CUDA - Video Encoder. - BadaBOOM

Status
Not open for further replies.

zedman3d

Fully Optimized
Messages
2,850
17074.png


Those numbers are compared to an Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770, the fastest quad-core CPU available today. In the worst case scenario, the GTX 280 is around 40% faster than encoding on Intel's fastest CPU alone.

RapiHD and thus BadaBOOM are both CUDA applications, meaning they are written in C and compiled to run on NVIDIA's GPUs. They won't work without a CUDA-enabled GPU (GeForce 8xxx, 9xxx or GTX 280/260) and they won't work on AMD/ATI hardware.

AnandTech: More Details on Elemental's GPU Accelerated H.264 Encoder
 
I saw something like this on Youtube a while back, well good scores :)

For some reason this also got my attention, and it makes me confused but it is related here...
Nvidia Supports ATI Radeon PhysX Efforts - Tom's Hardware

Just reading that, its funny because ive always wanted an ATI card for my new build, then i saw the encoding on Nvidia cards and then i said, wow, Nvidia's for me. BUT now that there going to be on ATI cards as well, its back to ATI.

Im guessing its gonna go back and forth quite a few times between now and my Christmas rig.
 
I've always told people that hardware encoders are better then cpu ones. I use the canopus, osprey quartet gl and opticast. gpu is kinda the same technology.


so do my graphic card have to be one of those list or just any nvidia that has 256 mb ram or more? can I use just one instead if 2. this is a lot cheaper than a real hardware encoder


a comparison of hardware and software encoding

http://www.digital-rapids.com/Products_DemoRoom.html
http://www.enseo.com/PDFs/QuartetGLi.pdf
 
Guys...please check the dates on threads!!

I dont wanna hand out infractions.....remember 3 months is the time limit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom