Question / Help Which CPU from these 2? Building new computer for streaming.

Jack0r

Jack0r

The Helping Squad
A quadcore with hyper-threading will generally give you a bit more room to work with than a quadcore without. BUT, core clocks can also be important, which depends on what your software/games use. (Single clock performance on CPU boss shows the i5 ahead).
Personally I would probably recommend the xeon but maybe just invest the few more bucks for one with an IGPU to get quicksync.
 
R

rangerrambo

Member
Thanks Jack0r for the reply.

Ya I was thinking on how to preserve the budget and see what I really need and what not.

As far as IGPU while I did some research and it is nice if you are recording locally at high bitrates, it seems the quality is not that great at lower bitrates, 2500-3500 kbit.

Also since I am planning to buy a Nvidia card in the very near future I would get the same feature from NVENC/Nvidia Shadowplay right?

I was thinking as following:

- if the game is taxing on the CPU, i ll use NVENC
- if the game is taxing on the GPU. I ll use just normal x264

Am I missing something or is IGPU not really that big of a deal?
 
G

GodlessGeek

New Member
rangerrambo said:
As far as IGPU while I did some research and it is nice if you are recording locally at high bitrates, it seems the quality is not that great at lower bitrates, 2500-3500 kbit.
Click to expand...
That has been my experience as well. It's great for recording but I tend to stick with x264 when streaming.

rangerrambo said:
Also since I am planning to buy a Nvidia card in the very near future I would get the same feature from NVENC/Nvidia Shadowplay right?
Click to expand...
In my experience, Shadowplay is kind of like Quick Sync - okay for recording but not necessarily streaming. Also, a couple things to be aware of:

Shadowplay doesn't allow you to configure a scene. No adding images, text, etc. What is on your screen is what you get.

There is no volume control for your microphone in Shadowplay. For audio capture, it's either "in-game & mic" or just "in-game". No volume controls. The only way I know of to control your mic volume would be through your Windows audio settings, which affects your whole system.
 
R

rangerrambo

Member
Thanks for info GodlessGeek!

The amount of information overload that one has to go through when upgrading :D.

So I have been looking at Jack0r posts and with quicksync I guess one has to consider which chip we are talking about. Some people are now praising the current HD4600 chip.

On the other hand, since the 97 boards will be broadwell supported, preliminary, I am also thinking that worrying about this is not that important as one will be able just get the a better broadwell chip in the future with most likely a better HD chip on it - maybe the 5200 which has been praised.

Information overload...
 
Last edited:
R

rangerrambo

Member
That is great Jack0r thanks a lot! I watched the mp4 for these, but side by side comparison is even better.

Is it me or does X264 seem a bit choppy in this and the QuickSync seems smoother: http://youtu.be/PK6IVEfJLqk?t=5m21s
also visible at http://youtu.be/PK6IVEfJLqk?t=7m21s

In the second video it is fine for a bit and then it start chopping at http://youtu.be/vfM4esnQz7E?t=7m48s

With that seen, now I am leaning again towards Quick Sync. I dont need a 2nd monitor to run Quick Sync right?
Also this is on the HD4800?
 
Jack0r

Jack0r

The Helping Squad
Oh that might have been vegas, or my PC. The smoothness will be the same if you configure them all correctly. But the videos show the slight quality differences. And yea, quicksync is pretty good isnt it? :D
I used a haswell gen i7 4770, that should be HD4600. You never "need" a 2nd monitor, but older generations needed a fake monitor connected. That is no more needed in most cases now.
 
R

rangerrambo

Member
Man o man, all the guys at linustechtips said i5. I was leaning towards the Xeon, but now I am leaning back towards the I5, if nothing else it is cheaper.
 
A

alpinlol

Active Member
rangerrambo said:
Man o man, all the guys at linustechtips said i5. I was leaning towards the Xeon, but now I am leaning back towards the I5, if nothing else it is cheaper.
Click to expand...

if you want a gaming machine which is able to stream you simply dont buy an i5 if you are on a hard budget you got with an fx 8120 (probably will still cause problems)
or you go with an intel xeon e3 1230v3 which is in theory the same as an i7 4770 but at a much lower price and without the igpu

going with an dedicated gpu is in most cases better anyway a gtx 750 or r7 260x will do the job for ~100$


but i5 compared to xeon e3 when it comes to encoding you want to buy the xeon
 
R

rangerrambo

Member
alpinlol said:
going with an dedicated gpu is in most cases better anyway a gtx 750 or r7 260x will do the job for ~100$


but i5 compared to xeon e3 when it comes to encoding you want to buy the xeon
Click to expand...

So Xeon then again? :D

Just to make clear I am not going to use the HD4600 for gaming. I am going to be using a geforce 460 for a bit and then most likely upgrade to a new nvidia, whether that will be a 7xx or 8xx series we will see.

All I need to figure out, how much Quick Sync is useful, is being used and whether i want to have it.
 
A

alpinlol

Active Member
qsv is not useful at all except if you already bought and weak cpu and are forced to stream with it for everything else when it comes to streaming its of no real use except if you would want to use sone sony vegas to encode on it or whatever but for streaming is only of use if you are running a really weak system
 
R

rangerrambo

Member
I just thought of something. With all the discussion going around on how 2000kbit is the sweetspot for non partnered streamers on Twitch, and me really only wanting 1080p so that I can save that to the disk at the same time for youtube editing...

Wouldn't it be a possibility just to stream at 720p

and have QuickSync record at a higher bitrate (lets say 5k+) at native resolution for editing?

Does anyone use a solution like this?
 
FerretBomb

FerretBomb

Active Member
Yes, that's pretty common. You just run two copies of OBS with the -multi switch. Have two Profiles, one set for streaming and one for local recording. Use hotkeys for scene-switches. Record local at high rate with QSV, and broadcast with x264 at a lower rate/res.

Yeah, 1080p isn't really feasible for a smaller/growing channel. Until you're Partnered, the needed bitrate simply isn't going to let your stream be watched by too many people as you won't have transcoding available. Even post-Partner, the i5 isn't going to have the oomph to swing 1080@30 and game at the same time.
 
R

rangerrambo

Member
How is running two copies as far as performance hit?

I was trying to look for this on the forums, but I haven't seen any post about it.
 
Jack0r

Jack0r

The Helping Squad
The performance hit by OBS using QuickSync and capturing something should be very low. In my last test with BF4 I could run two streaming instances of OBS doing x264 encoding at 720p and run a third using quicksync for the local recording.
That is on an i7 4770.

Oh and about linus techtips (or his ncix videos). I like the videos in general, but the last few they made about streaming were really horrible :/ They are not used to setting up streams everyday, so thats fine, but they give tips like it would be the ultimate solution that are just wrong.
 
FerretBomb

FerretBomb

Active Member
About the same. QSV incurs a very low hit to begin with, which is why it's used for the local recording side.

Shouldn't be too hard to try it out though, so long as you remember to create the Profile first, THEN change the settings. You don't change the settings then save them to a new Profile (as in many other programs).

So make sure your current settings are saved to a profile called Default (or Livestream, or whatever), then Add a new profile from the settings menu, then change all the settings to local-recording values; QSV, 30K bitrate, switch to local-recording only and set a save file location).

It isn't seamless, but it's still pretty good, if you NEED to have high quality local recordings for later editing and upload. Know one guy who records the stream at broadcast quality, and saves a HQ version of only the most recent cast to cut out highlights and send to YouTube in full-res with much better non-realtime encoding.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top