Bluray to MKV GPU Acceleration?

Buchanan0204

Buchanan0204

Buchanan0204

Soldato
Joined
10 Jun 2010
Posts
5,158
Location
Scotland
I currently use "MakeMKV" to backup my existing blurays, however the file sizes are between 20-30GB which is far too much if you have a lot of movies. I tried converting with handbrake, but it was something ridiculous like 5 hours. I have a [email protected]. It's still got enough oomph to do what I need, but this is a joke.

So I looked into it a little further and seen a guy on youtube using "DVDFab" with CUDA enabled and he was doing it in around 30mins. I currently have an ATI 6970 and I believe ATI cards use "DXVA." Same sort of principle as CUDA. I was sure dvdfab supported this, unfortunately it doesn't seem to kick in during the converting process. Is there something I'm missing?

Are there any good alternatives that will fully utilise my GPU for the video encoding?

Cheers.
 
Please don't encode using anything but x264 at decent bitrates, no other encoder compares and the encodes produced using CUDA, APP (AMD), etc are the worst by far. You'll see huge differences if you look up any comparisons.

I keep everything untouched myself, might encode if it was easier/quicker to do a good job but certainly wouldn't skimp.
 
AbsenceJam said:
Please don't encode using anything but x264 at decent bitrates, no other encoder compares and the encodes produced using CUDA, APP (AMD), etc are the worst by far. You'll see huge differences if you look up any comparisons.

I keep everything untouched myself, might encode if it was easier/quicker to do a good job but certainly wouldn't skimp.
Click to expand...

Isn't the likes of cuda only a way of offloading the work to the GPU? I didn't realised it effected quality in any way?
 
DXVA is a DirectX api for hardware decoding of the stream only, it's there for playback rather than accelerating the transcoding side. x264 as already suggested is the way forward quality wise but be prepared for some overnight encoding while you sleep lol.

I also play around with something called Badaboom, which is a cuda enabled media converting program which encodes on the gpu and fast with good quality too. Suspect it's only for nvidia hardware though.
 
Freemake video converter might be worth playing with. It's free (as the name suggests) but is excellent at conversion and also has the option of full CUDA capability if you want to try that. It's capable of ripping from Blu-Ray and has a ton of input and output options (over 200!). Well worth a look.

As was said though, x264 is the way to go even if it takes time. If you've a substantial collection and quality is important, personally I'd be ripping them from the command line in Linux with x264. Freemake is a great GUI alternative for Windows though. Take a look.
 
Buchanan0204 said:
Isn't the likes of cuda only a way of offloading the work to the GPU? I didn't realised it effected quality in any way?
Click to expand...

No, there's no 'offloading.' Software has to be written quite specifically for it and the encoding software that is just isn't any good. And the GPU's and CPU's with encoding specific hardware features just aren't as good as software either.
This stuff is fine for a quick transcode for a portable device with a little screen but not for any kind of quality.

Rainmaker mentions Linux, x264 is the same on Windows and you get access to better frontends and GUI's but encoding on Linux is a little faster (5-20% from what I've seen).
 
AbsenceJam said:
Please don't encode using anything but x264 at decent bitrates, no other encoder compares and the encodes produced using CUDA, APP (AMD), etc are the worst by far. You'll see huge differences if you look up any comparisons.

I keep everything untouched myself, might encode if it was easier/quicker to do a good job but certainly wouldn't skimp.
Click to expand...

+1 I used dvdfab so have seen the results of both cuda encode and x264 encode on the same software; cuda does not compare in anyway.

Also not sure what cpu you have but I can rip a full blu ray iso on my i7 in about 50 minutes which in all honesty is not that much slower than it does on my 480gtx.
 
How many movies are you backing up?

A 2tb hard drive should hold 60 or so films left as an untouched mkV file.

Have you thought about adding external storage or building a NAS?

Most cases will hold several hard drives so say 4, giving you 8tb giving you 240 films (all approx) which should be plenty for most people unless you want them on there just for the sake of it.
 
mkvs play in just about anything. the downside is you loose the menu functionality but the if you are willing to get rid of the extra and such then there can be quite a saving on file size.
 
I've decided just too give up. I did actually order two 2TB drives to put in my main pc which I also use a file server to stream to my HTPC running XBMC in the bedroom. I'm just going to stick too ripping to .MKV. Save any hassle with encoding etc.

If only it was quicker.
 
james.miller said:
mkvs play in just about anything. the downside is you loose the menu functionality but the if you are willing to get rid of the extra and such then there can be quite a saving on file size.
Click to expand...

I took all the 'frills' out when backing up to iso, so it's just the movie. Would the mkv still be smaller in size? And if so, by how much?
 
Razor-BladE said:
I took all the 'frills' out when backing up to iso, so it's just the movie. Would the mkv still be smaller in size? And if so, by how much?
Click to expand...

in that case no, mkv is just a container - the video and audio is kept intact from the original movie, along with some additional info that instructs the software player in how to decode the streams.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom