Question To K or to KF: do I *really* need Quick Sync?

[consptheory77]

So, the time is coming upon for me to secure a CPU for my new build, and the nearly final pre-build question remains: to K or to KF?

I know, it's useful to have the iGPU as a back up, but I do have a spare GPU. Other than that, there is Quick Sync.

Why creators NEED an iGPU alongside their dGPU

But I'm not planning to edit RAW files, use Adobe Premiere, or stream on Twitch. I may want to reencode some media files for Plex server, or to grab a film clip with Microsoft Video Editor. Does having Quick Sync pose any advantage that merits the price difference?

As far as I can tell, the GPU encoding is faster than the CPU but less quality at the same file size. And in any case, Quick Sync is the CPU and the GPU holding hands to expedite the encode, right?

x264 > QSV > NVEnc > VCE?

GPU or CPU encoding?

"there are no comprehensive quality tests of Intel's Quick Sync nor AMD's AMF encoders. There was some anecdotal evidence of relatively poor quality from users on various forums, but a closer inspection of the complaints shows that they barely knew how to use the encoders in question and were using sources of questionable value, i.e. already previously heavily compressed sources they had downloaded from some torrent site.

The only comprehensive test involving Intel's Quick Sync was done by MSU when they used a Sky Lake based system and in that test Intel's QS HEVC encoder beat out both x265 and x264. There was some questions surrounding those tests, such as whether the $5000 QS software used produced superior quality compared to open source solutions based on FFMPEG."

"H264 is say motorcycles and x264 is Honda. H265 can be cars and x265 is F1-McLaren, and Nvenc Hevc is like Jeep."

 

[Lutfij]

I know, it's useful to have the iGPU as a back up, but I do have a spare GPU. Other than that, there is Quick Sync.
There are instances when a discrete GPU might not even work due to a faulty PCIe slot, it's happened to others in the past. I'd simply keep the iGPU on grounds of troubleshooting.

My 2 cents.

 

[TerryLaze]

As far as I can tell, the GPU encoding is faster than the CPU but less quality at the same file size. And in any case, Quick Sync is the CPU and the GPU holding hands to expedite the encode, right?

Only if this same file size is extremely small.
If you give it enough bandwidth it will have perfect picture.
I mean if you watch a bluray with hardware acceleration then that's basically it, it just writes the results to the display instead of to a file.

And no, QS is 100% GPU only, if you get high CPU usage with it then that's a bug.

There was some questions surrounding those tests, such as whether the $5000 QS software used produced superior quality compared to open source solutions based on FFMPEG."

QS is hardware you can't change the way it works no matter how much the software costs. It might have better default settings but anything that is configurable can be configured with any program.

 

[consptheory77]

This man here is persuasively insistent that the extra $20 is worth it, for maximizing the potential of your GPU

UHD770 vs NVENC - Why you still NEED an iGPU even with RTX 3090

 

[kerberos_20]

there is also posibility that your mainboard firmware wont be compatible with your GPU firmware, which would give you black screen in bios/POST
which isnt issue if PC can boot blind...but igpu in this case can help when you want to change bios settings

 

[Avro Arrow]

This is a toughie...

Question #1: Do you do a lot of video encoding?
If no: Get the KF.
If yes: See Question #2.
Question #2: Do you already use your GPU for encoding?
If yes: Get the KF.
If no: Get the K

Sure, an IGP can be useful, like some have said, but the odds of you ever being in a situation where you are reduced to only being able to use an IGP are so small as to be irrelevant. I've been building PCs since 1988 (35 years come June) and I have never encountered a situation where I needed an IGP. In fact, none of my builds have ever had an IGP because I have always used video cards. I've built so many PCs that it's hard for me to remember them all but I can list you the CPUs that I remember using:

1. Intel 80286-16
2. Intel 80486DX2-66
3. Intel Pentium-2 (don't remember which one)
4. Intel Pentium-4 (don't remember which one)
5. Intel Core2Duo E6320
6. AMD Phenom II X4 940
7. AMD Phenom II X4 965
8. AMD FX-8350
9. AMD Ryzen 7 1700
10. AMD Ryzen 5 3600X
11. AMD Ryzen 7 5700X
12. AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D

The one time that I had a problem with a card was pretty recent, with my RX 5700 XT. I ended up having to ship it back to XFX for an RMA but all I had to do was pop my backup card (a Sapphire R9 Fury Nitro) into my motherboard and go. I didn't even have to change the driver package.

Is it worth an extra $20? That's a question that only you can answer because the answer is different for everyone. For me, the answer would be "No", but that's just me. If the extra $20 is no big deal to you and have a real use for it or you would gain peace of mind from having it, then the answer for you would be "yes".