Handbrake video-encoding and 4x core cpu's?

O

Orange Marmelade

n00b
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Messages
23
I am a newbe to video-encoding.
Will opening two instances of the software 'Handbrake', speed up transcoding of two videofiles simultaneously (1 file in each instance) on a processor with 4 physical cores (intel atom z3775)?

I need to know because I need to decide on a (cheap) new laptop without spinning fans.
 
I believe handbrake utilizes all cores. One instance with 2 videos in queue is the way to go. It showed 90+ % usage on my 6 core xeon which was good enough for me. I forget exactly, but I found 1 instance with queue to be just as fast, and 2 made the computer essentially unusable.
 
You do realize most laptops especially with an atom cpu is going to be PAINFULLY SLOW doing handbrake work.....if its the only way then get the most high end intel cpu with as many cores possible. If your buying a pc for the office only DO NOT get a laptop....just dont. For traveling then you have no choice

btw good luck getting a laptop without spinning fans...and for handbrake? its just no possible
 
one instance and queue the files.
3770k-encoding-files.jpg
 
primetime said:
And someone is going to do that on a laptop with no fans trying to keep the thing from literally melting ? I have to see that;)
Click to expand...

I've done it on my HP laptop, although I didn't do so many at one time, maybe 2 or 3 20 minute videos when I was converting them from .flv to .mp4.

The example I posted above was when I was converting 22 personal Home Video DVD's to MP4 for a client so that they could be put onto a thumb drive and played on any PC. I just used the file server machine to do the work since it sits idle 99% of the time.
 
If I had to guess, 2 Handbrake instances, each working on a single job, will be faster then 2 videos in the queue of a single instance of Handbrake.
 
SpeedyVV said:
If I had to guess, 2 Handbrake instances, each working on a single job, will be faster then 2 videos in the queue of a single instance of Handbrake.
Click to expand...

Why would you guess that? besides the processing, it now has to read and write twice as much to the disk or disks.
 
Zepher said:
Why would you guess that? besides the processing, it now has to read and write twice as much to the disk or disks.
Click to expand...
In speedyVV's case its probably true.....but he has a 32 core monster Xeon setup --unlike most people
 
primetime said:
In speedyVV's case its probably true.....but he has a 32 core monster Xeon setup --unlike most people
Click to expand...

Well, that too, but the real answer is that theoretically, to parallelize you need to divide the job in smaller chunks, process in parallel then merge.

edit: not 32... 36... but who's counting.
 
SpeedyVV said:
Well, that too, but the real answer is that theoretically, to parallelize you need to divide the job in smaller chunks, process in parallel then merge.

edit: not 32... 36... but who's counting.
Click to expand...


Except that video processing is already one of the ideal parallel loads, and will generally use 100% of CPU cores to their fullest.

There is no real benefit to running dual instances and you would probably have more resource collisions that way, and unnecessary duplication of some resources.

The best way to do this is one instance and a queue.
 
Snowdog said:
Except that video processing is already one of the ideal parallel loads, and will generally use 100% of CPU cores to their fullest.

There is no real benefit to running dual instances and you would probably have more resource collisions that way, and unnecessary duplication of some resources.

The best way to do this is one instance and a queue.
Click to expand...


Uhmmmm, looks like it is time to do a test..... results to follow tomorrow.
 
Snowdog said:
Except that video processing is already one of the ideal parallel loads, and will generally use 100% of CPU cores to their fullest.

There is no real benefit to running dual instances and you would probably have more resource collisions that way, and unnecessary duplication of some resources.

The best way to do this is one instance and a queue.
Click to expand...
That's not necessarily true. x264 does not scale indefinitely and quality will suffer if it spawns too many threads. How many threads are too many is a function of the vertical resolution of the video and a few other things. x264 is also not NUMA aware, so things get messy when you start trying to use multiple NUMA nodes at once.
 
I was wrong.

Did a test. Two instances was slightly faster (~3%) on my old quad core. It keeps the CPU pegged at 100%, where running them sequentially there are small dips in the CPU usage.

The difference isn't big enough that I would ever bother doing that way. Might be more dramatic on a monster 32 core system.
 
Running handbrake, encoding bluray from flash to flash on a 5930k. Normal settings, quality set at 20... 1080p with 5.1 HD audio... 109.7FPS encoding speed... I'm pretty sure a single copy can max any normal amount of desktop cores you may present it.
 
Orange Marmelade said:
I am a newbe to video-encoding.
Will opening two instances of the software 'Handbrake', speed up transcoding of two videofiles simultaneously (1 file in each instance) on a processor with 4 physical cores (intel atom z3775)?

I need to know because I need to decide on a (cheap) new laptop without spinning fans.
Click to expand...

The fastest laptop you can get with no moving parts is this one:

Buy ASUS ZenBook UX305FA-USM1 Signature Edition Laptop - Microsoft Store

If you get a crappy Atom, you'll get much worse performance. Not to mention crappier keyboard, trackpad and screen.
 
defaultluser said:
The fastest laptop you can get with no moving parts is this one:

Buy ASUS ZenBook UX305FA-USM1 Signature Edition Laptop - Microsoft Store

If you get a crappy Atom, you'll get much worse performance. Not to mention crappier keyboard, trackpad and screen.
Click to expand...


Some might get confused if you didn't mention this is indeed a dual core and it is a solid 30% faster than the atom quad core because it much more advanced and newer than the older atom models...lol i hope someone didn't run out and buy a atom quad core based on posted advice
 
HI all. Glad to see my question got so many honest hardcore replies. As to laptops I did some more reading and now have 1 illusion less.

Does the ux305 also come in a glare-screen version? It's all personal taste and most do not like glare-creens. But I do. If it bothers me I can use a mat-screen protector.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top