visualblind

Looks like the site is down. Appears to be a VPS on Ghandi's platform.

> Using an expensive GPU block (with most of its cores idling) to encode slightly faster than a cheaper CPU core will do?

Slightly faster? Sir, I do think you are mistaken.

There are other variables go that into it such as choosing between constant or variable bitrates & variable or constant frame rate, and profiles obviously. There's a crapload of other directives that you can tweak as well.

I see what you mean though, you're right if you have CPU with lot of cores/threads/horsepower then you should use that instead of hardware-accel transcoding. I don't.

The major companies are such as nvidia Cuda (nvenc encoder/nvdec decoder) and VAAPI in Intel CPUs. FFmpeg has lot of good documentation on this subject.

I agree with your statement mostly. However I think if we're dealing with 1080p displays, hardware-accelerated transcoding produces acceptable video quality for non-4k+ watching. That's just my 2 cents.

Video codec transcoding is very CPU resource expensive. If you do a lot of it, you should be looking into doing hardware-accelerated transcoding. https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/HWAccelIntro

My ffmpeg how-to/examples/scratchfile can be viewed here: https://paste.travisflix.com/?ce12a91f222cc3d7#BQPKtw6sEs9cE...