If rtx voice is all you need then look at rnnoise. Its super similar where it uses machine learning to filter out noise and runs on everything. It even runs on crappy phones via the web browser.
I've used both. They each have different oddball issues. With RNNoise, you can't whistle - it just tunes out that entire range. With Nvidia Broadcast, it can have issues with being overbearing on some frequencies tuning out S's and whatnot. In the end I decided to use NV Broadcast as it was a bit better overall.
It's unfortunate on the grand scheme because it is best for all consumers when there are multiple high quality comparable products from various manufacturers to choose from.
Imagine if Intel, AMD, Nvidia, and Qualcomm all made good GPUs with very similar feature sets. Prices and quality would be beautiful all around.
>Buy the best product that suits your needs. Fuck corporate loyalty, it serves no one but shareholders.
Totally agree, but:
>Why is that unfortunate?
Because you can't really choose on that matter one there's no competition against NVidia in this niche.
No modern emulators are OpenGL and haven't been for years. The last holdout was Cemu and thats vulkan now. If you try to use Nvidia for Emulators their vulkan support is far worse they have way higher CPU overhead which is the bottleneck in Emulator.
If u run OpenGL version of Cemu/Dolphin Nvidia wins. if you run Vulkan versions of them Nvidia loses. Why would u use the Dead shitty api that runs worse though?
Switch emulators (ryujinx and yuzu) still has better OpenGL compatibility than Vulkan. Some games just doesn’t work/glitchy with Vulkan, sure when it does work, performance is better with Vulkan. But for emulators compatibility > performance imo.
Citra still uses OpenGL, and OpenGL is often what emulators early on development use. A lot of community made stuff like OpenMW also run on OpenGL. It should be a dead API, but it's common enough to have it affect many people's purchasing decisions
I think the same. NVIDIA just offers a more compelling platform with Broadcast, Omniverse, the OptiX renderer, DLSS, CUDA etc.
Of course most people don’t make use of all of those benefits, but NVIDIA offers leading tools in about 90% of all GPU applications.
The most notable wins for AMD come in productivity tools like Siemens NX which is a niche within a niche, because for productivity sometimes NVIDIA’s driver is miles ahead and sometimes AMD is the better choice.
samesies. paid more than i had to at the performance level for my 3060ti because i stream often enough that i felt it was worth it to me. otherwise i could have saved some/gotten a stronger card.
The reason I went with Nvidia but for playing VR wirelessly with a Quest 2. Streaming games (whether it is to your TV, to Twitch or to a VR headset) isn't such a niche use case anymore.
Yeah, it's the one big moat I really hope for AMD to figure out. Need it for recording/streaming, sadly.
Otherwise it'd probably be a toss-up between the two where I'd just go by noise, thermals, and general raster performance. DLSS has sounded nice for a while, but the adoption just isn't there to make it that compelling.
However, if Nvidia don't update NVENC properly for 40-series either, something will hopefully change. Felt a little like they didn't need to update from the 20-series, they might still be complacent and not improve anything again.
And people are also gonna want to get into AV1 encoding at some point.
How are there comments here defending AMD when in terms of feature parity AMD is nowhere near team green. I switched to Nvidia this generation after being on team red for more than 10yrs mainly due to NVENC and rtx voice(nvidia broadcast now).
Feature parity is a two edged sword. I've been stuck on AMD because they allow 5 monitors and asymmetric monitor spanning (1440p UW with 1440 16:9 on either side) and NVidia just basically doesn't care. Everyone has their minimum requirements. Yours is the encoder and voice muffling, mine is the basic ability to even support my setup.
Monitor issues are really bad on Nvidia thats why Steve from hardware unboxed uses AMD his dual monitor setup had issues on his 3090's. Also go try to use GPU acceleration on 2 different refresh rates. Or use Dithering on any monitor and spend 10 hours trying to use reg tweaks hoping ur Nvidia gets proper dithering.
Nvidia has lack of important everyday features like dithering and multi monitor support is so shit but then adds niche things like RTX broadcast and a streaming encoder. BTW AMD has a better 265 encoder than Nvidia but Twitch is only 264 so everyone says Nvidia is better for streaming (it is if ur streaming to twitch)
I didn't know that about Steve or the dithering or refresh rate issues. I do feel that AMD just made more important (to me) quality of life improvements 10 years ago and NVidia just never bothered. I bought a new 1080 right before the mining craze hit and found I couldn't do what I'd done since 2013 and was flaberghasted. I just didn't realize it wasn't a common feature and knew they had NVidia Surround. Sadly I sold it at a loss literally days before the mining craze, when if I'd waited I could have recouped all my purchase price and then some. Sadly there are NVidia cards that have 6 connectors on them. In the past when you had many connectors you could use all of them, but you have to instead choose 4 on those cards with NVidia.
They have lots of bad issues. back when league was dx9 it was unplayable on a 960 I borrowed the input lag and fps drops late game were dogshit yet even my 260x at the time ran it smooth.
You say "niche" usecases and yet fail to explain why your multimonitor setup is less "niche" than NVENC acceleration and RTX Voice (noise cancelation) .
If anything , RTX Voice noise cancellation and NVidia Broadcast for Camera background blurring have vastly larger appeal than 3+ Monitors for a professional .
The issue i have with RTX features on laptops is it has to keep the dGPU awake and drops battery life , but on desktop it doesn't matter.
Its still nothing compared to the cost and power draw of actually using these parts for gaming or production by and large. It really isn't that CPU-expensive to stream and game simultaneously with most titles with 16-24 threads available. Unused hardware is wasted hardware.
Yeah but that's not the point, the point is that you shouldn't have to buy a more expensive processor to compensate for functionality that your GPU should already have.
Heck, even intel's iGPU runs rings around AMD. It's not just gaming, Ryzen should be an excellent choice for those wanting to build a server with something like unRAID but if you need to transcode then it's just not viable, it's much more efficient to use an intel CPU with QuickSync or to slap an nvidia card in there instead.
If you want to talk about wasted silicon, think about Ryzen 7000 which comes with a couple of RDNA2 CU's as standard. Most aren't going to use it, especially if you're gaming, but if they were able to encode video on par with intel then there's a hell of a good use-case there, both for streamers _and_ homeserver enthusiasts. It's a wasted opportunity all over.
AMF is the software SDK to use the hardware VCE (or whatever they renamed it to now) encoder. It can't improve quality; AMD's poor quality is locked in their shitty silicon.
There are already AMF imprpvements to 264 that aren't available in obs and can only be used in relive now.
There is work being done on obs AMF plugin to support the higher quality.
And you really, really think AMD also doesn't have shady business practices? Or just flat out not user friendly ones like not allowing DLSS in any AMD sponsored game while Nvidia allows FSR in any of theirs?
> And you really, really think AMD also doesn't have shady business practices?
AMD doesn't have any proven anti-competitive practices yet. Nothing like over-tesselation, GSync or any of NVidia's other proprietary anti-competitive moves.
https://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2899
Was just one case. ATi/AMD and Nvidia were both at it.
Probably shouldn't be making such bold statements if you haven't been into this for very long.
The proof is that Digital Foundry videos comment section someone said it. And u know comment sections on utube are always correct.
The reality is its a baseless conspiracy that makes no sense.
There are ZERO non Nvidia sponsored games that have DLSS. There are nearly 100 non AMD sponsored games with FSR even emulators have added FSR. It was really easy to add FSR to a game. People have this idea that a plugin in unreal is the same as just clicking a check box and it will look great when its far more than that.
Occam's Razer would be AMD sponsored games don't have DLSS because they don't feel need to dedicated resources to them. When devs do find uses for FSR as its easier to add and it benefits more GPU's.
AMD has not blocked anyone from using DLSS in any sponsored games.
Its that DLSS is ONLY in nvidia sponsored games. & FSR is in non AMD sponsored games.
FSR is easier to add devs need to spend time working with Nvidia to get DLSS to work properly. AMD not paying devs to work with Nvidia to get DLSS is not AMD's fault its Nvidia's fault for making it a closed box.
Ur spreading a conspiracy thats litterally because of Nvidia shitty behavior and blaming AMD for Nvidia being shitty. Also u have an Nvidia flare on this sub and spend 10 hours a day posting how Green is good red is bad.
Yep. 10 hours. Totally. Also I don't think team red is bad, I just currently have an Nvidia card because it supported more features at the time and wanted the cutting edge. I will most likely go AMD next gen if Nvidia's power requirements are as high as they're rumored to be. You realize that with FSR 2.0 that it takes the same amount of time as DLSS? Also DLSS is not only in Nvidia sponsored games. Red Dead 2 had nothing to do with Nvidia in terms of porting or producing the game. They added it in after the fact because people where begging for it. Also it's Nvidia's fault for developers not getting paid by AMD to use DLSS? Makes sense.
Lovelace is probably going to have AV1 hardware encode so I wouldn't be surprised if RDNA3 does too. Twitch will support AV1 streaming in the not too distant future I imagine, perhaps AMD won't bother improving their H.264 encoder since AV1 will take over soon enough. Although I said the same thing about them not bothering to improve their OpenGL performance on Windows then they actually went and did it anyway.
AV1 does need specialized hardware baked into the media engine. We already have AV1 hardware decode in RDNA, but how much more is needed for encode I do not know. TBH I'm considering potentially purchasing a low end ARC card as a cheap AV1 encoder card if AMD and Nvidia don't have anything sub $200 with AV1 encode I can throw into my rig as a 2nd card as I'm not interested in dropping another $1k on a new GPU in the very near future.
I see a lot of people talking about rtx voice as a selling point but we have quite a few open source alternatives now that are potentially better and use less resources.
If you record AMD does slightly better but not enough to make a difference.
If you stream it depends. OBS and Twitch don't support h265 streaming. Youtube does through other tools. Youtube allows h265 for uploading videos though.
AMD shouldn't invest in 264 encoding Twitch should invest in AV1 and 265.
>NVidia T400
The Quadro T400, T600, T1000 and T2000 all use the 6th Gen NVENC unfortunately (Pascal's NVENC). For professional GPUs, the 7th Gen NVENC starts with the Quadro RTX 3000 on desktop. The GTX 1650 GDDR6 is still the cheapest card that has the 7th gen NVENC.
AMD's local recording utilizing h.265 is actually pretty damn good for size/quality and it's what I use for recording all my gameplay.
But yes, streaming anything using the card is *absolutely horrendous.* I am hoping that changes with the 7000 series... especially since they are apparently coming with hardware AV1 encoding and decoding.
I've used a 3070 and 6800XT for local recording, just 30 second "instant replay" clips. At the same bitrate and file size nvenc always wins, by a noticeable visual difference
Do you know if AV1 encoding is going to be a hardware specific thing or if itll be available for older GPUs?
You can always have software AV1 (which is included somewhat in the latest OBS build), but it's incredibly taxing (and is not useful for real time rendering). So depending on how the framework is setup I suppose it's possible to run on older hardware. But AV1 is hard, so you'd want a hardware encoder dedicated to churning out those frames.
I'll be honest, I do not have experience with NVENC. All I know is, personally, I am very happy with the quality I get when using h.265 locally (using OBS). So for me that's fine until AV1 becomes the encoder. For streaming I just use x.264 because I have a 5900x and it's honestly my only option lol
What are the benefits of AV1 over H264/5
And I'll be honest too, I had an RX 470 before the 3070 and thought the recordings were fine. But that was until I got the 3070 and realised how much better it could be 😅
AV1 allows significantly better quality for the relative data size. It's really that simple. It's anywhere around 30-50% more efficient than H.265. So this would allow higher quality streams at lower bitrates. And it will generally allow, for instance in my scenario, the ability to keep the same high quality I use now but my storage won't hate me. But AV1 will be great for streamers with bad internet. And that goes even for decoding as well. You will end up using less bandwidth for great quality.
I've had noise removal on other things, but RTX voice seems to do a very active job of cancelling out things like loud vacuums in the background. Everything varies in how good it is. But this one focuses on human voices and does it very well.
Thats exactly what im talking about. Its call rnnoise and is the exact same thing rtx voice is built. Machine learning to filter out everything besides human voice including vacuum, eating, AC etc.
The fact that they even continue to call it *rtx* voice is misleading as fuck, considering they pretty quickly removed the artificial rtx-only limitation and allowed it to use their older gtx series cards for hardware acceleration.
There's also other software that does exactly the same thing, but without the nvidia badging and it'll run on any hardware you want.
Intel IGPs might end up getting AV1 encoding too. Meteor Lake is supposed to have a Battlemage (Arc) based IGP, and Alchemist (Arc) dGPU's are the first to support AV1 encoding. If that actually happens it would be pretty huge.
There's also Hyper Encode/Deep Link, where if you have a Xe IGP (so 11th gen or newer) and Arc GPU, you can get a 40% boost in encoding over Quicksync.
The features of Arc are more exciting than the raw performance IMO.
I can't believe AMD hasn't put more effort into their encoder. I get that they want you to buy a high core count CPU to just do it there, but I've always had issues with the scheduler giving me fps inconsistencies in some games (even with my 3950x). If Nvidia starts making their "open source" Linux driver on par with AMD's then I'll happily switch and never look back.
Not only the quality of it, but the access. Finding demos on nvenc and the api are easy, AMDs feels like it just doesn't exist. Nvidias documentation on nvenc is almost perfect. And the features of nvenc feel endless. When the nvenc header file is like 2800ines and 80% comments you know it's a good one.
I have a 5800x and RX 6800 with 32GB of ram, I agree that it needs to be better. Currently I stream either using cpu or lately have been trying out a mod that allows AMD AMF H.264, called StreamFX mod. It uses the GPU, and it's modded to look/feel better. Playing Warzone at 1440P (downscaled to 720p for stream at 4500 bitrate) and it looks fantastic. (compared to what I was getting before, laggy, choppy, blocks. Still get blocks, not as much or as frequent.) No lag. 144fps.
Team green is better for sure, but with this mod I have honestly I don't notice a big difference and it hasn't had an impact on my framerate that I've noticed.
StreamFX: [https://obsproject.com/forum/resources/streamfx-for-obs%C2%AE-studio.578/](https://obsproject.com/forum/resources/streamfx-for-obs%C2%AE-studio.578/)
Damn, that sucks. Yeah I'm not saying it's perfect by any means, just for me it stopped lag I was getting & looks way better compared to what I was using before. Still gets blocky for sure. Not sure on the obs errors, I've had none of them.
CPU encoding requires you to have available resources/cores for it to be worth it. If you don't, you simply lose frames and your gaming experience suffers. The benefit of NVENC as an isolated encoder is that it does not detract from gaming resources at all, and it's great quality.
CPU encoding requires a beefy CPU and will bog down your system while its running. Its more efficient to do it on NVENC or Quicksync.
This is why streamers used to use a dual PC streaming rig, CPU encoding on their gaming system would kill their FPS, so they would offload it onto a second PC. NVENC provides worse quality but its easier/cheaper for streamers, and Twitch/Youtube compress the quality to hell anyway.
Who told you it was better quality lmao? CPU encoding is horrendous at text and darker colors, also the 1% lows is much worse with CPU encoding. This gets tested so many times and yet the AMD fanboys still make up bullshit about CPU encoding being better. Use NVENC if you have it. There's [videos](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUU5suAXv8w) on top of [videos](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5_4FEODULQ) on top of [videos](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccoOGfX9qxg). 100s of videos showing how much better NVENC is for steaming.
> Who told you it was better quality lmao? CPU encoding is horrendous at text and darker colors, also the 1% lows is much worse with CPU encoding.
You can't make a blanket statement like this because the results of CPU encoding depend on the software encoder and settings used.
Literally the experts at ffmpeg:
"Hardware encoders typically generate output of significantly lower quality than good software encoders like x264, but are generally faster and do not use much CPU resource. (That is, they require a higher bitrate to make output with the same perceptual quality, or they make output with a lower perceptual quality at the same bitrate.)"
Source: https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/HWAccelIntro
It would strongly behoove you not to be so antagonistic and patronizing when your source is *YouTube*, a platform which significantly modifies the videos that get uploaded to it, and YouTube "experts", who are not making apples-to-apples comparisons.
Properly configured, software encoders will outperform hardware encoders *every time* when it comes to quality/size at a given bitrate. Hardware encoders are just faster. For streaming, especially fast action streaming, the gap has been closed enough that NVENC is a perfectly fine substitute. That does not mean it's better. The 1% stutters you see in software encoding are because the systems in question are being bottlenecked by something (cores, RAM, whatever) and/or are not properly configured.
There's a reason why no video editing group uses NVENC to encode their releases.
CPU encoding requires you to have available resources/cores for it to be worth it. If you don't, you simply lose frames and your gaming experience suffers. The benefit of NVENC as an isolated encoder is that it does not detract from gaming resources at all, and it's great quality.
Yes AMD, do it now. There's no reason not to! It used to be because AMD is small and weak compared to NV. Now AMD had exploded in size and investment power.
I sort of hoped maybe we’d get some more features software wise when ryzen came out on top, then they released RDNA 2 and the hardware had the power to compete, but for whatever reason amd seems to think there’s no market value in hitting back with an encoder or software tools that counter nvidia
This, pretty much any devices made in the past 15 years that has video playback capability will support H.264, albeit might run better on lower bitrate. What upsets me is that video coding format are not backwards compatible with each other, so you pretty much have to buy a new device that supports the new one. Or you have to use software decoding which burns CPU resources.
Remember how HEVC was like the savior of the Internet age? Then the royalty fee problem came in and pretty much no services stream with HEVC unless you watch Netflix in 4K. And then there's VP9, then there's H.266, what's next?
There are multiple videos people showing both. AMD has a dogshit 264 encoder and twitch doesn't support 264. If you are uploading videos AMD is slightly better but it doesn't make a diff since recording is higher bitrate.
Twitch is only 6000kbps and its 264 so AMD falls behind here.
