Hi! Is it normal that an R9 Fury with the latest VCE can barely maintain 1080p@60 FPS while recording ? I run the bult-in "benchmark" here is what I get using AMD AMF: Here is what my 4790k's IGP can handle: Not sure if it's a driver or plugin related but the video quality is also noticeably worse compared to Intel QuickSync. Here is (nearly) the same scene recorded with AMD AMF and Intel QuickSync Settings are highest quality and 50 Mbps in both cases.
Welcome to the club, i got R9 380 and it's pretty much the same here. As far as i can tell it's something that needs to be done with the SDK, there seems to be too much overhead. Recording and having high GPU usage is almost impossible, you drop more frames than you would with software recording:S
Those who beleive that it is worse than sw encoding have 100% open source code of the plugin and can try to improve original "broken" implementation.
You got me wrong. I am not saying the implementation is wrong. I don't even know if anything is wrong. But if something is wrong, then it's at the core, the SDK, it's AMD that has to do something. Every implementation faces more or less the same "issues", so it's either a hardware issue or a driver/SDK issue. And i think your implementation is good, so please don't get me wrong on that part, i am not blaming anyone here EDIT: Though to the original poster, those results are quite low, i get higher than that:S I assume you run the benchmark during no load?
I'm not judging your work, I just implied that currently encoding using the AMD AMF plugin has some issues in terms of performance and quality. In fact I don't even "blaimed" MSI AB or the Plugin itself I mentioned I'm suspicious about the driver/support of the new(er) VCE - but I don't know for sure... Intel's QuickSync plugin works fine and the AMD encoder also has some other issues in other softwares... I run the benchmark in idle but the GPU jumps to 720 MHz automatically so i don't think it's a performance state issue. I also tried recording in-game and after that I checked in MPC and the video FPS wasn't stable, fluctuated between 50-60 FPS not to mention the 10-15 FPS performance hit while recording and the far worse quality compared to the Intel encoder.
Well if you have run during idle then it's still very bad framerate you get, it's weird. Cause i have done quite some testing, and the GPU will jump up as you say, and if you force it not to, the Encoding speed is limited by a huge amount. However if you force it to run at higher speeds etc, it won't change anything, so it's bound by it's own to that part. And yeah as you say about the performance hit, it's really bad. I got the R9 380 cause i thought, oh 4k30fps must mean that it can do 1920x1200@60 with ease. Sadly that isn't the case, and cause of how it behaves and what some speculate, it might be a bad overhead. Cause i really hope it's not the hardware itself, but who knows. I wouldn't be surprised if it's the code (AMD code) that's bad.
May I hijack the thread for related question? I thought to give this a shot, but when I click on the benchmark button in configuration window, I get an error message saying something about failure to encode frame 0 and some super cryptic error code apparently coming from the driver. I have no idea what's wrong, and there's no hint of any possible prerequisities in the AB's help. It just says that Rivatuner contains plugin for this sort of encoding. whether I need to do something with the files in there I cannot tell. I selected Dx11 in the encoder settings btw.
Who said that VCE should be as fast as QuickSync and give the same quality? AMD's hardware encoder was always the worst and ths slowest of 3 available hardware encoding solutions (up to 5 times slower than QS depending on quality SETTINGS and VCE generation). QuckSync is the fastest and NVENC is between, rather close to QS.
Gave up on AMD GPU encoding looong time ago. As well as on GPU assisted decoding. Matter of fact I turn it OFF in some apps like Chrome, for the sake of elegance, power saving and stability. As long as you have Intel QS there is no reason to even think about AMD VCE/UVD I mean it loses in every imaginable aspect: power, performance, stability and quality. It's not even close. Just forget about it.
Me too. I sold my R9 270X and got a MSI GTX 960. Now I get good encoding speed while recording and most of my games are running better on the nvidia card. I'm pleased with the outcome.
Speaking of QuickSync, I need to enable the integrated GPU for that, right? And as far as I use a normal graphic card, encoding stuff with QS should not affect performance at all?
Not really. There is a little perf impact from reading out the framebuffer. But it should only have a very small impact.
I get approximately 5 FPS perf. hit with QuickSync and 3-4x more with the AMD encoder. You need to enable the IGP in the motherboard UEFI/BIOS, it's called "iGPU Multi-Monitor Support" or something similar and then install the Intel HD Graphics driver.
That doesn't seem too bad. I'll have to experiment though. I get a noticeable FPS hit even when using software encoding.
OP try the latest obs studio.. In my case AB has always been for some reason slower at recording(regardless of method used ) than other tools. tbh I've never had this kind of performance difference.. PS Do you record games at 30 or 60 fps?
