Benchmark your computer with Handbrake 1.01 and x265

[FiLeZz]

encoded 1497 frames in 82.80s (18.08 fps), 4036.02 kb/s, Avg QP:26.24

threadripper @4ghz Memery @3400mhz
win10 pro

 

[TahoeDust]

encoded 1497 frames in 82.00s (18.26 fps), 4036.02 kb/s, Avg QP:26.24

Handbrake: 1.0.1 64bit
Processor: i7 7820x
Processor Speed: 4.9 GHz
RAM: 32GB 3600 CL16
Operating System: Windows 10 Pro 64bit

 

[Zucker2k]

encoded 1497 frames in 82.00s (18.26 fps), 4036.02 kb/s, Avg QP:26.24

Handbrake: 1.0.1 64bit
Processor: i7 7820x
Processor Speed: 4.9 GHz
RAM: 32GB 3600 CL16
Operating System: Windows 10 Pro 64bit

Beast!

 

[FiLeZz]

encoded 1497 frames in 81.07s (18.47 fps), 4036.37 kb/s, Avg QP:26.24

All setting the same as before simply closed a few web pages I had open.
Next I will run it at 4.1ghz.

 

[MarkPost]

Nice results guys.

@FiLeZz have you checked the CPU load? it seems x265 doesnt use above 10 cores/20 threads or so, yet. Hopefully future builds can use more cores/threads to unveil that monster's power...

 

[TahoeDust]

encoded 1497 frames in 81.07s (18.47 fps), 4036.37 kb/s, Avg QP:26.24

All setting the same as before simply closed a few web pages I had open.
Next I will run it at 4.1ghz.

Haha...I did the same. This is with all the background stuff closed. I don't think I am going to be getting 5.0GHz with AVX. When you run 4.1, someone with a 7900x or better is going to have to represent the blue team...lol

encoded 1497 frames in 79.77s (18.77 fps), 4035.92 kb/s, Avg QP:26.24

Handbrake: 1.0.1 64bit
Processor: i7 7820x
Processor Speed: 4.9 GHz
RAM: 32GB 3600 CL16
Operating System: Windows 10 Pro 64bit

 

[FiLeZz]

4.1ghz memory at 3400mhz
encoded 1497 frames in 78.68s (19.03 fps), 4036.02 kb/s, Avg QP:26.24
Not all Cores working during test. My hands are tied to the software at this point. I can still overclock another 75mhz on all cores. Maybe tomorrow.

 

[ElFenix]

ElFenix is around, he probably just forgot about this thread or doesn't check this forum often. All you have to do is summon him @ElFenix

 

[traderjay]

Here is mine:

encoded 1497 frames in 101.27s (14.78 fps), 4036.02 kb/s, Avg QP:26.24

CPU: XEON E5-2696 V3
RAM: 32GB DDR4 ECC PC2133 Crucial CL19
OS: Win 10 Pro with fall Creators Update

Average CPU load is in the range of 55 to 75%.

 

[MarkPost]

Here is mine:

encoded 1497 frames in 101.27s (14.78 fps), 4036.02 kb/s, Avg QP:26.24

CPU: XEON E5-2696 V3
RAM: 32GB DDR4 ECC PC2133 Crucial CL19
OS: Win 10 Pro with fall Creators Update

Average CPU load is in the range of 55 to 75%.

so it uses 10-12c/20-24t or so right?

 

[traderjay]

so it uses 10-12c/20-24t or so right?

From task manager, all cores (physical and logical) are used but hovers in the 55 to 75% range. Do you call this 10 - 12c utilization? I am trying to build a dual 2696V4 system and once I get that online I will re-run this test. Looking at the results, it seems thats Handbrake cannot fully use more than 12 cores and after that, Mhz becomes more important.

 

[MarkPost]

yeah, thats why I mention 10-12c. Looking at TR 16/32 and your Xeon 18/36 results I suppose only cpus up to 10-12c/20-24t would be fully loaded in all cores/threads

 

[PeterScott]

From task manager, all cores (physical and logical) are used but hovers in the 55 to 75% range. Do you call this 10 - 12c utilization? I am trying to build a dual 2696V4 system and once I get that online I will re-run this test. Looking at the results, it seems thats Handbrake cannot fully use more than 12 cores and after that, Mhz becomes more important.

Or is it a case, that it can't use that many cores on a problem this small? It obviously has to break the work into smaller pieces. If each pieces has to be one region of the screen, it may be that it can only work effectively down to a minimum region size of screen. I remember reading for x264, at very high thread counts quality would suffer as it used smaller regions sizes. So maybe they limit it now for quality reasons.

Try compressing 4K without downsizing it, and see how much core occupation you get, as that should dramatically increase the amount of available regions to work on. Or maybe you need 8K to really load all your cores.

With this much computing power, if you have multiple videos to compress it would be best to run multiple copies of handbrake to get around the limitations, and possibly improve quality.

 

[traderjay]

Or is it a case, that it can't use that many cores on a problem this small? It obviously has to break the work into smaller pieces. If each pieces has to be one region of the screen, it may be that it can only work effectively down to a minimum region size of screen. I remember reading for x264, at very high thread counts quality would suffer as it used smaller regions sizes. So maybe they limit it now for quality reasons.

Try compressing 4K without downsizing it, and see how much core occupation you get, as that should dramatically increase the amount of available regions to work on. Or maybe you need 8K to really load all your cores.

With this much computing power, if you have multiple videos to compress it would be best to run multiple copies of handbrake to get around the limitations, and possibly improve quality.

Encoding to 4K resulted in much higher CPU utilization in the range of 90 to 100% across all cores. Below is the result using handbrake 1.07 - 2160p30 output setting:

encoded 1497 frames in 211.79s (7.07 fps), 6897.08 kb/s, Avg QP:27.59

 

[PeterScott]

Thanks, I was curious about that. I figured there must be a limitation to how small a chunk they can effectively break the screen into.

 

[traderjay]

Thanks, I was curious about that. I figured there must be a limitation to how small a chunk they can effectively break the screen into.

I guess and across all other video application such as adobe media encoder and Vegas 15 pro, 4K to 4K always result in much higher CPU utilization. My two 2696V4 CPUs are arriving today and can't wait to test them (if I can get that system working yikes)

 

[PeterScott]

I did some searching/reading and at some point it looks like x264 was supposed to have switched from dividing each frame into pieces for threading, to giving each thread a range of frames, so I am not sure what to think.

Have you tried just encoding a much longer video, to see if core utilization improves?

 

[traderjay]

My dual 2696V4 workstation is "half operational" but managed to run some numbers;

Workstation 1:
CPU: Dual XEON 2696 v4
RAM: 64 GB Crucial DDR4 ECC PC2133 (8x8GB)
OS: Win10 Pro will Fall update
SSD: Samsung 850 pro 512GB

4K footage to 1080P H.265
encoded 1497 frames in 87.29s (17.15 fps), 4036.02 kb/s, Avg QP:26.24

4K to 4K Roku 2160p30 4K H.265
encoded 1497 frames in 169.78s (8.82 fps), 6897.08 kb/s, Avg QP:27.59


Workstation 1 (PC2400 RAM SPEED):
CPU: Dual XEON 2696 v4
RAM: 64 GB Crucial DDR4 ECC PC2400 (8x8GB)
OS: Win10 Pro will Fall update
SSD: Samsung 850 pro 512GB

4K footage to 1080P H.265
encoded 1497 frames in 86.65s (17.28 fps), 4036.02 kb/s, Avg QP:26.24

4K to 4K Roku 2160p30 4K H.265
encoded 1497 frames in 167.95s (8.91 fps), 6897.08 kb/s, Avg QP:27.59


Workstation 2:
CPU: XEON E5-2696 V3
RAM: 32GB DDR4 ECC PC2133 Crucial CL19
OS: Win 10 Pro with fall Creators Update

4K footage to 1080P H.265
encoded 1497 frames in 101.27s (14.78 fps), 4036.02 kb/s, Avg QP:26.24

4K to 4K Roku 2160p30 4K H.265
encoded 1497 frames in 211.79s (7.07 fps), 6897.08 kb/s, Avg QP:27.59

 

[PeterScott]

What do you do with that beast of a computer?

 

[traderjay]

What do you do with that beast of a computer?

Quite a bit actually:
- 4K video editing for footage captured by my 5D Mark IV (mostly my 4 year old and newborn)
- Trading and running financial modelling (my modelling guru friend)
- Machine vision application, 3D scanning and metrology (will post some benchmarks once I stabilize the dual CPU workstation)

 

[PeterScott]

I see the source of username.

 

[DrRamtop]

CPU: Intel Xeon X5660 @ 4.5GHz
RAM: 24GB DDR3-1600
OS: Windows 7 Pro 64-bit

encoded 1497 frames in 213.84s (7.00 fps), 4036.02 kb/s, Avg QP:26.24

Pretty good for a chip that's nearly 8 years old.

 

[StinkyPinky]

Here is my 8700k at 5

My system is in my sig

x265 [info]: Weighted P-Frames: Y:3.9% UV:1.2%
x265 [info]: consecutive B-frames: 26.4% 9.1% 11.5% 42.3% 10.7%
encoded 1497 frames in 108.77s (13.76 fps), 4036.02 kb/s, Avg QP:26.24
[20:16:34] mux: track 0, 1497 frames, 31505829 bytes, 4026.03 kbps, fifo 1024
[20:16:34] mux: track 1, 2933 frames, 1252808 bytes, 160.09 kbps, fifo 2048
[20:16:34] libhb: work result = 0

# Encode Completed ...

 

[traderjay]

Here is my 8700k at 5

My system is in my sig

Amazing result - High Clock speed and new architecture really help here! Put my 2696V4 to shame.

 

[MarkPost]

Here is my 8700k at 5

My system is in my sig

It seems your cpu is throttling or something is wrong. Its only ~9% faster than Crono's 8700 at 4.3

EDIT: ummm or is it AVX offset? about -300 or so?

 

[Totalnet]

encoded 1497 frames in 47.86s (31.28 fps), 4036.02 kb/s, Avg QP:26.24
HandBrake 1.0.7 (2017040900) - 64bit
OS: Microsoft Windows NT 10.0 - 64bit
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-7980XE CPU @ 4.60GHz
Ram: 32GB, DDR4 - 3200 (12-12-12-28 1t)
GPU Information:
NVIDIA GTX 670
Screen: 1920x1080