@HitsVille said:
Yep. I’m not 100% sure if a Coffee Lake offers anything beyond a Kaby. But for 4K HEVC 10bit a Kaby will definitely do the job well. Which is why I was simply trying to steer you away from the false impression you were being given about a 20K CPU benchmarks being needed for 2 4K HEVC transcodes. Utter nonsense.
Thanks.
I found some more details on Kaby Lake vs Coffee Lake… “In terms of the integrated GPU, there is only a change in the way Intel addresses the name. Technically, it is still the same Intel HD Graphics 620 that is found in the 7th generation Kaby Lake CPUs but Intel has decided to change the branding to “UHD Graphics” to better convey the 4K/HEVC decoding that the iGPU is capable of. It is still the Gen9.2/GT2 engine as the previous generation but it now comes with native support for HDCP 2.2. Therefore, the GPU part is relatively unchanged, and for the most part, Intel has limited its tinkering to the CPU side.”
So doesn’t look like Coffee would provide any benefit of Kaby for HEVC decoding.
Yeah I didn’t think there was a huge difference. do you have a particular CPU in mind? I’m guessing your’e gonna have to do the motherboard too due to it being socket 1151?
Yeah current setup is Haswell i7, so was looking to replace with Coffee Lake i7 and z370 board to support, but to be honest the only bottleneck in the machine is HEVC so i’m more inclined to drop the haswell kit into a smaller case and utilise the one i already have which can take 10x 3.5" disks, and then drop-in a cheap Coffee Lake i3-8100 with supporting motherboard, 8GB RAM, NVMe SSD and Ubuntu with PMS.
That should future proof the 4k / hevc side of things for barely £500.
I think so - it’s the same price as the equivalent Kaby Lake, and as we now know zero difference in HEVC decode capability from the bottom spec i3 to top-sped i7 or i9!.. so for a dedicated media server it makes no sense to pay 3x the price.
I am here to find out what are the capabilities of integrated intel GPUs in a 8700k for instance is sufficient for hw transcoding 4k files or not? it’'s super slow from my experience and I don’t get why it’s always saying x264 to x264 transcode. shouldn’t it be hevc to x264 or x265 to x264. or whatever? why is intel GPUs trapped at x264, because with my nvidia GPUs in my server I get hevc to x264 or x265. Can anybody answer my QUESTIONS? SOMEBODY answer my questions I need to decide on the build I am going with for my unpaid server.
I have a 8700. I tossed on a 400Mbps bitrate 4k x265 10bit file and used hardware conversion to play it. I had to convert to 1080p, so your results may differ. The server was able to transcode the video from x265 to x264 and it played with no issue.
intel_gpu_top reported 84% usage. It was a small clip, so I don’t know if that’s high because it was buffering or if that’s the regular usage. So based on my tests I would say you can convert one 4k video to 1080p at a time. Keep in mind the x265 did have a 400Mbps bitrate though.
i have a REAL server doing my plex server and transcoding with CPUs that don’t support intel qs. if i were to do it over again I would have just bought a dedicated gpu for my server and utilized hw transcoding. with a nvidia 10 series gpu you can do 10+ hw transcodes 4k and 1080p. GPU asics are built to do this sort of work cpus can do it ok but they aren’t nearly as efficient. if you aren’t doing a millions streams all with transcoding a 1050 Ti should be more than sufficient, There are patches to unlock streams for both windows and ubuntu. no sense in arguing or buying a new cpu just use gpu transcoding…
I am about to purchase a whole new CPU/Mobo/ram combo based on the results of this thread. Where is this patch that gets past the 2stream limit. Also hearing that GPU Accel is nowhere near as reliable as quicksync.
