W A R N I N G !

W A R N I N G !

This page is full of non-facts and bullsh!t, (just like the internet and especially forums and other blogs), please do not believe entirely without exercising your intellect. Any resemblance to real things in reality is purely coincidental. You are free to interpret/misinterpret the content however you like, most likely for entertainment, but in no case is the text written on this blog the absolute truth. The blog owner and Blogger are not responsible for any misunderstanding of ASCII characters as facts. *cough* As I was saying, you are free to interpret however you like. *cough*

Sunday, January 15, 2012

TMPGEnc Video Mastering Works 5

Ok, so I don't know when to call it a review and when to call it a quick look, so screw the concept, everything will be called reviews regardless of how good or rubbish they are. So I've joined the masses of creators of bad reviews.

Continuing from the previous review, I have decided to make x264 (but not Mediacoder!) the winner instead of MainConcept encoder used in TMPGEnc XPress.

Because I just tried out the new (ok... almost one-year-old) TMPGEnc Video Mastering Works 5. Despite the first impression that the webpage gives, it is really a very good program that is improved over TMPGEnc 4 Xpress.

Tha main thing of concern here is the removal of MainConcept H.264 encoder and replacing it with x264 (yes x264), CUDA encoder and Intel Media SDK (I presume is Quick Sync).

Screenshots - Mediacoder vs TMPGEnc 4.0 Xpress vs TMPGEnc Video Mastering Works 5

So when I tested it, I got a few seconds longer than 100 seconds. The sharpening is also there, confirming that it is applied by TMPGEnc (and not MainConcept encoder). But picture quality has noticeably improved over TMPGEnc 4's encode, making TMPGEnc Video Mastering Works 5 the clear winner in terms of image quality. Speed is a bit of an issue though. Consider this - when the encoding speed is supposedly limited by the decoding speed, TVMW5 took around 50% more time to encode compared to T4X. If we are dealing with HD encodes, the differences may get very big.

Funny thing is, TMPGEnc has always been slower than generic x264 encoders, but when TMPGEnc switched to x264 it got even slower. So the slowdown may not be due to the encoder but something else, like a lot of post-processing. Oh well, it works, so I'm not complaining.

CUDA encoder, speed is a few seconds shorter than 100 seconds. However the output video is unusably glitched and trashy.

No comments: