Jump to content

Hardware transcoding for Ryzen 35 550H CPU


Recommended Posts

clarkss12
Posted

I have an older miniPC (Vorke V2) that I have been using as my main Emby server.  I now have a newer Ryzen powered miniPC that I would like to use as my main Emby server.  However, the transcoding is not capable of producing a fluid video stream.

Here are the specs for the Vorke V2

WIN10 64bit CPU Supported:6th generation Intel Core i7-6500U 2.50GHz / 3.10GHz

GPU:Intel HD Graphics 520 Memory:1 x 204Pin SO-DIMM 8GB DDR3L 1600Mhz; 256G SSD

Here are the specs for the GTR miniPC.

Beelink GT-R
Ryzen 5 3550H
16GB DDR4 SO-DIMM
Ryzen 5 3550H is equipped with eight Vega Compute Units (CUs) that max out at 1,200 MHz

When I enable hardware decoding, the fps is very low.  When I disable the hardware decoding, the fps is better, but still as not as good as my older Vorke V2.

So, the question, is the GT-R miniPC just not capable, or is there a setting that I am missing......

Here are some clips that may help explain what I am talking about.

First, here is the pics of the Vorke transcoding and the  transcoder it is using.

Next are the pics of the Ryzen transcoding and transcoder being used.

 

 

 

Vorke transcoding.jpg

Vorke V2 hardware decoder.jpg

GTR software transcode.jpg

GTR hardware transcode.jpg

GTR transcoders.jpg

Posted

In short yes - the older PC has Intel HD graphics which accelerates the video conversions - the Ryzen chip does not so it needs to do it with software and normal CPU.

 

clarkss12
Posted
1 minute ago, rbjtech said:

In short yes - the older PC has Intel HD graphics which accelerates the video conversions - the Ryzen chip does not so it needs to do it with software and normal CPU.

 

Why is the Ryzen graphics chip unable to transcode?

Posted

It can, but as you have found out, it is not as good as the Intel media accelerator/chip (quickSync) - so while the CPU is much better, the media chip is not.  This has nothing to do with the GPU itself - that may be more powerful than the Intel GPU - I'm not sure.  

Posted

Last thing to add - sorry, I just noticed this - you are transcoding VC-1.    I'm not even sure AMF supports this for hardware DECODING - so you are actually decoding with CPU and then re-encoding with AMF.  With QuickSync - it is doing both the DECODING and ENCODING in hardware.

clarkss12
Posted

I installed plex server to check the hardware decoding with their server, but I can't find the information that Emby supplies.   Been a very long time since I used Plex, so maybe I am not looking in the right location for transcoding information.

clarkss12
Posted (edited)

By comparing the playback of a VC-1 video codec on a device that does NOT natively support that codec using Emby vs Plex, Plex is NOT fluid, compared to the Emby playback.  However, with the hardware decoding enabled on the Emby server, the video plays for a few minutes, then crashes to the desktop.......  With hardware decoded disabled, the video plays perfectly............

I tried to disable just the VC-1 hardware decoding, but that did not seem to work, it still used transcoding.

Bottom line, if I did not have access to this transcoding information, I would be happy as a lark.  Ignorance is truly bliss.  If the video plays perfectly, does it really matter if it is software or hardware decoded???

363996513_VC-1codecdisabled.thumb.jpg.5764aa4d90783eb17f8d759bda966bd6.jpg

Edited by clarkss12
  • Haha 1
Posted

If you did want to go fully GPU in the new PC I'd pickup an Nvidia 1650 or similar which is their new turing architecture which works very well with Emby.

clarkss12
Posted
29 minutes ago, cayars said:

If you did want to go fully GPU in the new PC I'd pickup an Nvidia 1650 or similar which is their new turing architecture which works very well with Emby.

I already have the Ryzen miniPC, was just hoping the onboard GPU had drivers that could do real time transcoding............

Posted

Understood, I was just saying if you dropped in an NVidia GPU like the one I mentioned it would turn the miniPC into a Beast for transcoding. That card is easy to unlock and get around 20 transcodes all in GPU in real-time.

Posted
8 hours ago, cayars said:

Understood, I was just saying if you dropped in an NVidia GPU like the one I mentioned it would turn the miniPC into a Beast for transcoding. That card is easy to unlock and get around 20 transcodes all in GPU in real-time.

GTX 1650's have two types of encoders, some have the old Volta encoder - so be wary on which one you recommend  - see footnote 4 on the link below .. ;)  

see - https://www.nvidia.com/en-gb/geforce/graphics-cards/gtx-1650/

 

 

  • Like 1
clarkss12
Posted

Doing more testing, this time with my almost 4 year old home made PC... 