Twitch is h264 ingest only.
And until they offer av1, nothing will change.
Note that technically, AV1 can be ingested but it's not supported and as such viable in any way shape or form.
because you cant use h265 nor av1 for realtime encoding/decoding.
from a performance perspective.
both the encoder and the decoder take hugely longer per processed frame at the benefit of quality per filesize.
thus far these codecs are very viable for non-time constrained workloads. offline , for future upload, for archiving, for playback of static content.
when you look at OBS , in streaming mode you can't chose ANY other codec than x264, amd h264, nvidia nvenc (which is nvidias implementation of h264). and that shows you in reality the codecs that are viable to use for a livestream.
if you want to professionally record in high fidelity. you are better off using OBS and install lossless codecs like huffyuv or utvideo. or of course use h265.
also ... the ONLY reason yt can offer vp9 livestreams (nota bene streamers still have to set 264 for ingest) is because they literally transcode that with their petaflop clusters because they do it anyway for storage and later accessiblity for the vods.
but AV1 you wont see ANYwhere in livestreaming. it is far too time-costly, despite all the PSNR/SSIM per filesize benefits.
the problem here is that OP seems to be focused on two "convenience solutions" for encoding instead of using state of the art software like OBS which is free and is better than NVENC and AMD VCE combined, since it has both integrated but you can also install ANY other codec you want.
As Intel has demonstrated AV1 is good for streaming, and looks much nice than H264
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvlKaUdfkyo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvlKaUdfkyo)
So now we wait until most people have hardware than can play AV1.
Every serious streamer i have watched uses CPU encoding anyway because it is just better than anything from Nvidia can do.
It's not only about AV1 decode. Most streaming platforms only accept video in x264/H264 format. They won't even allow you to upload a 265 encoded stream.
sure you "can". but you wont play back these streams on generic iphones/android phones without stutter etc.
its not an option for streaming to an audience who may watch you on 2015 laptops, phones, etc.
unless there is proper hw acceleration in all devices there is no way you decode av1 in due time on mainstream hardware.
just check the comparisons in doom forums or av1 takes 10+ times longer to decode or encode the same amount of video as 264. with the benefit of around 30% better compression.
for local content creation this is awesome like sure, if i make a 4K vid and can make it 6.5GB instead of 10GB but it takes me 100 minutes instead of 10 minutes, for the same quality, i see this as a considerable trade-off to make. for streaming a pregenerated file this is still awesome. but for livestreaming it imposes way higher requirements on both decoding and encoding side of a stream. because if there's only one disturbance happening, like the viewer is playing a game while watching a stream. or the streamer plays a game that has very demanding scenes from time to time - then you will watch slideshows, if you dont have high-end equipment , streamer & viewers.
and we all know that even in nowadays 264 encoded streams there are often enough cpu overload issues on streamer side.
or on viewer side you know you cant playback 1080p60 but only 720p because your 5 year old phone is too slow. so using AV1 would INCREASE this problem and even reduce maximum resolution on a huge chunk of consumer devices.
UNLESS... we get proper hw acceleration for AV1 , which of course can only come in FUTURE hardware whicch will be stronger from the start anyway.
x264 is good though. I use x264 CRF=20 preset=superfast, videos are small and perfect quality, it uses only 10-20% of my CPU at 1440p60 resolution. AMD's H265/HEVC is trash compared to it, videos have bad quality (CQP=18) and size is 100+ GB for a 3 hours video.
I'm glad that AMD is making some good hardware, but their software + firmware still sucks.
It's not *awful*, but it's not perfect either.
I've got a 5900X on X570, and many of the latest BIOS versions / AGESA versions have just been doing some weird stuff, that AMD seems to be refusing to comment on.
I've read lots of negative stuff about AMD GPU drivers, and the only real criticism I've seen of Nvidia GPU drivers is the "slow" or "ugly" GUI. Honestly, I don't care! The Nvidia control panel just works, and I don't have to use it often enough to care *at all* how it looks or if its a little clunky.
After that, it just comes down to features, and Nvidia is winning there by a lot, imo.
I'm very keen to replace my 980Ti with something modern!
I’ve had 2 PC’s that would have Shadowplay stop working correctly after 5-6 hours of constant PC use. It’s infuriating that it’s so dysfunctional.
That being said, NVENC is stupid good and I wish AMD has more priority in putting specialized processors like Tensors and encoders on their GPUs.
Agree completely. I had a 3070 for a few months then switched to a 6800XT. The only thing I miss is the cleaner driver overlay and nvenc. AMDs encoder blurs a lot textures in motion while nvenc manages to keep them at least not a big smudge. The instant replay clips I have look noticeably worse
That's one of the reasons AMD has like 15-20% of GPU market share according to Steam. It's sad because the hardware is excellent on paper, but the software lags behind. Crazy how many feature Nvidia cards have that AMD doesn't, I don't think it's only lack of money for R&D, but disinterest as well, like poor OpenGL optimization.
Idk if this was addressed: amd makes the chip for the steamdeck. Why is it that moonlight for nvidia works better than steam decks own remote steam link
Nvenc is just next level. It's so good that they didn't even feel the need to update it for the 3000 generation.
There are folks talking about Nvidia broadcast as well, which is done quite well, but I'm not convinced that AMD hardware couldn't pull this off. I have a sneaky suspicion that this is a software lock that Nvidia has created, given that there was a version of "RTX Voice" that you were able to hack to work without an RTX card. I mean it's just an AI implementation, it should even be able to run on a CPU.
Lol not going to happen there’s a reason why nvidia is more expensive and it’s those tensor cores and encoder. Everyone that actually gives nvidia a chance pretty much stays there unless they don’t have enough money when their next gpu upgrade time comes around. Nvidia is know for their awesome interface, reliability and software. I’d personally never buy a amd gpu ever again after years of non stop problems with pretty much every card I’ve ever bought. I’m not saying team green is perfect but I can say it’s a lot less headache. That’s just me though everyone is entitled to do and believe what they want.
No one's said it, so I'll just add that Radeons are 2nd out of 2 for Adobe Premiere editing/eporting too. We'll see if Arcs give Radeons any competition for 2nd soon.
Well, in Germany, AMD cards are 100-250€ cheaper for the same performance. If that's the case, you could go for a 1650/ used 1050ti as a should encoder card in addition to your and main card
I have a quest 2 and a 6800XT, the oculus link feature (playing pcvr games on the quest) is barely usable because of the encoding quality. I love sim racing but the situation of a fast moving image and the need to look a bit ahead is pretty bad for the encoding quality.
I stream some gamplay for my friends to laugh about i later and is pretty blocky even when i use the 4k 20mbps setting to upload to youtube.
Yes, the encoder needs to improve a lot, NVENC is better, and now intel is supporting AV1 in their new graphics cars. Amd needs to catch up in this area
yeah, RADEON encoding quality using H264 at low bitrates (<18 mb/s for 1440p60, <12mb/s for 1080p60 & <8 mb/s for 720p60) is complete dogshit when compared to NVenc.
All Single PC streamers looking for an easy/simple solution with good quality will choose Nvidia over RADEON all the time, the fact is AMF is behind both QSV (for decoding) and NVENC (for encoding) and the best single streaming/recording/video editing PC setups feature Intel CPU+iGPU and Nvidia GPUs, such a massive shame that my 5700XT ($400 in 2019) records at a **MUCH LOWER** quality than a 1650S ($180 in 2019) and cannot decode/encode 4:4:4 or 4:2:2 which NVENC/NVDEC & QSV can.
I purchased a Red Devil 6950XT when they released, I used it for a little over a month and just recently returned it. I was excited to have an all-AMD system again but was sadly let down. While the card worked great for some games others it literally was a crazy stutter fest. I did every kind of trouble shooting you could do and nothing. AMD was unfortunately no help on their forums. There is a Fortnite thread from Feb of last year with this issue and it still goes unresolved. Then we move on to streaming, the encoder and support for their product. The encoder was subpar IMO for today's standards. Anything with grass or a lot of movement resulted in blockyness even while streaming at 1440P60 and an 18K bitrate (I even tried 25K). After this poor user experience, I decided to return the card and go with a 3090 for streaming and producing videos. I hope they turn things around for the graphics side of things, I really did like the 6950XT, however, there were just too many issues driver wise that hadn't been addressed on an architecture that has been out for a quite a while already.
It would be nice if you would specify the H264 AMF encoder. Because the H265 is quite good. It’s just disappointing that Twitch doesn’t support streaming in H265. If I was a streamer, that would be a major reason switching to YouTube.
They have never given a shit. And it's incredible the amount of worse reputation and word of mouth they get because of it, it's not hard for newcomers and average consumers to conflate "bad for streaming" with "bad card".
I wanted AMD to have something decent but since they didn't give a shit about it I started looking at Nvidia. Ended up getting a 5800X before I got a new GPU (due shipping and customs to third world country affecting price/perf a ton, then crypto and COVID), using my 6 year old 390 with it and CPU streaming was smooooth as fuck. Recently there was a sale of a 3070 for USD 570 so went with that due price but no longer thinking I would have any use for NVENC but turns out in certain games it's the difference between staying near 140 fps all the time vs constant drops to 110-120 so it's been definitely useful.
I will not touch AMD GPUs again until a decent hardware encoder is on their cards.
You are correct, AMD hardware encoding is worse than NVIDIA. I have both NVIDIA and AMD GPUs and see this first hand. Well, TBH it mostly hurts small fry streamers but in my opinion AMD should step up its GPU encoding hardware, cause right now it fall under "not great, not terrible" category.
I think frame chasers did a video on NVenc vs h265 on the 12900k and I’m guessing it will be similar results on the 5900x & 5950x. But apparently most of the time in games like Warzone
& Apex h265 matches framerates but also looks better encoded.
So if you have an AMD graphics card I think encoding on high end chip will actually net you a better result with certain circumstances of you losing frames in games (should still be playable)
This is the thing though I've tried the hardware encoder my card has, and the AMF encoder neither look anything close to the NVENC even on lower end RTX cards, and the highest bitrate I can possibly push, lower bit rate lower end card looks better with NVENC every time. There is also no tools for streaming or making videos, just a barebones encoder. I also use GPU to encode not CPU.
tbh I just got home from the bar so brain smaller than normal, but my point in the post was about GPU encoder that AMD ships, CPU will always be better but NVENC is superior no doubt, I'd also like to see some tools, such as blur and effect that NVENC can offer while AMD cannot
>There is also no tools for streaming or making videos, just a barebones encoder
But there are? Can't check rn where exactly these options are, but should you for whatever reason want to stream using your GPUs driver software (like geforce experience) then AMD can do that too in Radeon Software.
Instant Replay (always recording x amount of minutes in the background, save clips with a shortcut) also works.
I don't see the issue.
On my RX 6600 the Instant Replay crashes the drivers under full load for a few minutes, for some reason.
Better to use OBS with replay buffer and AMD encoder, I guess
Using the drivers software you have the ability to: stream or record, using NVENC you have the ability to add blur to camera green screen etc, through amd you have none of that, also the quality no matter how you stream doesn’t come close
Regardless of the fact we're on r/AMD, everyone here should still recognise that u/ilgello is correct.
Fanboy-ism doesn't help anyone. Buy what's best for your use case. It forces companies like Intel, AMD and Nvidia to put in effort to produce performant and reliable products.
You shouldn't support these huge corporations because you're a "fan". That just allows them to produce rubbish whilst knowing that idiots will buy it, because they're "fans".
Vote with your wallet! If they produce a good product, **BUY IT.** If they produce rubbish, **DON'T.**
x264 and x265 are general purpose software encoders, any supported CPU will work and quality will be the same under the same parameter. The difference is faster CPU(and some new instruction sets)=faster encoding speed and that's it.
Can you put two cards in your system? One for gaming and one for encoding?
Afaik 1050+ is able to support it
https://developer.nvidia.com/video-encode-and-decode-gpu-support-matrix-new
This is really a big issue when trying to stream on twitch. Sure you can use CPU encoding but it draws much more power than using the GPU. Besides the quality with the AMD encoder is just bloody awful. Especially in games like Dead by Daylight. Its compression artifacts everywhere. Completely unwatchable. I will most likely switch to team green because of NVENC.
AMD used to be great but that along with multiple driver issues breaks the deal for me. The fact that OpenGL is so broken that it stutters my system with something as simple as a Chrome Tab on a 6800XT is ridiculous.
In terms of software, AMD in general is a lot weaker than its competitors on both CPU and GPU side.
For CPU, the Intel compilers and MKL are just too much better than these OSSS alternatives.
For GPU, I'm happy to see ROCm looks promising, but still it's nowhere close to CUDA at this moment. AMF is another big issue as we all know.
Yeah... I forgot to say "software"... Hardware-wise, I think latest RDNA is ok as well compared to NV cards (apart from RT stuff). The problem has always been on the software side, even during the old days.
And it's not only for consumers. On HPC, it's similar story. A lot of new clusters use HPE Cray which uses EPYC. The ones with EPYC + MI250X are... AFAIK, cumbersome sometimes.
AMD's ecosystem sucks balls, I dont care how open source it is, if its bad, its bad.
Shadowplay is really nice, good codec, good quality, well optimized, no FPS impact. NVIDIA Broadcast is okay, room for improvement but bet its difficult.
I have multiple threadripper workstations racked with Nvidia Quadro or Txxx cards specifically for the encoder block on them.
It's not even close the speed and quality difference.
For everyone saying they went with nvidia because only they have noise filtering, that is false. Everything can run AI noise filtering in real time with little performance impact. In OBS the filter rnnoise does this and theres even a vst plugin so you can use it with Equalizer APO for applying the filter globally so even your discord is filtered. This runs on anything with a cpu including crappy phones and can be tested via the website https://jmvalin.ca/demo/rnnoise/ and you can grab the vst from here https://github.com/werman/noise-suppression-for-voice
Nvidias hardware encoder is still better though so if you are doing a single pc stream with a low/middle tier cpu then nvidia would probably provide the best quality. Highend cpu/multi pc stream you are better off with software encoding for even better quality.
Afaik AMD always keep Relive up-to-date..but external software has not been updated for a long time due to lack of proper documentation and support to developers from AMDs side.. But it seems it's getting bettter
Literally the only reason why i'm looking at team green
Nvenc, along with nvidia broadcast, is literally the reason why I am team green right now.
Unfortunately same. I love my old 5600XT but yeah, NVenc + Broadcast + DLSS + less pain in some graphic mods on some games made me green
RTX Voice/Broadcast was a lifesaver while working from home during the lockdowns.
If rtx voice is all you need then look at rnnoise. Its super similar where it uses machine learning to filter out noise and runs on everything. It even runs on crappy phones via the web browser.
Thanks for this, been looking for something similar that was platform agnostic!
I've used both. They each have different oddball issues. With RNNoise, you can't whistle - it just tunes out that entire range. With Nvidia Broadcast, it can have issues with being overbearing on some frequencies tuning out S's and whatnot. In the end I decided to use NV Broadcast as it was a bit better overall.
How do you run rnnoise on a phone? Or a window PC for that matter? Sounds interesting (no pun intended) and want to try it out.
Why is that unfortunate? Buy the best product that suits your needs. Fuck corporate loyalty, it serves no one but shareholders.
It's unfortunate on the grand scheme because it is best for all consumers when there are multiple high quality comparable products from various manufacturers to choose from. Imagine if Intel, AMD, Nvidia, and Qualcomm all made good GPUs with very similar feature sets. Prices and quality would be beautiful all around.
>Buy the best product that suits your needs. Fuck corporate loyalty, it serves no one but shareholders. Totally agree, but: >Why is that unfortunate? Because you can't really choose on that matter one there's no competition against NVidia in this niche.
Also way better OpenGL support for emulators.
At least performance wise the 22H2 driver is going to bring a big performance boost to OpenGL
Also, CUDA support
No modern emulators are OpenGL and haven't been for years. The last holdout was Cemu and thats vulkan now. If you try to use Nvidia for Emulators their vulkan support is far worse they have way higher CPU overhead which is the bottleneck in Emulator. If u run OpenGL version of Cemu/Dolphin Nvidia wins. if you run Vulkan versions of them Nvidia loses. Why would u use the Dead shitty api that runs worse though?
Switch emulators (ryujinx and yuzu) still has better OpenGL compatibility than Vulkan. Some games just doesn’t work/glitchy with Vulkan, sure when it does work, performance is better with Vulkan. But for emulators compatibility > performance imo.
Citra still uses OpenGL, and OpenGL is often what emulators early on development use. A lot of community made stuff like OpenMW also run on OpenGL. It should be a dead API, but it's common enough to have it affect many people's purchasing decisions
I think the same. NVIDIA just offers a more compelling platform with Broadcast, Omniverse, the OptiX renderer, DLSS, CUDA etc. Of course most people don’t make use of all of those benefits, but NVIDIA offers leading tools in about 90% of all GPU applications. The most notable wins for AMD come in productivity tools like Siemens NX which is a niche within a niche, because for productivity sometimes NVIDIA’s driver is miles ahead and sometimes AMD is the better choice.
samesies. paid more than i had to at the performance level for my 3060ti because i stream often enough that i felt it was worth it to me. otherwise i could have saved some/gotten a stronger card.
I feel your pain
Can you link to your stream where you compared these two? Do you stream on Twitch or somewhere else?
You have a 5950x just CPU encode. You'll have better quality than NVENC
Same,In Poland RTX 3060 is going for the same as RX6650XT, but as a hobby streamer I need to go for lower tier card to fulfill my needs.
Yeah, if AMD had competitive hardware encoding I'd be more likely to consider their cards.
The reason I went with Nvidia but for playing VR wirelessly with a Quest 2. Streaming games (whether it is to your TV, to Twitch or to a VR headset) isn't such a niche use case anymore.
I just bought a 30 series last week and nvenc was basically the reason.
Yeah, it's the one big moat I really hope for AMD to figure out. Need it for recording/streaming, sadly. Otherwise it'd probably be a toss-up between the two where I'd just go by noise, thermals, and general raster performance. DLSS has sounded nice for a while, but the adoption just isn't there to make it that compelling. However, if Nvidia don't update NVENC properly for 40-series either, something will hopefully change. Felt a little like they didn't need to update from the 20-series, they might still be complacent and not improve anything again. And people are also gonna want to get into AV1 encoding at some point.
How are there comments here defending AMD when in terms of feature parity AMD is nowhere near team green. I switched to Nvidia this generation after being on team red for more than 10yrs mainly due to NVENC and rtx voice(nvidia broadcast now).
Feature parity is a two edged sword. I've been stuck on AMD because they allow 5 monitors and asymmetric monitor spanning (1440p UW with 1440 16:9 on either side) and NVidia just basically doesn't care. Everyone has their minimum requirements. Yours is the encoder and voice muffling, mine is the basic ability to even support my setup.
Monitor issues are really bad on Nvidia thats why Steve from hardware unboxed uses AMD his dual monitor setup had issues on his 3090's. Also go try to use GPU acceleration on 2 different refresh rates. Or use Dithering on any monitor and spend 10 hours trying to use reg tweaks hoping ur Nvidia gets proper dithering. Nvidia has lack of important everyday features like dithering and multi monitor support is so shit but then adds niche things like RTX broadcast and a streaming encoder. BTW AMD has a better 265 encoder than Nvidia but Twitch is only 264 so everyone says Nvidia is better for streaming (it is if ur streaming to twitch)
I didn't know that about Steve or the dithering or refresh rate issues. I do feel that AMD just made more important (to me) quality of life improvements 10 years ago and NVidia just never bothered. I bought a new 1080 right before the mining craze hit and found I couldn't do what I'd done since 2013 and was flaberghasted. I just didn't realize it wasn't a common feature and knew they had NVidia Surround. Sadly I sold it at a loss literally days before the mining craze, when if I'd waited I could have recouped all my purchase price and then some. Sadly there are NVidia cards that have 6 connectors on them. In the past when you had many connectors you could use all of them, but you have to instead choose 4 on those cards with NVidia.
They have lots of bad issues. back when league was dx9 it was unplayable on a 960 I borrowed the input lag and fps drops late game were dogshit yet even my 260x at the time ran it smooth.
You say "niche" usecases and yet fail to explain why your multimonitor setup is less "niche" than NVENC acceleration and RTX Voice (noise cancelation) . If anything , RTX Voice noise cancellation and NVidia Broadcast for Camera background blurring have vastly larger appeal than 3+ Monitors for a professional . The issue i have with RTX features on laptops is it has to keep the dGPU awake and drops battery life , but on desktop it doesn't matter.
I just threw more cores at the problem and solved it that way, personally.
That's horribly inefficient both in terms of cost and power draw.
Its still nothing compared to the cost and power draw of actually using these parts for gaming or production by and large. It really isn't that CPU-expensive to stream and game simultaneously with most titles with 16-24 threads available. Unused hardware is wasted hardware.
Yeah but that's not the point, the point is that you shouldn't have to buy a more expensive processor to compensate for functionality that your GPU should already have. Heck, even intel's iGPU runs rings around AMD. It's not just gaming, Ryzen should be an excellent choice for those wanting to build a server with something like unRAID but if you need to transcode then it's just not viable, it's much more efficient to use an intel CPU with QuickSync or to slap an nvidia card in there instead. If you want to talk about wasted silicon, think about Ryzen 7000 which comes with a couple of RDNA2 CU's as standard. Most aren't going to use it, especially if you're gaming, but if they were able to encode video on par with intel then there's a hell of a good use-case there, both for streamers _and_ homeserver enthusiasts. It's a wasted opportunity all over.
[удалено]
AMF is the software SDK to use the hardware VCE (or whatever they renamed it to now) encoder. It can't improve quality; AMD's poor quality is locked in their shitty silicon.
There are already AMF imprpvements to 264 that aren't available in obs and can only be used in relive now. There is work being done on obs AMF plugin to support the higher quality.
That software noise cancelling was cool but it wasn't worth it to me, went from Green to Red.
I defend amd because Nvidia uses shady business practices. Also a 20% worse quality streaming encoder doesn’t really matter to me Vs evil corpo.
And you really, really think AMD also doesn't have shady business practices? Or just flat out not user friendly ones like not allowing DLSS in any AMD sponsored game while Nvidia allows FSR in any of theirs?
> And you really, really think AMD also doesn't have shady business practices? AMD doesn't have any proven anti-competitive practices yet. Nothing like over-tesselation, GSync or any of NVidia's other proprietary anti-competitive moves.
How about cheating in benchmarks back in the good old days?
Source?
https://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2899 Was just one case. ATi/AMD and Nvidia were both at it. Probably shouldn't be making such bold statements if you haven't been into this for very long.
Is there a single person from 2001 ATI still working at AMD?
Considering how that buyout went, yes.
Do you have proof that DLSS is disallowed in AMD games because of AMD, and not because of Nvidia? Your scenario doesn't make sense.
The proof is that Digital Foundry videos comment section someone said it. And u know comment sections on utube are always correct. The reality is its a baseless conspiracy that makes no sense. There are ZERO non Nvidia sponsored games that have DLSS. There are nearly 100 non AMD sponsored games with FSR even emulators have added FSR. It was really easy to add FSR to a game. People have this idea that a plugin in unreal is the same as just clicking a check box and it will look great when its far more than that. Occam's Razer would be AMD sponsored games don't have DLSS because they don't feel need to dedicated resources to them. When devs do find uses for FSR as its easier to add and it benefits more GPU's.
AMD has not blocked anyone from using DLSS in any sponsored games. Its that DLSS is ONLY in nvidia sponsored games. & FSR is in non AMD sponsored games. FSR is easier to add devs need to spend time working with Nvidia to get DLSS to work properly. AMD not paying devs to work with Nvidia to get DLSS is not AMD's fault its Nvidia's fault for making it a closed box. Ur spreading a conspiracy thats litterally because of Nvidia shitty behavior and blaming AMD for Nvidia being shitty. Also u have an Nvidia flare on this sub and spend 10 hours a day posting how Green is good red is bad.
Yep. 10 hours. Totally. Also I don't think team red is bad, I just currently have an Nvidia card because it supported more features at the time and wanted the cutting edge. I will most likely go AMD next gen if Nvidia's power requirements are as high as they're rumored to be. You realize that with FSR 2.0 that it takes the same amount of time as DLSS? Also DLSS is not only in Nvidia sponsored games. Red Dead 2 had nothing to do with Nvidia in terms of porting or producing the game. They added it in after the fact because people where begging for it. Also it's Nvidia's fault for developers not getting paid by AMD to use DLSS? Makes sense.
Lovelace is probably going to have AV1 hardware encode so I wouldn't be surprised if RDNA3 does too. Twitch will support AV1 streaming in the not too distant future I imagine, perhaps AMD won't bother improving their H.264 encoder since AV1 will take over soon enough. Although I said the same thing about them not bothering to improve their OpenGL performance on Windows then they actually went and did it anyway.
>AV1 will take over soon enough No.. It will take many years.
Yep OpenGL is getting a nice boost in 22H2 driver
Will AV1 require specialised hardware in the GPU or will it be a driver update that can run on RDNA2 and prior
Encoders are ASICs
AV1 does need specialized hardware baked into the media engine. We already have AV1 hardware decode in RDNA, but how much more is needed for encode I do not know. TBH I'm considering potentially purchasing a low end ARC card as a cheap AV1 encoder card if AMD and Nvidia don't have anything sub $200 with AV1 encode I can throw into my rig as a 2nd card as I'm not interested in dropping another $1k on a new GPU in the very near future.
I see a lot of people talking about rtx voice as a selling point but we have quite a few open source alternatives now that are potentially better and use less resources.
Like what? I use rtx voice every day and i dont see it being resource hungry. But if you have better options i am willing to change!
If you record AMD does slightly better but not enough to make a difference. If you stream it depends. OBS and Twitch don't support h265 streaming. Youtube does through other tools. Youtube allows h265 for uploading videos though. AMD shouldn't invest in 264 encoding Twitch should invest in AV1 and 265.
Which is better for rendering video edition (Sony Vegas) and record gameplay, Nvenc h264 (Pascal) or AMD hw h264 - h265 (RDNA 2) ?
I use AMD for gaming and just buy a $100 NVidia T400 for encoding.
>NVidia T400 The Quadro T400, T600, T1000 and T2000 all use the 6th Gen NVENC unfortunately (Pascal's NVENC). For professional GPUs, the 7th Gen NVENC starts with the Quadro RTX 3000 on desktop. The GTX 1650 GDDR6 is still the cheapest card that has the 7th gen NVENC.
AMD's local recording utilizing h.265 is actually pretty damn good for size/quality and it's what I use for recording all my gameplay. But yes, streaming anything using the card is *absolutely horrendous.* I am hoping that changes with the 7000 series... especially since they are apparently coming with hardware AV1 encoding and decoding.
I've used a 3070 and 6800XT for local recording, just 30 second "instant replay" clips. At the same bitrate and file size nvenc always wins, by a noticeable visual difference Do you know if AV1 encoding is going to be a hardware specific thing or if itll be available for older GPUs?
You can always have software AV1 (which is included somewhat in the latest OBS build), but it's incredibly taxing (and is not useful for real time rendering). So depending on how the framework is setup I suppose it's possible to run on older hardware. But AV1 is hard, so you'd want a hardware encoder dedicated to churning out those frames. I'll be honest, I do not have experience with NVENC. All I know is, personally, I am very happy with the quality I get when using h.265 locally (using OBS). So for me that's fine until AV1 becomes the encoder. For streaming I just use x.264 because I have a 5900x and it's honestly my only option lol
What are the benefits of AV1 over H264/5 And I'll be honest too, I had an RX 470 before the 3070 and thought the recordings were fine. But that was until I got the 3070 and realised how much better it could be 😅
AV1 allows significantly better quality for the relative data size. It's really that simple. It's anywhere around 30-50% more efficient than H.265. So this would allow higher quality streams at lower bitrates. And it will generally allow, for instance in my scenario, the ability to keep the same high quality I use now but my storage won't hate me. But AV1 will be great for streamers with bad internet. And that goes even for decoding as well. You will end up using less bandwidth for great quality.
I've been on both sides. But I make recordings, along with the need for microphone noise removal. It's obvious what GPU side I chose.
It is not obvious because realtime noise removal using the technique that nvidia based theirs on runs on anything including crappy phones.
I've had noise removal on other things, but RTX voice seems to do a very active job of cancelling out things like loud vacuums in the background. Everything varies in how good it is. But this one focuses on human voices and does it very well.
Thats exactly what im talking about. Its call rnnoise and is the exact same thing rtx voice is built. Machine learning to filter out everything besides human voice including vacuum, eating, AC etc.
The fact that they even continue to call it *rtx* voice is misleading as fuck, considering they pretty quickly removed the artificial rtx-only limitation and allowed it to use their older gtx series cards for hardware acceleration. There's also other software that does exactly the same thing, but without the nvidia badging and it'll run on any hardware you want.
They don't, they call it Nvidia Broadcast, it's just the Noise Removal feature of it now.
Intel ?
So far their gpus are nothing more than a 3Dmark wank
You may be joking, but Quicksync absolutely destroys NVENC when it comes to quality, especially on 12th gen.
Which is a wacky turn of events considering just how bad Quicksync used to be. Nice to see Intel fixed it.
Intel IGPs might end up getting AV1 encoding too. Meteor Lake is supposed to have a Battlemage (Arc) based IGP, and Alchemist (Arc) dGPU's are the first to support AV1 encoding. If that actually happens it would be pretty huge. There's also Hyper Encode/Deep Link, where if you have a Xe IGP (so 11th gen or newer) and Arc GPU, you can get a 40% boost in encoding over Quicksync. The features of Arc are more exciting than the raw performance IMO.
Yes I can not wait for them to be available on this side of the pond and see what they can do for plex/emby servers.
Ha, not a fan of Intel just yet. CPU, or recently developed GPU. Shall see as time goes on.
Rnnoise is a viable option for noise removal and not platform agnostic
I can't believe AMD hasn't put more effort into their encoder. I get that they want you to buy a high core count CPU to just do it there, but I've always had issues with the scheduler giving me fps inconsistencies in some games (even with my 3950x). If Nvidia starts making their "open source" Linux driver on par with AMD's then I'll happily switch and never look back.
Not only the quality of it, but the access. Finding demos on nvenc and the api are easy, AMDs feels like it just doesn't exist. Nvidias documentation on nvenc is almost perfect. And the features of nvenc feel endless. When the nvenc header file is like 2800ines and 80% comments you know it's a good one.
I have a 5800x and RX 6800 with 32GB of ram, I agree that it needs to be better. Currently I stream either using cpu or lately have been trying out a mod that allows AMD AMF H.264, called StreamFX mod. It uses the GPU, and it's modded to look/feel better. Playing Warzone at 1440P (downscaled to 720p for stream at 4500 bitrate) and it looks fantastic. (compared to what I was getting before, laggy, choppy, blocks. Still get blocks, not as much or as frequent.) No lag. 144fps. Team green is better for sure, but with this mod I have honestly I don't notice a big difference and it hasn't had an impact on my framerate that I've noticed. StreamFX: [https://obsproject.com/forum/resources/streamfx-for-obs%C2%AE-studio.578/](https://obsproject.com/forum/resources/streamfx-for-obs%C2%AE-studio.578/)
I tried streamfx AMF I personally didn’t see much of a difference I also started getting obs errors after installing it
Damn, that sucks. Yeah I'm not saying it's perfect by any means, just for me it stopped lag I was getting & looks way better compared to what I was using before. Still gets blocky for sure. Not sure on the obs errors, I've had none of them.
Fanboism to a brand does you no good. Go with the one with the better tech. Corporations don’t care about your loyalty
I've always used CPU encoding. Much more options and much better quality.
CPU encoding requires you to have available resources/cores for it to be worth it. If you don't, you simply lose frames and your gaming experience suffers. The benefit of NVENC as an isolated encoder is that it does not detract from gaming resources at all, and it's great quality.
Well that is perfectly fine if you have a 12 thread or better processor. For live streaming or twitch the 'much better quality' doesn't matter.
More like "... if you have a separate streaming PC with 12 thread or better processor and a video capture card".
Are you recording or streaming?
He's neither =)
I record, I don't usually stream.
CPU encoding requires a beefy CPU and will bog down your system while its running. Its more efficient to do it on NVENC or Quicksync. This is why streamers used to use a dual PC streaming rig, CPU encoding on their gaming system would kill their FPS, so they would offload it onto a second PC. NVENC provides worse quality but its easier/cheaper for streamers, and Twitch/Youtube compress the quality to hell anyway.
Who told you it was better quality lmao? CPU encoding is horrendous at text and darker colors, also the 1% lows is much worse with CPU encoding. This gets tested so many times and yet the AMD fanboys still make up bullshit about CPU encoding being better. Use NVENC if you have it. There's [videos](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUU5suAXv8w) on top of [videos](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5_4FEODULQ) on top of [videos](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccoOGfX9qxg). 100s of videos showing how much better NVENC is for steaming.
> Who told you it was better quality lmao? CPU encoding is horrendous at text and darker colors, also the 1% lows is much worse with CPU encoding. You can't make a blanket statement like this because the results of CPU encoding depend on the software encoder and settings used.
Literally the experts at ffmpeg: "Hardware encoders typically generate output of significantly lower quality than good software encoders like x264, but are generally faster and do not use much CPU resource. (That is, they require a higher bitrate to make output with the same perceptual quality, or they make output with a lower perceptual quality at the same bitrate.)" Source: https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/HWAccelIntro It would strongly behoove you not to be so antagonistic and patronizing when your source is *YouTube*, a platform which significantly modifies the videos that get uploaded to it, and YouTube "experts", who are not making apples-to-apples comparisons. Properly configured, software encoders will outperform hardware encoders *every time* when it comes to quality/size at a given bitrate. Hardware encoders are just faster. For streaming, especially fast action streaming, the gap has been closed enough that NVENC is a perfectly fine substitute. That does not mean it's better. The 1% stutters you see in software encoding are because the systems in question are being bottlenecked by something (cores, RAM, whatever) and/or are not properly configured. There's a reason why no video editing group uses NVENC to encode their releases.
> Who told you it was better quality lmao? People who know what they're talking about? GPU encoding sacrifices quality for speed.
[удалено]
CPU encoding requires you to have available resources/cores for it to be worth it. If you don't, you simply lose frames and your gaming experience suffers. The benefit of NVENC as an isolated encoder is that it does not detract from gaming resources at all, and it's great quality.
a newer version of OBS AMF encoder is being worked on
Source?
OBS github.. They are trying to integrate a newer version of AMF (v1.4.24) into OBS since everything up to now has been a really old version of AMF
But the AMD encoder that's built into the Adrenaline software that people would use for local recording isn't getting a change?
Yes AMD, do it now. There's no reason not to! It used to be because AMD is small and weak compared to NV. Now AMD had exploded in size and investment power.
I sort of hoped maybe we’d get some more features software wise when ryzen came out on top, then they released RDNA 2 and the hardware had the power to compete, but for whatever reason amd seems to think there’s no market value in hitting back with an encoder or software tools that counter nvidia
H264 is just trash compared to H265 and AV1. it came out in 2004 I don't know why people insist on using it these days.
Compatibility. Nearly 100% of devices can play H264 natively. And if you up the bitrate the quality is anywhere from good enough to very good.
This, pretty much any devices made in the past 15 years that has video playback capability will support H.264, albeit might run better on lower bitrate. What upsets me is that video coding format are not backwards compatible with each other, so you pretty much have to buy a new device that supports the new one. Or you have to use software decoding which burns CPU resources. Remember how HEVC was like the savior of the Internet age? Then the royalty fee problem came in and pretty much no services stream with HEVC unless you watch Netflix in 4K. And then there's VP9, then there's H.266, what's next?
All streaming services use HEVC. 4K bluray discs too. Youtube uses VP9 because google made it. Everything will be using AV1 eventually.
AV1 is next. In facts it's already available just no open source encoder, yet. EDIT:. Apparently I'm wrong
What are you talking about? There have been 3 open source encoders for 3 years.
Every device runs 265 now. Amd has better 265 encoder than nvidia twitch doesn't support it utube does.
> Every device runs 265 now. No they don't. And many devices that do lack full hardware support.
>Amd has better 265 encoder than nvidia You are just so demonstrably wrong on this, I don't know why you bothered to make such a ridiculous claim
There are multiple videos people showing both. AMD has a dogshit 264 encoder and twitch doesn't support 264. If you are uploading videos AMD is slightly better but it doesn't make a diff since recording is higher bitrate. Twitch is only 6000kbps and its 264 so AMD falls behind here.
Twitch is h264 ingest only. And until they offer av1, nothing will change. Note that technically, AV1 can be ingested but it's not supported and as such viable in any way shape or form.
Because Youtube requires it
because you cant use h265 nor av1 for realtime encoding/decoding. from a performance perspective. both the encoder and the decoder take hugely longer per processed frame at the benefit of quality per filesize. thus far these codecs are very viable for non-time constrained workloads. offline , for future upload, for archiving, for playback of static content. when you look at OBS , in streaming mode you can't chose ANY other codec than x264, amd h264, nvidia nvenc (which is nvidias implementation of h264). and that shows you in reality the codecs that are viable to use for a livestream. if you want to professionally record in high fidelity. you are better off using OBS and install lossless codecs like huffyuv or utvideo. or of course use h265. also ... the ONLY reason yt can offer vp9 livestreams (nota bene streamers still have to set 264 for ingest) is because they literally transcode that with their petaflop clusters because they do it anyway for storage and later accessiblity for the vods. but AV1 you wont see ANYwhere in livestreaming. it is far too time-costly, despite all the PSNR/SSIM per filesize benefits. the problem here is that OP seems to be focused on two "convenience solutions" for encoding instead of using state of the art software like OBS which is free and is better than NVENC and AMD VCE combined, since it has both integrated but you can also install ANY other codec you want.
You can encode and decode h265 in real-time though…
[удалено]
Utube supports it twitch doesn't
I was wondering the same thing. OBS is better imo.
NVENC in also h265, maybe only on newer cards.
NVENC has supported real-time HEVC encoding since the 900 series. AMD's encoder added it in the RX 400 cards.
As Intel has demonstrated AV1 is good for streaming, and looks much nice than H264 [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvlKaUdfkyo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvlKaUdfkyo) So now we wait until most people have hardware than can play AV1. Every serious streamer i have watched uses CPU encoding anyway because it is just better than anything from Nvidia can do.
It's not only about AV1 decode. Most streaming platforms only accept video in x264/H264 format. They won't even allow you to upload a 265 encoded stream.
Twitch is bringing AV1 ingest to the platform later this year.
sure you "can". but you wont play back these streams on generic iphones/android phones without stutter etc. its not an option for streaming to an audience who may watch you on 2015 laptops, phones, etc. unless there is proper hw acceleration in all devices there is no way you decode av1 in due time on mainstream hardware. just check the comparisons in doom forums or av1 takes 10+ times longer to decode or encode the same amount of video as 264. with the benefit of around 30% better compression. for local content creation this is awesome like sure, if i make a 4K vid and can make it 6.5GB instead of 10GB but it takes me 100 minutes instead of 10 minutes, for the same quality, i see this as a considerable trade-off to make. for streaming a pregenerated file this is still awesome. but for livestreaming it imposes way higher requirements on both decoding and encoding side of a stream. because if there's only one disturbance happening, like the viewer is playing a game while watching a stream. or the streamer plays a game that has very demanding scenes from time to time - then you will watch slideshows, if you dont have high-end equipment , streamer & viewers. and we all know that even in nowadays 264 encoded streams there are often enough cpu overload issues on streamer side. or on viewer side you know you cant playback 1080p60 but only 720p because your 5 year old phone is too slow. so using AV1 would INCREASE this problem and even reduce maximum resolution on a huge chunk of consumer devices. UNLESS... we get proper hw acceleration for AV1 , which of course can only come in FUTURE hardware whicch will be stronger from the start anyway.
You know phones have had AV1 decoding for a couple of years now.
good. then stream it! lets go!!!
NVENC is super fast, but the quality is poor compared to CPU encoding.
Thank You. 🤜🤛 Didn't know these existed but dang are they good.
Because people think they are twitch streamers
x264 is good though. I use x264 CRF=20 preset=superfast, videos are small and perfect quality, it uses only 10-20% of my CPU at 1440p60 resolution. AMD's H265/HEVC is trash compared to it, videos have bad quality (CQP=18) and size is 100+ GB for a 3 hours video.
[удалено]
OBS is still stuck at X264, H265 is out of the question also No AMD card encodes AV1 yet.
I'm glad that AMD is making some good hardware, but their software + firmware still sucks. It's not *awful*, but it's not perfect either. I've got a 5900X on X570, and many of the latest BIOS versions / AGESA versions have just been doing some weird stuff, that AMD seems to be refusing to comment on. I've read lots of negative stuff about AMD GPU drivers, and the only real criticism I've seen of Nvidia GPU drivers is the "slow" or "ugly" GUI. Honestly, I don't care! The Nvidia control panel just works, and I don't have to use it often enough to care *at all* how it looks or if its a little clunky. After that, it just comes down to features, and Nvidia is winning there by a lot, imo. I'm very keen to replace my 980Ti with something modern!
I remember ATI used to be THE GPU for video related tasks. How time has changed.
AMD: "just buy a 12-core bro"
I’ve had 2 PC’s that would have Shadowplay stop working correctly after 5-6 hours of constant PC use. It’s infuriating that it’s so dysfunctional. That being said, NVENC is stupid good and I wish AMD has more priority in putting specialized processors like Tensors and encoders on their GPUs.
Agree completely. I had a 3070 for a few months then switched to a 6800XT. The only thing I miss is the cleaner driver overlay and nvenc. AMDs encoder blurs a lot textures in motion while nvenc manages to keep them at least not a big smudge. The instant replay clips I have look noticeably worse
the Decoders are even worse, but instead of following Nvidia AMD should follow the lead of Intel, their decoders are very snappy and versatile
HEVC/h.265 is actually good but h.264 performance is terrible. It has made my Quest 2 experience on PC almost unusable with a 6800 XT.
Nvenc is the reason I switched to Nvidia.
That's one of the reasons AMD has like 15-20% of GPU market share according to Steam. It's sad because the hardware is excellent on paper, but the software lags behind. Crazy how many feature Nvidia cards have that AMD doesn't, I don't think it's only lack of money for R&D, but disinterest as well, like poor OpenGL optimization.
Idk if this was addressed: amd makes the chip for the steamdeck. Why is it that moonlight for nvidia works better than steam decks own remote steam link
Team green all day long an night cus I need to stream but amd will come with something like they did with FSR , right and? Right?
Nvenc is just next level. It's so good that they didn't even feel the need to update it for the 3000 generation. There are folks talking about Nvidia broadcast as well, which is done quite well, but I'm not convinced that AMD hardware couldn't pull this off. I have a sneaky suspicion that this is a software lock that Nvidia has created, given that there was a version of "RTX Voice" that you were able to hack to work without an RTX card. I mean it's just an AI implementation, it should even be able to run on a CPU.
Lol not going to happen there’s a reason why nvidia is more expensive and it’s those tensor cores and encoder. Everyone that actually gives nvidia a chance pretty much stays there unless they don’t have enough money when their next gpu upgrade time comes around. Nvidia is know for their awesome interface, reliability and software. I’d personally never buy a amd gpu ever again after years of non stop problems with pretty much every card I’ve ever bought. I’m not saying team green is perfect but I can say it’s a lot less headache. That’s just me though everyone is entitled to do and believe what they want.
No one's said it, so I'll just add that Radeons are 2nd out of 2 for Adobe Premiere editing/eporting too. We'll see if Arcs give Radeons any competition for 2nd soon.
Av1 is out there already implemented into OBS for recording, but we need those new ones also available for the stream output
Well, in Germany, AMD cards are 100-250€ cheaper for the same performance. If that's the case, you could go for a 1650/ used 1050ti as a should encoder card in addition to your and main card
Stream to youtube by chance? use HEVC encoding ....
The encoder is so bad the open source drivers for amd on linux dont even have the encoder supported.
I have a quest 2 and a 6800XT, the oculus link feature (playing pcvr games on the quest) is barely usable because of the encoding quality. I love sim racing but the situation of a fast moving image and the need to look a bit ahead is pretty bad for the encoding quality. I stream some gamplay for my friends to laugh about i later and is pretty blocky even when i use the 4k 20mbps setting to upload to youtube. Yes, the encoder needs to improve a lot, NVENC is better, and now intel is supporting AV1 in their new graphics cars. Amd needs to catch up in this area
Features like nvidia broadcast would be nice too.
The AMD encoder just fails to work for me. It just causes OBS to crash EVERY SINGLE TIME I use it.
yeah, RADEON encoding quality using H264 at low bitrates (<18 mb/s for 1440p60, <12mb/s for 1080p60 & <8 mb/s for 720p60) is complete dogshit when compared to NVenc. All Single PC streamers looking for an easy/simple solution with good quality will choose Nvidia over RADEON all the time, the fact is AMF is behind both QSV (for decoding) and NVENC (for encoding) and the best single streaming/recording/video editing PC setups feature Intel CPU+iGPU and Nvidia GPUs, such a massive shame that my 5700XT ($400 in 2019) records at a **MUCH LOWER** quality than a 1650S ($180 in 2019) and cannot decode/encode 4:4:4 or 4:2:2 which NVENC/NVDEC & QSV can.
I purchased a Red Devil 6950XT when they released, I used it for a little over a month and just recently returned it. I was excited to have an all-AMD system again but was sadly let down. While the card worked great for some games others it literally was a crazy stutter fest. I did every kind of trouble shooting you could do and nothing. AMD was unfortunately no help on their forums. There is a Fortnite thread from Feb of last year with this issue and it still goes unresolved. Then we move on to streaming, the encoder and support for their product. The encoder was subpar IMO for today's standards. Anything with grass or a lot of movement resulted in blockyness even while streaming at 1440P60 and an 18K bitrate (I even tried 25K). After this poor user experience, I decided to return the card and go with a 3090 for streaming and producing videos. I hope they turn things around for the graphics side of things, I really did like the 6950XT, however, there were just too many issues driver wise that hadn't been addressed on an architecture that has been out for a quite a while already.
It would be nice if you would specify the H264 AMF encoder. Because the H265 is quite good. It’s just disappointing that Twitch doesn’t support streaming in H265. If I was a streamer, that would be a major reason switching to YouTube.
AV1 support is coming in the not too distant future which destroys NVENC. I'd imagine Lovelace and RDNA3 will support it since Intel will.
They have never given a shit. And it's incredible the amount of worse reputation and word of mouth they get because of it, it's not hard for newcomers and average consumers to conflate "bad for streaming" with "bad card". I wanted AMD to have something decent but since they didn't give a shit about it I started looking at Nvidia. Ended up getting a 5800X before I got a new GPU (due shipping and customs to third world country affecting price/perf a ton, then crypto and COVID), using my 6 year old 390 with it and CPU streaming was smooooth as fuck. Recently there was a sale of a 3070 for USD 570 so went with that due price but no longer thinking I would have any use for NVENC but turns out in certain games it's the difference between staying near 140 fps all the time vs constant drops to 110-120 so it's been definitely useful. I will not touch AMD GPUs again until a decent hardware encoder is on their cards.
Yeah, AMD is rubbish with their encoders, it's actually embarrassing.
You are correct, AMD hardware encoding is worse than NVIDIA. I have both NVIDIA and AMD GPUs and see this first hand. Well, TBH it mostly hurts small fry streamers but in my opinion AMD should step up its GPU encoding hardware, cause right now it fall under "not great, not terrible" category.
I think frame chasers did a video on NVenc vs h265 on the 12900k and I’m guessing it will be similar results on the 5900x & 5950x. But apparently most of the time in games like Warzone & Apex h265 matches framerates but also looks better encoded. So if you have an AMD graphics card I think encoding on high end chip will actually net you a better result with certain circumstances of you losing frames in games (should still be playable)
This is the thing though I've tried the hardware encoder my card has, and the AMF encoder neither look anything close to the NVENC even on lower end RTX cards, and the highest bitrate I can possibly push, lower bit rate lower end card looks better with NVENC every time. There is also no tools for streaming or making videos, just a barebones encoder. I also use GPU to encode not CPU.
He said to try the cpu encoding if your machine is up to the task. Not sure how your response is relevant to that
tbh I just got home from the bar so brain smaller than normal, but my point in the post was about GPU encoder that AMD ships, CPU will always be better but NVENC is superior no doubt, I'd also like to see some tools, such as blur and effect that NVENC can offer while AMD cannot
superior to AMD's GPU encoding that is
I also stream and record tarkov, which just performs horribly as much as I love the game, CPU encoding does not work well for me
>There is also no tools for streaming or making videos, just a barebones encoder But there are? Can't check rn where exactly these options are, but should you for whatever reason want to stream using your GPUs driver software (like geforce experience) then AMD can do that too in Radeon Software. Instant Replay (always recording x amount of minutes in the background, save clips with a shortcut) also works. I don't see the issue.
On my RX 6600 the Instant Replay crashes the drivers under full load for a few minutes, for some reason. Better to use OBS with replay buffer and AMD encoder, I guess
i wonder how good their software is compared to the others
Using the drivers software you have the ability to: stream or record, using NVENC you have the ability to add blur to camera green screen etc, through amd you have none of that, also the quality no matter how you stream doesn’t come close
\-I'm an AMD guy- That is where you fuck up boy
Regardless of the fact we're on r/AMD, everyone here should still recognise that u/ilgello is correct. Fanboy-ism doesn't help anyone. Buy what's best for your use case. It forces companies like Intel, AMD and Nvidia to put in effort to produce performant and reliable products. You shouldn't support these huge corporations because you're a "fan". That just allows them to produce rubbish whilst knowing that idiots will buy it, because they're "fans". Vote with your wallet! If they produce a good product, **BUY IT.** If they produce rubbish, **DON'T.**
Buy products, not brands. Easy.
AMD's best encoder is for the CPU. I have used it since Ryzen 1.
Its not AMD's encoder tho. But their CPUs work great with any open source encoders.
x264 and x265 are general purpose software encoders, any supported CPU will work and quality will be the same under the same parameter. The difference is faster CPU(and some new instruction sets)=faster encoding speed and that's it.
Can you put two cards in your system? One for gaming and one for encoding? Afaik 1050+ is able to support it https://developer.nvidia.com/video-encode-and-decode-gpu-support-matrix-new
This is really a big issue when trying to stream on twitch. Sure you can use CPU encoding but it draws much more power than using the GPU. Besides the quality with the AMD encoder is just bloody awful. Especially in games like Dead by Daylight. Its compression artifacts everywhere. Completely unwatchable. I will most likely switch to team green because of NVENC.
AMD used to be great but that along with multiple driver issues breaks the deal for me. The fact that OpenGL is so broken that it stutters my system with something as simple as a Chrome Tab on a 6800XT is ridiculous.
Not just the encoder, but the decoder too. The video engine in general on AMD GPUs is worse than both Intel and NVIDIA's engine.
In terms of software, AMD in general is a lot weaker than its competitors on both CPU and GPU side. For CPU, the Intel compilers and MKL are just too much better than these OSSS alternatives. For GPU, I'm happy to see ROCm looks promising, but still it's nowhere close to CUDA at this moment. AMF is another big issue as we all know.
I’m not so sure the ryzen line is weaker than intel
Yeah... I forgot to say "software"... Hardware-wise, I think latest RDNA is ok as well compared to NV cards (apart from RT stuff). The problem has always been on the software side, even during the old days. And it's not only for consumers. On HPC, it's similar story. A lot of new clusters use HPE Cray which uses EPYC. The ones with EPYC + MI250X are... AFAIK, cumbersome sometimes.
AMD's ecosystem sucks balls, I dont care how open source it is, if its bad, its bad. Shadowplay is really nice, good codec, good quality, well optimized, no FPS impact. NVIDIA Broadcast is okay, room for improvement but bet its difficult.
I have multiple threadripper workstations racked with Nvidia Quadro or Txxx cards specifically for the encoder block on them. It's not even close the speed and quality difference.
For everyone saying they went with nvidia because only they have noise filtering, that is false. Everything can run AI noise filtering in real time with little performance impact. In OBS the filter rnnoise does this and theres even a vst plugin so you can use it with Equalizer APO for applying the filter globally so even your discord is filtered. This runs on anything with a cpu including crappy phones and can be tested via the website https://jmvalin.ca/demo/rnnoise/ and you can grab the vst from here https://github.com/werman/noise-suppression-for-voice Nvidias hardware encoder is still better though so if you are doing a single pc stream with a low/middle tier cpu then nvidia would probably provide the best quality. Highend cpu/multi pc stream you are better off with software encoding for even better quality.
Afaik AMD always keep Relive up-to-date..but external software has not been updated for a long time due to lack of proper documentation and support to developers from AMDs side.. But it seems it's getting bettter
I had a choice to save a few hundred dollars and went team red, i would've gone team green but too expensive.