CloneBD results with video card hardware acceleration||Post HERE

[antipodes]

But that still doesn't give system specs, without those the times are meaningless as there's no frame of reference.

CUDA speeds vary depending on the GPU. Newer GTX 10xx range are really fast (300-400fps), the older GTX 600 range tend to be really slow (50-60fps) so knowing these things helps gauge how well your system is actually doing

@Adbear I would like to mention that the original Blu-ray disc in question has a film running time of 135 mins.I have also copied another Blu-ray disc "Safe" this has a running time of 94mins. The encoding time taken for this disc using the same parameters as for my previous copy, 25.45 minutes with a fps ranging from 68 to 80 but some speeds were over 114. Transcoding speeds were about an average rate of 7600 kps. I was using the latest version of Clone BD of which the log file will contain the equipment details you require.

 

[Pete]

@Adbear I would like to mention that the original Blu-ray disc in question has a film running time of 135 mins.I have also copied another Blu-ray disc "Safe" this has a running time of 94mins. The encoding time taken for this disc using the same parameters as for my previous copy, 25.45 minutes with a fps ranging from 68 to 80 but some speeds were over 114. Transcoding speeds were about an average rate of 7600 kps. I was using the latest version of Clone BD of which the log file will contain the equipment details you require.

According to your log file, you are only encoding with CUDA acceleration, but decoding without hw acceleration, is that on purpose?

 

[Pete]

I'll look at that but D4 which successfully completed in 1.0.9.1beta has just failed with the same TRANSCODER FAIL message under 1.0.9.2beta.

Ok, it clearly would have worked without acceleration, it was a pure CUDA bug.
Please try version 1.0.9.3

 

[antipodes]

According to your log file, you are only encoding with CUDA acceleration, but decoding without hw acceleration, is that on purpose?

Pete I don't have enough computer expertise to do anything with computers on purpose but on this occasion I thought I was using cuda both ways. I will check my settings. Thanks

 

[Sabertooth]

Ok, it clearly would have worked without acceleration, it was a pure CUDA bug.
Please try version 1.0.9.3

Summary of 1.0.9.3beta Test Results. Please see my first post here for complete testing parameters and results for all versions.

Test 12 Rerun 2 (1.0.9.3beta/nVidia Driver: 375.95)
Source material: Torchwood Series 1 D4 pISO
Source Drive: Hitachi 2TB 7200rpm SATA III HDD
Copy Mode: Complete copy to BD9 ISO using CUDA Decoder CUDA Encoder at Highest Quality re-encode
Result: 23.10 GB to 8.40 Gb in 12:57

Test 18 (1.0.9.3beta/nVidia Driver: 375.95)
Source material: Torchwood Series 1 D1 pISO
Source Drive: Hitachi 2TB 7200rpm SATA III HDD
Copy Mode: Complete copy to Custom (BD9) ISO using CUDA Decoder CUDA Encoder at Highest Quality re-encode
Result: 22.55 GB to 8.36 GB in 13:16

Looks like the Complete copy is working okay again.

Other 1.0.9.3beta retests:

Test 2 Rerun (1.0.9.3beta/nVidia Driver: 375.95)
Source Material: The Legend of Tarzan pISO
Copy Mode: MP4 File container using CUDA Decoder and CUDA Encoder at Highest Quality h.264 transcode
Result: 2.34 GB completed in 07:59 or 330 fps

Test 6 Rerun (1.0.9.3beta/nVidia Driver: 375.95)
Source Material: The Legend of Tarzan pISO
Copy Mode: Partial Disk/Folder/ISO to Folder using CUDA Decoder and CUDA Encoder at Highest Quality re-encode
Result: 23.16 GB completed in 08:23 or 315 fps.

Test 13 Rerun (1.0.9.3beta/nVidia Driver: 375.95)
Copy mode: MP4 File container using CUDA Decoder and CUDA Encoder at Highest Quality h.265/HEVC transcode
Result: 2.34 GB completed in 08:59 or 294 fps.

Test 19 (1.0.9.3beta/nVidia Driver: 375.95)
Source Material: The Legend of Tarzan pISO
Copy Mode: Complete copy to Custom (BD9) ISO using CUDA Decoder CUDA Encoder at Highest Quality re-encode
Result: 29.94 GB to 8.26 GB in 11:03

Only software encoding remains an issue for my setup due to low processor utilization.

 

[Bubbator]

Hi,
I have:
1x nvidea gtx 680 stock clock
cpu 3930k oc to 4.3ghz
mem 4x ddr3 8gB @667mhz
asus x9p79 deluxe
samsung evo 840 1tB
win 10 pro v1607 64 bit

settings: hardware accel on -both

I reported a bug to elby when cuda encoding failed outright with 1.0.9.2. Today I got "Volver" BR and encoded to mp4 with version 1.0.9.3 and software.
Results were 10 minutes 9 seconds at about 260 fps and with a message that the 840 evo was slowing me down 37%. Repeating with both acceleration boxes ticked on yielded 16 minutes 20 seconds, 166 fps and just the hw accel on message!?
I guess my 3930k wouldn't be a bottle neck if I upgrade my gpu. Any upgrade suggestions?
B

 

[Ch3vr0n]

i swapped my old 680 gtx for a 1080. 475-500+ FPS on every title in fastest mode. Even the known "problematic single thread VC-1" video codec

Source on SSD, target on SSD (850 evo) regardless of the codec 475+ FPS every time. Asus Strix GTX 1080 Advanced (combined with a 6700k and 850 evo)

