Question / Help Do these numbers make sense for recording?

[Orisa]

I'm having this dilemma where it seems like older games (on the SNES / NES / Genesis classic, all HDMI 720p newer consoles) seem to be recording games at a far higher space amount then brand new Nintendo Switch titles. I don't really know if this is normal or not, but I did some tests and wanted to show you guys. This is with my brand new Elgato HD60 S with Windows 10 in OBS studio:

CBR 5000 kbps settings:

F-Zero (SNES Classic) = 185 MB per 5 MIN
Mega Man X (SNES Classic) = 197 MB per 5MIN
Animal Crossing: NH (Switch / new game) = 185 MB per 5MIN

CRF 23 settings:

F-Zero = 632 MB per 5 MIN
Mega Man X = 246 MB per 5 MIN
Animal Crossing: NH = 178 MB per 5 MIN

So if I want to use CRF at 23 with the same settings for everything, the SNES Classic is still taking double the amount or more space per 5 minutes then a brand new game like animal crossing. F-Zero would take almost 7.5 Gigs per hour for a super nintendo game, which is crazy.

 

[vapeahoy]

It's not realistic to demand that 1 set of encoding settings will fit all use cases. You would need an AI that's capable of understanding what it's asked to do, to put it a bit silly and blunt and a bit over excessive. If you really want to encode something specifically with a specific quality you need to understand the parameters and also the medium. The only crazy thing here is expecting old titles graphics will encode in similar fashion as new games with a much higher pixel and frame count, in addition to increased audio quality.

 

[Orisa]

Yeah that didn't answer why my brand new games like Animal Crossing And Breath of the Wild take up half as much space as a 25 year old game. You don't have to be rude about it either.

 

[vapeahoy]

If you think I was being rude you should probably consider a break from the internet. I can't believe you pm'd me over this.

I was simply being as sincere as i could. Im not going to tea spoon such a simple answear. The answear is in that you need to consider what settings, the parameters, you use - and for what game or rather what video feed you want to encode. It's a very time consuming process, and what looks best, encodes best will in many cases be entirely subjective. There is no single answear here.

If there was 1 optimal way to encode all video we'd all be using it.
You seem to not understand that while a 80's game that has low pixel count, little variation, it is still data, clean data, which the encoder will try and respect. How it quantifies pixels will vary greatly from setting to setting and from codec to codec. And so much more. People go to great lengths to get the absolute cleanest capture to be able to record and stream as the product is supposed to look.

 

[carlmmii]

Ignore him. There's a button for that.

The reason your older games take more space to keep the same quality is because to the encoder's algorithm, they're more complex -- they have sharper edges due to pixelization. The smoother an image, the easier it is to approximate the space using things like larger macroblocks and shaded areas. The more it has to chop up the area and preserve high detail (read: high contrast sharp lines, like pixels), the more space it has to allocate.

If you really want to keep the same recording space for your videos, then you should just use CBR, or even VBR to allow some variance... with the knowledge that those older titles won't compress as well due to how sharp pixels compress.

 

[vapeahoy]

Ignore him. There's a button for that.

The reason your older games take more space to keep the same quality is because to the encoder's algorithm, they're more complex -- they have sharper edges due to pixelization. The smoother an image, the easier it is to approximate the space using things like larger macroblocks and shaded areas. The more it has to chop up the area and preserve high detail (read: high contrast sharp lines, like pixels), the more space it has to allocate.

If you really want to keep the same recording space for your videos, then you should just use CBR, or even VBR to allow some variance... with the knowledge that those older titles won't compress as well due to how sharp pixels compress.

Exactly how do you think your answear is different then explaining that there are settings and parameters that make the difference, as you just repeat here in your reply? If you wanted to improve upon that you should just post exactly what he/she should use. Which you can't as you don't have the same gear and can't replicate the situation.

You could at least have pointed out that CBR 5000 is quite low bitrate used for streaming, and that CRF23 is quite high in comparison and used for things like simple dvd rips, if you wanted to make a meaningful remark - that would give some meaningful adaptive response with an analogy.
But just simply having an acid reflux response to the thread repeating the points is just showing off an ego trip.
-

Settings matter, greatly so.