T O P

H265 for me or not?

H265 for me or not?

Gareth321

* I think 10x 1080p x265 streams will be fine with that CPU. * I really don’t think you should re-encode. X264 -> x265 is lossy. Just reacquire the content in your chosen codec. * I think you should consider getting 4K HDR movies when you reacquire. X265 shines with HDR content, and you’ll find excellent quality 4K movies for 12GB. * If you go 4K x265, your CPU won’t be able to handle 10x streams simultaneously.


ggfools

with HW encoding (quicksync) the CPU will definitely handle 10 transcodes, probably even 20... he said he has no 4K (and transcoding 4K is kinda silly anyway better to just store a 4K and 1080p copy)


seek102287

That's what I started doing. Any movie I really want in 4k, I'll just also get a 1080 x265 copy. They're like 2gb or less. If I'm getting a 4k copy, what's a few more gigs


speelgoedauto2

Thanks for your information, however I don’t need 4K content, I’m pretty happy with some 264x files. What you’re saying is, leave my library for now what it is, and everything new, start directly with .265?


Gareth321

Yes. You'll save space but at the expense of content quality. In future, begin transitioning to x265 as you acquire new content.


speelgoedauto2

How do I know that the content I’m getting in is “originale” x265 instead of an encode of an encode etc.. Any tips how I can find out?


Gareth321

I'll message you.


neruve

Why a message. It seems many people myself included would like to know this. You should post it publicly to help anyone that reads this in the future.


merger3

The answer is involves a fairly deep explanation of pirate groups and sources which is probably not allowed on the sub. There might be some tricks with mediainfo to find it out but a lot of x265 piracy groups provide details about their encodes and that’s what I would use to find out


neruve

Ahhh. I see what your saying now. I knew about that. Although it’s hard to automate that unless you know all things are like that.


merger3

Yeah unfortunately there’s a lot of x265 content out there that’s encoded with poor or overaggressive settings or is an encode of an already heavily encoded video which results in a lot lower quality. There are groups that release x265 content with good, consistent, settings and use high quality sources though, and there are some tags you can use that increase the likelihood of it being a “good” encode even if you don’t know the group.


deepfriedpandas

Can you message me too? Also curious.


foster1984

Could you message me the guide too please? 😁 As I am in the process of reacquiring parts of my library in x265


DrMoneroStrange

Me as well!


FirzenYogesh

could you message me too, curious to know this


thesnyper

If by Chromecast you mean GoogleTV, hold off until plex/google fix their sh!t.


Puptentjoe

Am I missing something? I have chromecast and googletv and use x265 with no problem.


thesnyper

Yes, probably. If you allow a hevc video to finish and autoplay the next in a series, the video will be stretched and the entire unit will crash and reboot if you attempt to do anything. This only started happening in version 8.16 of plex. If you haven't upgraded to that version or later then you won't see the problem. It has been ongoing for a very long time now and is described in detail here ... https://forums.plex.tv/t/plex-restarts-new-google-tv-chromecast/711966/209


Puptentjoe

I have not updated! Good to know!


peaceablefrood

I transcode all my Blu-rays to x265 to save space, but I'm doing it on very slow with some other tweaks to try to preserve as much quality as possible (can take anywhere from 12 to 40 hours using a 5900x). They look fine to me sitting 7 or 8 feet back from the TV. That said, I'm using HEVC because I know the clients I have can direct play it. If they don't, then Plex will transcode it back to x264 and if set to original quality the amount of bandwidth used could be 4x as much as the x265 file, since Plex attempts to match the quality. I also block any HEVC files being played remotely through a web browser using Tautulli/killstream since none of them support direct play with x265 for that reason. Edit: Here's an example what happens to a client that doesn't support x265 but has original quality set - [https://imgur.com/BpqbRti](https://imgur.com/BpqbRti)


ZivH08ioBbXQ2PGI

I think that aquiring/ripping directly to x265 is thought to be just fine if you're OK with the extra CPU time. This is more about converting existing content, in which case you'll save space, but lose quality since it's a lossy conversion.


t3as

I can't say anything to the capability of your CPU. But wether you should reencode or not: Don't * Encoding lossy (x264) to more lossy (x265) is a bad idea. If you really want to have a x265 library: reencode x265 from the lossless source or get it from someone who encoded it in x265 directly * Since you have a wide range of different clients (and possibly some with older hardware) you're usually better off keeping the x264 files ... especially since you have no interest in 4K and/or HDR content. * Only reencode from source or reaquire in x265 if you run out of space on your server.


speelgoedauto2

Thanks mate! Appreciate your opinion


tangsgod

For sure your server can handle 10 and even more x265 transcode, even though you'll certainly not have 10 at the same time. Turning x264 to x265 will make you gain space without loosing so much quality. I'm in the same place as you are and my choice is to leave my movies as they are and to turn tv show from x264to x265.


speelgoedauto2

Maybe I will do this yes, I always rip Blu-ray’s TV shows and they are eating my GB like it’s nothing. Some good tv shows are easy +100Gb


tangsgod

Yes, they are taking a lot of space ! I care (a bit) less about the tv show quality so they are going to be the first to suffer the x265 transformation :)


Puptentjoe

I have two servers, one i5 8th gen and one i7 8th gen. Both handle x265 like a champ. Personally though I'd find some groups who do great rips and re-download stuff if you have the bandwidth and are about that life. Way quicker and you can do things like get the good quality rips for good quality stuff and silly small rips like megusta for stuff you don't mind being compressed a bit. But if you are going to convert on your own look into Tdarr if you haven't already.


turlian

Just my $.02, but I've had nothing but troubles with clients playing 265 content from my server. 264 just works better, and storage is cheap. Totally admit that if I had a more powerful server it would likely not be an issue.


bfodder

I'm waiting for Plex to support transcoding **TO** h.265 before I start encoding everything that way. As it is now, even if the client supports h.265, if the file is transcoded for some other reason (bandwidth perhaps), then the resulting format is always h.264.


NipsofRad

Don't hold your breath. H265 is exponentially more complex and difficult to encode. Somewhere in the region of 10x more CPU/GPU is required for real time encoding. I doubt Plex want to deal with the headache of thousands of people creating tickets saying "H265 transcoding doesn't work!" The proportion of people who have the hardware capable of H265 encoding will be fairly low so I doubt there's much point in them to doing it anytime soon.


bfodder

I mean, if they were to add support for it then the server being able to hardware transcode h.265 would obviously be a prerequisite.


NipsofRad

It would be awesome! But I doubt Plex fancy the headache of getting it working right now when so few of their users could take advantage of it. If and when they do it I imagine there'll be a splash screen or something which says "go here and check your CPU/GPU passmark. If it's lower than this number you can't do HEVC, and don't come crying to us".


Proud_Purchase_8394

I've converted some shows to 265, but only once they're done airing. That way I can do the entire show in one go, instead of doing a couple seasons then hoping I remember which seasons I've done later on. I see mention here of losing quality, but I've played the 264 and 265 versions side by side on my PC monitor right in front of my face and couldn't tell a difference, so whatever quality is lost is fine by me to save as much space as it does (up to 90% sometimes!). Especially when most of my content is consumed via mobile devices or on TVs that are a decent distance away. ​ That said, I wouldn't do it via CUDA. I've been doing mine with my 5950x. It takes forever, but the file size is smaller, and I definitely could tell a quality difference when doing it with a 3080.


Bonanzareddit

No, your i5 wont handle 10 h265 transcodes. I would be surprised if it could handle 10 h264 transcodes. Just remember that everytime you convert media you do lose quality.


Puptentjoe

Wrong. 10 series i5 can handle 10 with no sweat. My 8th gen has easily done 13 at once. If you have Plexpass the HW acceleration is even better.


speelgoedauto2

If can handle 10 streams without a sweat. Not everything needs to be transcode tho (right now) Let say 6/4 is direct play. But based on your expirerencs you say don’t do it?


Electric_Jeebus99

OP, don't listen to this advice. Claiming that an i5-10400 won't handle 10 x265 streams is patently wrong. I have an i3-10100 in my Plex server and I can transcode 20+ simultaneous streams without breaking a sweat. Your CPU will eat x265 streams. Here's a screncap showing me playing 6x 1080p x265 streams in VLC with hardware transcoding enabled. \[Imgur\]([https://imgur.com/iGDdRC8](https://imgur.com/iGDdRC8)) The important things to note are that my CPU is hovering between 2-3% utilization, my CPU and iGPU temps are 35°C (95°F) and the maximum CPU usage (59%) you can see in the Maximum column of HWINFO64 was during a previous run with the same files with hardware transcoding disabled. Yes there is a small degredation in quality with QuickSync, but it's negligable. It's hard to show you an example as a still image doesn't tell the story and anything I upload to YouTube will be impacted by compression artefacts anyway. Unless you're streaming big REMUXed 4K files to technophiles with good TVs, nobody will know the difference. I was nervous before I pulled the trigger on a low end Intel CPU instead of a beefy Ryzen. But if you have a Plex Pass, switch on hardware transcoding, then sit back and relax. Why don't you test it in VLC like I did? Edit: just realised I said I was playing 2 streams when in fact it was 6.


kelvin_bot

35°C is equivalent to 95°F, which is 308K. --- ^(I'm a bot that converts temperature between two units humans can understand, then convert it to Kelvin for bots and physicists to understand)


Electric_Jeebus99

Good bot


speelgoedauto2

Thank you so much for details information. I tried it myself yes but I always think that real life practicing is better. Because I’m testing it on a chrome web app, but my other clients are using chromecast or tizen or whatever. And they have not the 1000 Mbps like I have. Should I convert with tdarr or handbreak? Ofcourse with the lowest quality losses.. Like some one else mentioned, maybe I will start with tv shows instead of movies.


Electric_Jeebus99

Great to hear you tried it. You probably realised it, but my screencap shows me playing 6 files simultaneously, not 2. PMS allows you to set a limit for the maximum quality you're streaming to your clients (E.g 1080p @ 4 Mbps). Clients can also set a quality profile on their end. Assuming that you downloaded your files and didn't rip them, t's probably easier to just re-download them. Especially with a 1000 Mbps connection. Do you have Radart/Sonarr setup?


Bonanzareddit

Your i3 will not will not do 20 transcodes all by its self. You would need hardware transcoding to assist.


Bonanzareddit

Covering to x265 is a waste of quality and electricity. In my opinion, 1080p content should be x264 and 4k should be x265.


ShimReturns

In my opinion no. It's not worth it to deal with incompatible client issues and quirks if you already have it encoded in 264.