 

[Adbear]

I also get around 475+fps on SSD using my laptops GTX 1060 and drive read speed is only around 80-90MB/s so looks like there may be no advantage going above the GTX 1060 for CloneBD encoding

 

[Ch3vr0n]

a faster ssd like nvme would

 

[Adbear]

Don't see how, the drive is only reading at 80-90MB/s so that shouldn't be the bottle neck

 

[Ch3vr0n]

precisely. NVME's have a read/write speed in the couple hundred MB my 1080 would probably be able to keep up or be the bottleneck then

 

[Adbear]

A decent SSD has read write speeds of over 400MB/s.
A decent NVME drive should read/write at well over 1GB/s, some read at over 3GB/s

Just tested the same movie on my 2TB mechanical HD and on my SSD and both top out at 475+fps. I suspect it's a limitation on the GPU's

 

[Ch3vr0n]

could be, maybe it's maxing out the cuda cores

 

[Bubbator]

i swapped my old 680 gtx for a 1080. 475-500+ FPS on every title in fastest mode. Even the known "problematic single thread VC-1" video codec

Thanks!
B

 

[Sabertooth]

a faster ssd like nvme would

I also get around 475+fps on SSD using my laptops GTX 1060 and drive read speed is only around 80-90MB/s so looks like there may be no advantage going above the GTX 1060 for CloneBD encoding

I've been trying to look at this very question since I do have an Samsung 950 Pro NVMe m.2 drive as my o/s boot drive. In order to minimize the effect of the encoder, I set up some Partial to Folder no compression keep original audio copies of The Legend of Tarzan (28.37 GB, 158214 frames). While the results, as expected, favors the NVMe drive as the source drive, it's not as great a difference as might be anticipated. The best result would probably be an NVMe drive to a second NVMe drive but I don't have two to test with.

Source Material: The Legend of Tarzan pISO mounted with VirtualClonedrive 5.5.0.0 decrypted with AnyDVD HD 8.0.6.1beta. CUDA Decoder CUDA Encoder Highest Quality

-Source Drive: Samsung 950 Pro m.2 512 GB NVMe drive

Tests:
Destination Drive: Samsung 950 Pro m.2 512 GB NVMe drive
Result: 04:09 or 635.4 fps (calculated 158214 frames/249 sec)

Destination Drive: Intel Series 535 SATAIII 480GB
Result: 03:48 or 693.9 fps

Destination Drive: Mushkin Enhanced ECO3 SATAIII 480GB
Result: 04:05 or 645.8 fps

-Source Drive: Intel Series 535 SATAIII 480GB

Tests:
Destination Drive: Samsung 950 Pro m.2 512 GB NVMe drive
Result: 04:55 or 536.3 fps

Destination Drive: Intel Series 535 SATAIII 480GB
Result: 06:46 or 389.7 fps

Destination Drive: Mushkin Enhanced ECO3 SATAIII 480GB
Result: 05:45 or 458.6 fps

 

[Adbear]

But with those tests CUDA or no CUDA should make no difference as you aren't re-encoding anything.

On my laptop if I use the same settings and I use my 2TB hard drive as the source I get around 500 FPS (this is a slower 5400RPM drive so a standard 7200RPM drive may be quicker) going to my 480GB SSD as destination.
If I go from my 1TB SATA M.2 (500MB/s read/write/) to my 480GB SSD I get over 1000fps, so I would say you may have an issue with those NVME drives as I would expect them to be quicker.

Have you updated the NVME driver?

 

[Sabertooth]

If I go from my 1TB SATA M.2 (500MB/s read/write/) to my 480GB SSD I get over 1000fps, so I would say you may have an issue with those NVME drives as I would expect them to be quicker.

Have you updated the NVME driver?

I was using the Windows driver and I switched to the Samsung 1.4.8.3 with little or no change noticeable. There is a 2.0 driver available but I can't seem to download it from Samsung at the moment due to some imposed limit to downloads between now and the 27th.

 

[Yordan5]

Has anyone done quality comparisions between CUDA and Software transcoding? In my experience using CUDA produces slightly inferior results.

 

[jwjohnson]

Clone BD Version 1.1.0.0
intel i7-6700 4.0GHZ OC to 4.2 (with DDR4 RAM at 3400)
Source Capt. America - Civil War on ´external USB 3.0 HD
Dest - .MP4 ~7.2 GB on Samsung SSD 850 (also used for temp files)
EVGA GeForce GTX 950

1. Hardware Accel for decode and encode Max Quality: 235 FPS 15:12 (mm:ss)
2. Software for Encode and Decode Max Quality: 16 FPS 3:38:05 (h:mm:ss)
3. Software for Encode and Decode Max Speed 180 FPS 21:22 (mm:ss)

I'll have to do some further experimenting to see if it's worth taking the time to move the source file to a faster drive. Currently I'm just using an external USB 3 dock that I store iso's on.

Any idea what the quality setting was before you could adjust it? Academic question now, since I won't be doing anymore software encoding unless some issue crops up.

 

[skippy]

Hello,

With a i7 980x 24 gb ram
Amd R9 290x GC
Clonebd 1.1.0.2

I convert the witch 2016 => 19:48 (min:sec) to in a mp4 format quality maximum with hardware support
Without hardware support same quality => 04:22:39 (hh:min:sec)

So for me its very positiv 14 time faster with the amd app support.

Its good to have the hardware support in Clonebd!

Thanks

Skippy