Go Back   Hardware Canucks > HARDWARE > HTPC Systems & Software

    
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old January 2, 2012, 11:09 AM
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Kelowna, BC
Posts: 11
Default Does Intel Quick Sync suck? Or is it something else?

So I got a new system recently. One thing I was building around was the 2600k SandyBridge and a z68 mobo so I could take advantage of the vaunted Intel Quick Sync technology for transcoding video. All the reviews said how blazing fast it was... none said that it resulted in crappy unplayable video! So I'm trying to figure out what I'm doing wrong.

My goal is to rip my DVDs to MKV so I can store them on HDD and play them on my Asus O!Play for watching on TV and my Asus Transformer Prime Tablet for watching on the go.

I stick a DVD in the PC and use AnyDVD to rip it to VOBs on my PC. No problem so far.
I open up DVDFab 8 and encode it to MKV h.264. No problem so far.
It finishes a full DVD in under 6 minutes! That rocks!

problem. The playback is choppy. VERY chopping. Unwatchable choppy. No, I'm not being picky... nobody would watch it. Its that bad. The "quality" of image is fine - that's not the issue.

I can fix it two ways:

1) I can turn on 2-pass. NO WAY! That turns OFF Quick Sync. Defeats the purpose as it now takes 45 minutes to finish. Screw that.
2) I can crank up the bitrate to some insane number like 10000kbps and then it works. But now the file is 2 to 3 times the size of the DVD and this just shouldn't be necessary.

I searched and searched and it seems that most people aren't having this problem. I tried different software packages (including everyone listed by Intel as being compatible) and it always results in the same thing. I've tried different frame rates to no avail.

I'm left wondering if either I have a defective 2600k somehow... or if its the motherboard (Asrock Fatal1ty z68 pro)?

I took out the discrete video cards to rule that out as the issue. It made no difference.

Frustrated!

- Steven
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old January 2, 2012, 11:16 AM
enaberif's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgahree, AB
Posts: 10,679
Default

why are you converting a dvd to mkv? convert dvds to xvid.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old January 2, 2012, 02:42 PM
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Kelowna, BC
Posts: 11
Default

Can`t even compare the two. MKV is a container and xvid is a codec.

Doesn`t really answer my question anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old January 2, 2012, 03:23 PM
JD's Avatar
JD JD is offline
Moderator
F@H
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 6,955

My System Specs

Default

I think what he meant was to use the AVI container and XviD as the codec as that's typically what you'd rip DVD's to as they're low-quality to begin with.

It's possible that QuickSync doesn't like MKV? No harm in trying AVI...
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old January 2, 2012, 03:51 PM
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Kelowna, BC
Posts: 11
Default

quick sync can't do xvid it seems
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old August 14, 2012, 09:31 AM
lcdguy's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: An undisclosed location
Posts: 2,048
Default

did you try using x.264 just for S&G :) and maybe try using mp4 as the container.
__________________
and now for something completely different

Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old August 14, 2012, 10:07 AM
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Kelowna, BC
Posts: 11
Default

Curious what in the world made you dig up this old thread?

Anyway, I abandoned Quick Sync months ago. While it is ridiculously fast, the resultant files were just not acceptable no matter what I tried. I got it "fairly good' after awhile, and if my point was to share mid-quality files on the net or watch them on a 3" screen that'd be fine... but I was looking to archive my DVD collection and it was nowhere near good enough. Instead I used my graphics cards' hardware and handbrake. It takes 2-3 times as long but the quality is SO much better its not funny.

- Steven
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old August 14, 2012, 10:36 AM
lcdguy's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: An undisclosed location
Posts: 2,048
Default

bored at work i guess
__________________
and now for something completely different

Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old August 14, 2012, 10:59 AM
great_big_abyss's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,210

My System Specs

Default

There is a great article at The Tech Report talking about this very issue. It compares different hardware encoding options, from QuickSync (Intel) to VCE (AMD) to NVENC (Nvidia) measuring picture quality and time. Quite the interesting article, in fact.
__________________



HTPC: Z77A-G45; 3770K; Coolermaster GeminII; 2x4GB Kingston HyperX 1600Mhz; MSI R7-260X; 2x 128GB Crucial M4 SSD; 1TB WD Green, 2x 2TB WD Green; PC P&C 750W PS; Fractal Design Node 605;
Son's Rig: M5A97; 1055T; CNPS20LQ; 2x4GB Corsair Vengeance 1600Mhz; ASUS GTX650Ti Boost; 80GB Intel 520 SSD; 320GB WD Black HDD; SPI 700W; Bitfenix Shinobi;
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old August 16, 2012, 04:44 PM
Trial Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by s_mack View Post
Curious what in the world made you dig up this old thread?

Anyway, I abandoned Quick Sync months ago. While it is ridiculously fast, the resultant files were just not acceptable no matter what I tried. I got it "fairly good' after awhile, and if my point was to share mid-quality files on the net or watch them on a 3" screen that'd be fine... but I was looking to archive my DVD collection and it was nowhere near good enough. Instead I used my graphics cards' hardware and handbrake. It takes 2-3 times as long but the quality is SO much better its not funny.

- Steven
It looks like you found out the same way as me how poor Quicksync is; funny how very few of the articles at the time mentioned it. It is very limited, won't ever support 2-pass encoding and probably only equivalent to x264 Ultra fast setting - which is not for anything of quality.
Handbrake and Cuda are good for x264 but don't use them for Xvid encoding.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wow, this would SUCK! YukonTrooper Off Topic 16 May 26, 2011 09:42 PM
Intel X25-M 80GB 34NM Postville $199 (need help quick) Nodscene Storage 2 June 5, 2010 03:34 PM
Quick fix for audio sync issues on DVD? sswilson O/S's, Drivers & General Software 6 April 17, 2009 07:15 PM
Are there any External HD that don't suck? Urotsukidoji Storage 23 July 23, 2008 07:33 AM
Intel 775 Heat Sink - QUICK question mattydies Water Cooling 3 June 26, 2007 07:57 PM