![]() ![]() I plan on using either windows 10 or windows server as the OS.I don't plan on getting a GPU initially. ![]() Here are some notes on what I plan on doing with the server: Will Quick Sync and hardware acceleration make a big enough difference to pay the extra money for the Intel processors? Here are the Intel processors I was looking at for around 60-80 dollars more than the AMD cpus. Does Quick Sync supports Hi444PP in the latest SKL-based CPU with the GEN9 GPU. Is it worth it to buy an intel processor that has quick sync for around $60-80 dollars more, or just stick with the AMD cpus? I only have an IVY-based CPU(i3-3220) with HD2500 in which it seems as if only three profiles are supported, i.e., baseline, main and high. I was set on either the Ryor the Ryzen 5 2600, but I was reading about hardware acceleration this morning and now I am unsure. I am planning to build a plex media server, and I am trying to figure out what CPU will be best for me. Please go to the relevant subreddits and support forums, for example: Build help and build shares posts go in their respective megathreads No referral / affiliate links, personal voting / campaigning / funding, or selling posts Guía de instalación y de validación de Intel® Quick Sync Video y FFmpeg. Welcome to /r/Plex, a subreddit dedicated to Plex, the media server/client solution for enjoying your media! Plex Community Discord Rules Intel® Quick Sync Video utiliza las capacidades de procesamiento multimedia dedicadas de la tecnología de gráficos Intel® para decodificar y codificar rápidamente, permitiendo al procesador completar otras tareas y mejorando la capacidad de respuesta del sistema. The bad news is I can't say the same about its 3D graphics performance.Latest Regular Threads: No Stupid Q&A: Tool Tuesday: Build Help: Share Your Build: Submit Troubleshooting Post Files not showing up correctly? If your only need for Intel's processor graphics is for transcode work, the HD 2500 appears indistinguishable from the HD 4000. Quick Sync does rely heavily on the EU array for transcode work, but it looks like the workload itself isn't heavy enough to distinguish between the 6 EU HD 2500 and the 16 EU HD 4000. The HD 2500 does a little better than our HD 4000 here, but that's just normal run to run variance. We'll get to quantifying that shortly, but the good news is Quick Sync performance is retained: Youll have to poke around some forums / in the bios. Im using a Dell R220 and it didnt allow it, I wouldnt be shocked if the T110II doesnt either. Given that Intel's HD 4000 is getting close to the minimum level of 3D performance we'd like to see from Intel, chances are the 2500 will not impress. The thing to be aware of (and I wasnt when I tried this) is many server mobos dont actually allow you to use QuickSync even if its available on the cpu. 3 4 Performance and quality Like most desktop hardware-accelerated encoders, Quick Sync has been praised for its speed. In fact, Intel claims that performance should be around 10 - 20% faster than HD 2000 in 3D games. Quick Sync Video is available on Core i3, Core i5, Core i7, and Core i9 processors starting with Sandy Bridge, and Celeron & Pentium processors starting with Haswell. The main difference between the 25 is the number of compute units on-die: Intel Processor Graphics ComparisonĪt 6 EUs, Intel's HD 2500 has the same number of compute resources as the previous generation HD 2000. What makes the 3470 particularly interesting to look at is the fact that it features Intel's HD 2500 processor graphics. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |