![]() ![]() My experience with x265: I have an i7 4790K 4.4GHz and some of the settings I have played with in handbrake estimate the encode time at +12hrs (Remux -> x265). Even then, it will take a long time and a lot of CPU power to complete. Ideally if you have a remux file and compressed to x265 that would be ideal. ![]() That takes CPU power, time, and writes to your HDD/SSD. Part of the re-encoding process is to first decompress the file. If your x264 is lossless (or close to it) and decide to go from x264 to x265. IIRC your 10-15GB movies are lossy but are pretty close to lossless. * Note: both x264 and x265 compressions can be lossless although they typically are not. Find a 10GB movie that's x265 and it looks amazing.įor equal quality (size reduction only): Making an encode of an encode is not a great idea because you're going from what is typically a lossy compression to another form of lossy compression. The releases which save 80% are lossy compression and I see a lot of blocking. If you want the quality to be comparable to the original x264 file, the space savings is really around 25%. See chart: optimal viewing by the size of the television and resolution You may not notice the difference on a TV depending on your setup. I highly suggest that you make an encode and compare the two. ![]() That 80% savings comes at a cost which is quality. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |