nMP vs CompressHD

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by pcconvert, Mar 28, 2014.

  1. pcconvert macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2008
    #1
    I am using Matrox CompressHD (H.264 encoder PCI card) on my 3.84 quad hackintosh with ATI Radeon HD6870 and Mavericks. I was thinking about getting nMP and was wondering what would be the encoding speed difference. With latest FCPX and Compressor I see some improvement in the software only encoding (OpenCL?) but it's nowhere near as fast as CompressHD. Does anyone have real life comparison experience between the two - nMP and CompressHD? How efficient is the OpenCL power of those n500 cards?
     
  2. linuxcooldude macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2010
    #2
    OpenCl is not software encoding. It is using the GPU's for hardware encoding. I use a compressHD card too in a Mac Pro 2009.

    I find they tend to be slow in new drivers when upgrading the operating system. When they did finally upgrade the drivers it caused my system to constantly reboot until I removed them.

    And factor in you have it on a hackentosh probably makes matters worse.

    CompressHD only does H264, so other formats are not supported.
     
  3. Stephent macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2012
    #3
    Many of the h.264s I've been outputting on my nMP have been near real time. maybe 10% slower. Would have to take a closer look. 6-core d700 64GB RAM
     
  4. pcconvert thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2008
    #4
    I thought FCPX is using OpenCL to use GPU's power for encoding (?). Yes Matrox is kinda slower in drivers but they did release Mavericks and my hack works fine, no rebooting, sleeps well etc. I am more interested in the performance comparison - CompressHD vs. nMP...

    ----------

    Thanks! This was what I've been looking for - could you post some example real number? (say 5 min clip 1080p@5mbit took x minutes to render? One pass/two pass etc.) This would be great!
     
  5. handsome pete macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2008
    #5


    There's really no solid answer on this. It all comes down to the specific output settings. If you're looking to do a single pass encoding, then I'm afraid the Mac Pro is going to fall short of many other options out there, even the iMacs. The Xeons don't feature quicksync, which allow the consumer version Intel chips the encoding acceleration they're capable of in this regard. However, that becomes irrelevant with dual pass encodings, so the Mac Pro should still shine there.
     
  6. Stephent macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2012
    #6
    Have a few outputs to do tomorrow will let you know
     

Share This Page