[elheffe80]

What happens in the bedroom stays in the bedroom, and we don't kink shame here. :P

I would imagine some machine learning/development or video editing. Or playing dwarf fortress.

[capableweb]

If someone is doing ML or video editing and the software is not using the GPU for most parts of the workflow, I'd like to invite that person to 2022.

Now Dwarf Fortress, that's another beast with no cure...

[KronisLV]

> If someone is doing ML or video editing and the software is not using the GPU for most parts of the workflow, I'd like to invite that person to 2022.

That sounds like a pretty strong statement, so I decided to try it out on some hardware from the last 5 years (an AMD GPU with VCE 3.0 and a 6/12 core/thread AMD CPU), in particular, encoding the same video: 1080p, 30fps with similar quality settings.

Here are the results for various encoders (using ffmpeg, through Handbrake and/or Kdenlive):

  How File         Size   Time
  CPU h264         105 MB 03:15
  GPU h264_amd_vce 198 MB 03:22
  CPU h265          99 MB 07:44
  GPU h265_amd_vce 361 MB 04:36
  CPU mpeg4        102 MB 02:07
  CPU mpeg2         72 MB 02:04
  CPU vp8           55 MB 06:13 (low CPU usage, <50%)

Seems like the quality settings don't actually mean much across different encoders, so these results aren't that conclusive in regards to comparing the codecs against one another, however one can surmise out that GPU isn't an order of magnitude ahead of CPU in regards to video encoding, at least on mid tier consumer grade hardware.

That probably changes on more specialized or recent hardware (something newer than VCE 3.0), or things like the aforementioned ML.