As far as I know, they don't have interlace detection filtering. You won't get better quality as the filters protect against quality loss to begin with. If you know your sources are defiantly progressive, you can just turn the 2 filters off and gain the speed back. We've decided that the performance hit is worth it as users then don't have to understand what this is. If you don't de-interlace a interlaced source, you'll get interlacing artefacts in the output which are nasty. If it does need de-interlaced then it's a moot point. If it doesn't need de-interlaced, it won't do anything. Interlace detection looks at your source and decides whether it needs de-interlaced or not. (That said that's with one sample file on one sample system but in general, given both apps use the same underlying encoder and likely same decoder, it should be within a pretty small gap) In my own testing HandBrake win's out but is more often than not within a margin of error or very slightly faster. Speeds in HandBrake vs xMedia, like of like on settings, should be very similar. ![]() Note, I don't believe xMedia has those same filters available so you'd probably have to switch to yadif on both sides to have equivalence. ![]() The "Fast 480p30" preset in HandBrake is essentially Quality RF 20, x264, fast preset, 3.1 with Interlace Detection and Decomb turned on and a hard cap of 480p resolution at 30fps Turn off Interlace detection and Decomb on the filters tab and you'll probably find any difference disappears all other settings equals. The reason HandBrake is likely running slower is that there are a 2 filters that are default on which won't be in xMedia.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |