AMD releases its H265 codec encoder (open source sdk) for RX series graphics cards

[gereral1]

Just played with the new encoder and use it in A's Video encoder with windows 10 on an h264 sample.
My tests resulted in 1min 25 sec approx. clip was 144megs. with h265 encoding it took 25 sec to encode the clip via amd h265 encoder. The resulting file was a whopping 36 megs. WOW. The quality is amazing considering the speed of 99 frames per second live encode. This is 30fps 1920 by 1080 at VBR of 14mbit for the original.
This was ran on an RX 470 with 4gig of gpu vram. GPU read 100 percent and the cpu 5 percent.

The original sample:

Video
ID : 4113 (0x1011)
Menu ID : 1 (0x1)
Format : AVC
Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec
Format profile : High@L4
Format settings, CABAC : Yes
Format settings, ReFrames : 3 frames
Codec ID : 27
Duration : 1 min 21 s
Bit rate : 13.7 Mb/s
Width : 1 920 pixels
Height : 1 080 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 16:9
Frame rate : 29.970 (30000/1001) FPS
Standard : Component
Color space : YUV
Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0
Bit depth : 8 bits
Scan type : Progressive
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.221
Stream size : 134 MiB (93%)
Color range : Limited
Color primaries : BT.709
Transfer characteristics : BT.709
Matrix coefficients : BT.709

The final h265 sample was :

Video
ID : 1
Format : HEVC
Format/Info : High Efficiency Video Coding
Format profile : Main@L4.1@Main
Codec ID : hev1
Codec ID/Info : High Efficiency Video Coding
Duration : 1 min 22 s
Source duration : 1 min 22 s
Source_Duration_FirstFrame : 802 ms
Bit rate mode : Variable
Bit rate : 3 547 kb/s
Width : 1 920 pixels
Height : 1 080 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 16:9
Frame rate mode : Constant
Frame rate : 29.970 (29970/1000) FPS
Color space : YUV
Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0
Bit depth : 8 bits
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.057
Stream size : 35.0 MiB (92%)
Source stream size : 36.5 MiB (96%)
Encoded date : UTC 2017-02-04 07:06:43
Tagged date : UTC 2017-02-04 07:06:43
mdhd_Duration : 82783

Remember it took 25 seconds to do this! Cant wait tell they unlock 2 pass as promised by amd Polaris for h265. Then the quality will be even better even though its pretty dam good now.

 

[gereral1]

now supports IN BROWSER 4K for the FIRST TIME. YAHHHHHHHH I'm using 7-8 year old hardware in this video. Amazing. No need for Kaby Lake cpu now for youtube 4k.

 

[Jeff R 1]

I wonder if that would work for UHD Blu-ray.
Even if SGX is still needed it would be great to be able to use the HDMI/DP ports on a dedicated GPU.

That's the other thing, if I can't use both, HDMI for video to the projector and DP to the AVR, the whole things a lost cause anyway.

 

[gereral1]

This article is leaning more to do 4k away from that sgx crap. I would rather use this pc for 4k in the future.

 

[Jeff R 1]

Maybe by the time the UHD drive is officially released here, there won't be a need for it.
Even then I won't have a problem with SGX as long as I can use a dedicated card.
I have to upgrade my video card anyway, my GT980 can't deal with H265, so I thought a pair of R480's.
With AMD there may a be a chance to use the Smooth Motion feature in PowerDVD _ have to wait for the official release for that too.

Of course if James can pull a rabbit out of his ass, all I'll have to worry about is updating the GPU, in that case I'll go with a GTX1080.

If they would just release all UHD Blu-rays in HFR or at least the option to choose that, there wouldn't be any need for any of this.
I'm so sick and tired of people wining about soap opera effect.

 

[Ch3vr0n]

Even then I won't have a problem with SGX as long as I can use a dedicated card.

See, now that's the problem. You can't. UHD playback (in PDVD 17) REQUIRES SGX support AND use of the cpu's GPU component. A dedicated GPU at this time WILL NOT WORK! Not even a 1080. AMD/nVidia will have to find a way to implement SGX support (intel does have an SDK) at the driver level to be able to use a dedicated gpu.

 

[Jeff R 1]

See, now that's the problem. You can't. UHD playback (in PDVD 17) REQUIRES SGX support AND use of the cpu's GPU component. A dedicated GPU at this time WILL NOT WORK! Not even a 1080. AMD/nVidia will have to find a way to implement SGX support (intel does have an SDK) at the driver level to be able to use a dedicated gpu.

I can only hope that this will change with the official release. It would be in their best interest to do so, they would sell allot more copies.
Contacting Cyberlink now I think would be a waste of time, I'm pretty sure I would just get "that it's not been released publically yet" BS...

 

[Ch3vr0n]

It won't, it's in the PDVD 17 system requirements. For standard blu-ray playback an dedicated gpu will work just fine. Wanna play UHD = SGX capable system from the motherboard and cpu up to the disc drive.

 

[gereral1]

It won't, it's in the PDVD 17 system requirements. For standard blu-ray playback an dedicated gpu will work just fine. Wanna play UHD = SGX capable system from the motherboard and cpu up to the disc drive.

Maybe james can find a weak link in powerdvd17 like he did with the audio protect bypass. Maybe a bypass for the code that looks for sgx. A virtual bypass for the internet key authorization. Sounds easy to say this but I'm sure its like reading 0's and 1's and hex. That's what smart people like you guys do. Way to complicated for me to follow code.

 

[gereral1]

Requirements

• .NET 4.6.1
• Intel Skylake CPU for HEVC/H.265 hardware encoding
• NVIDIA Maxwell gen2 card for HEVC/H.265 hardware encoding
• AMD Polaris card for HEVC/H.265 hardware encoding
• Java for ProjectX in case MPEG-2 files are opened
• AviSynth+ x64, the installer is bundled with StaxRip x64
• VapourSynth x64 as optional AviSynth+ alternative
• Python x64 in case VapourSynth x64 is used

Staxrip will encode and embed missing HDR triggering for all GPU acceleration cards hevc h265 main 10 1h guessing takes 20min for h265 lol

Have to flex my GPU on some HDR test material and see how fast I can get it without any quality loss.