on the M1 Pro / Max chips. This is the reason why encodes using these engines are the same speed regardless of M1 Pro or M1 Max. It’s just that the Max could do multiple encodes at once.
I’ve completed testing (finally). I got the Big Bunny Buck video that the Handbrake team likes as a benchmark in both 1080p and 2160p formats then converted them to the same size h365 MKV format. Once using VideoToolbox option then again using standard settings. The results are eye opening for me and once again I am just looking at times, not final video quality.
MacBook Pro 14″ M1 Max with 32Gb and macOS 12.2.1
1080p Software h365 MKV
11 minutes 28 seconds.
1080p VideoToolbox h365 MKV
1 minute 6 seconds.
or a 1042. 42% speed increase.
2160p Software h365 MKV
43 minutes 51 seconds.
2160p VideoToolbox h365 MKV
3 minutes 36 seconds.
or a 1218.06% speed increase.
#48
-
Add bookmark
-
#48
algebraist said:
The results are eye opening for me
Click to expand. ..
Bloody hell!
#49
-
Add bookmark
-
#49
algebraist said:
No. Please see https://github. com/HandBrake/HandBrake/issues/4028 where they say VideoToolbox is using dedicated video encoding engines on the M1 Pro / Max chips. This is the reason why encodes using these engines are the same speed regardless of M1 Pro or M1 Max. It’s just that the Max could do multiple encodes at once.
I’ve completed testing (finally). I got the Big Bunny Buck video that the Handbrake team likes as a benchmark in both 1080p and 2160p formats then converted them to the same size h365 MKV format. Once using VideoToolbox option then again using standard settings. The results are eye opening for me and once again I am just looking at times, not final video quality.
MacBook Pro 14″ M1 Max with 32Gb and macOS 12.2.1
1080p Software h365 MKV
11 minutes 28 seconds.1080p VideoToolbox h365 MKV
1 minute 6 seconds.or a 1042.42% speed increase.
2160p Software h365 MKV
43 minutes 51 seconds.2160p VideoToolbox h365 MKV
3 minutes 36 seconds.or a 1218. 06% speed increase.
Click to expand…
Interesting results, thanks again. You should check out the quality of the results.
When I did my own tests there was some noticeable quality issues with VideoToolbox compared to the software render. Mind you that was a few versions ago in HB it may have been improved or I could have fiddled a bit more. But in the end didn’t feel it was worth it for my setup to bother with either 265 and VB. If I had a new M1 type processor I would review the setup.
It would be interesting to see what Apple compressor could do. It should be able to tap into the specialty cores in the M1 Max.
#50
-
Add bookmark
-
#50
Totally subjective but it was producing files noticeably smaller in size than the software encoder. Also seems to depend on the source material too. The Handbrake benchmark video looks almost identical, slightly soft in places. I ran a h364 action film from 1987 through and it really had trouble with the film grain: still watchable but noticeably compressed.
All default settings though. Might be possible to change for performance. I think @galad could talk with more authority on that than me.
#51
-
Add bookmark
-
#51
The quality of the hardware encoder depends mainly on the actual hardware, so this is it. Apple doesn’t expose many settings, and Compressor will give a similar output, and x265 will give a much better quality (at a much higher encoding time), but it you can’t see the difference you can still use the hardware encoder and be happy
There is no magic unused hardware in the M1 Pro or M1 Max anyway.
#52
-
Add bookmark
-
#52
algebraist said:
Matey-O said:
So is it using the ProRes cores on M1? I’m looking at an M1Pro with bonus money and it’s always chapped my hide that performant acceleration solutions take money. ..or I’m just looking in the wrong places.
Click to expand…
No. Please see https://github.com/HandBrake/HandBrake/issues/4028 where they say VideoToolbox is using dedicated video encoding engines on the M1 Pro / Max chips. This is the reason why encodes using these engines are the same speed regardless of M1 Pro or M1 Max. It’s just that the Max could do multiple encodes at once.
Click to expand…
Awww, I’m far enough along in life that I realize I’d just want to use the ProRes cores, MARVEL at just how blazingly fast they are, then never really use them again….same goes for the Neural Engine components…I know aspects of the OS use ‘em, but the desire to grab xcode and use any kind of code to see what they’re like is always not quite enough to do anything about.
Watching the MKBHD videos an their ilk, they’re clearly taking advantage of some substantial hardware acceleration…I’m just positive I’d not get $299 worth of benefit out of a Final Cut Pro license.
It’s like knowing the ARM chip on the Raspberry Pi’s got hardware H.264 playback acceleration and it could help massively…but it’s lacking a driver to expose it to Rapsbian.,,
#53
-
Add bookmark
-
#53
There’s one other thing I should have mentioned. A CPU based encode with Handbrake is one of the few guaranteed ways I know of to get the cooling fans to spin up on an Apple Silicon Mac. The VideoToolbox, damn thing didn’t even get warm.
You must log in or register to reply here.
Hand brake valve Etalon, TATA E-2 (for sensor) Rider RD264343700116
- Manufacturer
- Rider
- Part number
- RD264343700116
Applicability: Bus, 35. Brakes
Applicability
- Commodity group:
- —
Devices
Sensors, indicators, instrument clusters
- —
brakes
Taps, valves, regulators, chambers
- —
brakes
All parts of the brake system
About the manufacturer Rider
ABOUT THE COMPANY
Trademark RIDER is a European brand that has established itself as a manufacturer of high quality spare parts at an affordable price
In 2004, the company «KENTER CAM» was founded in Hungary in AZ CAM.