If I turn off the QS playback they work ok. I believe QSV has two options to choose between speed and quality. We will be getting some Kaby Lake processors in to test and I am expecting them to perform better than Skylake but I don't expect much improvement out of the Quick Sync encoding/playback.Hi David - Have you had a chance to to test with an i7-7700k yet? I see the 630 GPU also has h.265 4k 10bit hardware decoding. We will be getting some Kaby Lake processors in to test and I am expecting them to perform better than Skylake but I don't expect much improvement out of the Quick Sync encoding/playback. If you are comparing processors for playback then sometimes it is better to get a higher powered CPU rather than rely on Quick Sync since the high powered CPU soups up all kinds of footage rather than just H.264 based footage. With playback, Quick Sync lets me playback 2 streams of 4K video in a 4K project on an Skylake processor which is about the same as I can manage with an 8 core (and more expensive) Broadwell-E, which does not have Quick Sync and just uses the CPU. With Quick Sync the encoding is WAY faster than not using Quick Sync but some people choose other methods because they can get better quality in other ways, especially at lower bit rates (there are quite a few threads about this on the forum).
I doubt whether any editing program will take advantage of the H.265 abilities yet. I am not sure whether there are any changes to do with H.264.
The new thing with Kaby Lakes is that they have support for playback of H.265 video in the processor. Quick Sync is a lot faster for encoding than a using just an nVidia card and it will be the same for the Kaby Lake processors.
0 kommentar(er)
