At first i thought it was like x264, where high is actually more efficient than main. It wont impact quality unless i max out the main teir of whatever level im on. Yes thats what i thought, high is just another set of restraints. Does fewer threads not mean higher compression efficiency like with x264? If only marginal? I heard that x265 was LESS parralelizable than x264? Would it not still make sense to use only 12 threads out 24 anyway? I can play games while encoding, and when im not playing, i can run a second encode. So its worth using slower over slow? Not worth going much slower than that? 1080p50 would use a higher profile with a higher max bitrate. But, for the same reason, not as compatible for device decoding.įor 1080p24, 12 Mbps peak is generally quite ample with x265. High Tier is basically all the same constraints of Profile & Level, except allowing much higher bitrates than Main Tier.
High Tier is more for creating high-bitrate mezzanine files.
#BEST HANDBRAKE SETTINGS FOR BLU RAY 1080P#
Using more than you have logical cores is pointless, and probably would cause encoding to become slower overall at some point due to the extra overhead of parallelization.īy Level, do you mean Tier? A typical 1080p encode for distribution/playback would be Main Profile Level 4.0 Main Tier. If you are doing 1080p, you probably don't need to be running in parallel with only 12 physical cores, and can just leave it at default. x265 is generally able to use more threads than x264 at a given frame size. Main10 would be used for 10-bit instead of High10. The Main profile of HEVC is equivalent to High in x265. Using -preset slower is where the best features of HEVC generally kick in, but it'll still be a lot slower than x264 veryslow. X265's default tuning is generally just fine. What is the "HEVC" of audio coding? I want something that would also generally work with a soundbar or sound system, as i want to get one in the future. I use ac3 640kbs for 5.1 as ac3 is a very old inneficient codec, and i was told thay anything less than max can make the difference noticable, but i may as well save space on audio too. For x265, i read that 12 mbits is the max for 4.0, which seems quite low, but that 30 was the max if i use high? Also, i noticed it was mentioning something to do with luma and stuff, which i dont understand, and i used 5.1 with my 4k stuff to avoid messing with the hdr.Īlso, audio. For x264, level 4 was generally what i needed, it only mentioned bitrates and resolutuons n stuff, 25mbits for 1080p which was all i really need. Im thinking, as x265 equals thread count, rather than 1.5x like x264, i should set frame threads to 12, and run 2 encodes at the same time? Or would it be worth going lower, how much difference in quality would it make, or is it just not relevant with 12 threads?Īlso, what level should i use? If i leave it on automatic, i can only use main, not high for x265. Also, what about thred count? I put threads=18 in the advanced options in handbrake, as i have 12c/24t 5900x, and opening 36 threads is a lot, as the quality loss begins to become noticable at that point. For my 4k stuff, i essentially set the same settings as film tune manually, but i cant remember what it was.
I also want to know if i should leave tune at none, as there is no film tune. Im asking if theres is maybe a 1-2% improvment in efficency, at like half the speed, and is therefore not worth it, that kind of question. With x264 veryslow i can encode faster than realtime pretty much, 25-30fps give or take, and thats with limiting thread count too. In terms of preset, the general wisfom is to go as slow as one can bare, but im wondering what the difference is between slow and slower mainly, im not too concerned about the others. Im not as familiar with x265 as i am with x264, and i have a couple of questions. The harder to compress stuff, where 7mbits can be considered a "low" bitrate, will benefit from x265s efficency and wont be stupid artifacty. Im think of using 7mbits, which im aware is a bit high for x265, but i dont mind bloating the easilt compressed stuff a bit, at least i know the quality will be practically lossless. Im thinking of using 10bit too, and with 2 pass abr instead of crf as with my current settings, the file sizes can vary so wildy, and some files actually get bigger. I was thinking of using staxrip instead as its what i use for my 4k blurays, but im still a little confused with it. In handbrake with x264 i use crf 18, very slow, film tune, high profile, level 4.1. Im thinking of changing my bluray encodes from x264 in handbrake to x265 to squeeze out a little more space.
0 kommentar(er)