The frame rate is only 71fps, compared to my 2 or 3 year old Vorke V2 miniPC, that runs over 100fps while hardware transcoding.........

Purchased items for my desktop PC on Feb. 13, 2017 from Newegg.  Been building computers for many, many years.

AMD FX-8350 Black Edition Vishera 8-Core 4.0 GHz (4.2 GHz Turbo) Socket AM3+ 125W FD8350FRHKBOX Desktop Processor

EVGA GeForce GT 730 DirectX 12 (feature level 11_0) 02G-P3-3733-KR 2GB 64-Bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.0 Low Profile Video .

4 year old pc.jpg

  • Like 1
Posted

I don't have any VC-1 in my library as I convert everything to H.265 these days but still have some H.264 being converted over (2 files constantly being converted 24/7).

What kind of FPS do you get going from HEVC to AVC? on both of those?

clarkss12
Posted
35 minutes ago, cayars said:

What kind of FPS do you get going from HEVC to AVC? on both of those?

Not sure what you mean by that?

clarkss12
Posted
36 minutes ago, cayars said:

I don't have any VC-1 in my library as I convert everything to H.265 these days but still have some H.264 being converted over (2 files constantly being converted 24/7).

What kind of FPS do you get going from HEVC to AVC? on both of those?

I tried many times using different apps that you suggested, but never was able to get everything correct.  Finally gave up.  Either the subtitles were out of sync or could not get the audio codec that I wanted........... Spent days to no avail..........

Posted
1 hour ago, clarkss12 said:

Not sure what you mean by that?

Sorry was asking about the speed.  How many Frames Per Second (FPS) are you seeing on the Dashboard when transcoding similar HEVC files?

1 hour ago, clarkss12 said:

I tried many times using different apps that you suggested, but never was able to get everything correct.  Finally gave up.  Either the subtitles were out of sync or could not get the audio codec that I wanted........... Spent days to no avail..........

Bummer, I don't need subtitles very often so I've not got hit with issues with them.  I never have any audio codec or sync issues.

clarkss12
Posted
6 minutes ago, cayars said:

Sorry was asking about the speed.  How many Frames Per Second (FPS) are you seeing on the Dashboard when transcoding similar HEVC files?

The only transcoding that I encounter are from the VC-1 codecs.  Actually, the HEVC play better than any other codecs that I play....  I have quite a few of the BlueRay rips that are encoded with that dang VC-1 video codec..  

ALL Amlogic boxes suffer from the lack of VC-1 codec support....

Posted

I was just curious the frame rate different during transcode.  If you get a few "free" minutes see if you can find something similar in VC-1 and HEVC then play it back in chrome to force it to transcode (or just force it).  I'm wondering if the frame rate will be a lot higher for the HEVC conversion then the VC-1.

clarkss12
Posted

HEVC using my Vorke V2, has 25fps using chrome.

VC-1 using my Vorke V2 has 125 fps using Chrome.

HEVC using my GTR has 35 fps under Chrome

VC-1 using my GTR has 38 fps under Chrome (software decoding)

Posted

Thanks for that, really appreciated.

I'm surprised the HEVC vsVC-1 Vorke V2 speed differences!

RanmaCanada
Posted

I think the bigger issue is that your AMD system is running with a laptop chip that is not optimized for video encoding (yes your old one was as well, but Intel has been working on their ASICS for a decade).  AMD's ASICS are no where near as mature as Intel's or Nvidia's.  Intel has constantly been trying to win the quality game, and they even have broadcast quality encoding software, and have won the MSU encoder test at least once.  If you had gone with even an STX form factor with a desktop chip, you would have been better off, or even another Intel.  To give you an idea, Intel will be adding tone mapping to quicksync with Gen 11 Intel CPU's.

  • Like 1
RanmaCanada
Posted
On 15/01/2021 at 23:39, cayars said:

Thanks for that, really appreciated.

I'm surprised the HEVC vsVC-1 Vorke V2 speed differences!

Skylake (6th Gen) can only do 8-bit HEVC in hardware for decoding and encoding.  Anything that is 10bit has to be done in software.  The Ryzen system has full hardware support, hence it being faster, but still underwhelming.  10-bit HEVC was added in Kabylake (Gen 7).  We really need someone to start a thread with a standardized video and have people with different gen Intel's do some transcoding so that people have an idea of what to expect in regards to speeds and max encodes, as this information is not readily available unlike the multiple calculators there are for Nvidia cards.

Posted

Everyone would need to use the same standard file for doing the transcode or results wouldn't mean much.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...