This affects everyone who uses Steam Streaming (or Parsec) too, I don't know why reviewers don't test it regularly. Its a no-go for me then, the current H.264 encoder on AMD hardware is beyond terrible.
If you don't have or want to use the CPU grunt for that, Intel Quick Sync isn't bad and a good pair with a Radeon like the 6000 series. If you want hardware encoding, Intel CPU + AMD GPU is a great pair, as is AMD CPU + Nvidia GPU. Otherwise anything works well with sufficient core count, can go AMD/Intel CPU + AMD GPU.
But yeah, my next PC will prob. have the power to software-encode. Are you sure about the lower latency though?
I just dug up one of my sources for you, you'll enjoy this.[0] It may no longer be accurate but it's at least suggestive. They all have similar latency, but you'll see the in the longest delay results (my eyeballs always focus on worst-case), has the software encoder on top. I'm currently considering a 5800X (higher sustained boost clocks due to heat/VRMs) or 5900X (lower sustained boost but more cores for potentially better streaming) to upgrade my system.
Given an 8+ core system can encode so well, I'm fine with either a 6800XT or 6080. I really don't have enough information yet. For years I used to buy based on NV's OpenGL support (and after NV's Vista driver blunders, AMD), but since the Oculus Quest was released, my primary deciding factor is VR performance. NV has held the edge there historically, but 16GB VRAM for the same price is not to be dismissed outright. If NV will match AMD's 16GB at a similar MSRP I'd go that route, the GDDR6X would cut into their margins pretty good though so I'm not holding my breath. I find AMD's Infinity Cache approach so interesting that I'm leaning towards rewarding their innovation. It works so well while cutting costs means that their approach is probably the future for all GPUs.
Anyway, with this evidence you hopefully now have more hardware to choose from for your upgrade. I had a great luck with Nvidia for a long time (currently using Pascal), but zero good reason to be entirely at Nvidia's mercy these days. Radeons got a big bump in quality since AMD bought ATI and it'll continue to get better.
I'm probably sticking to the combo you're looking at, AMD+NV. I generally prefer Intel for overall QA reasons, and I can attest that Ryzen was buggy up until today, but I still can't imagine going with an Intel system right now. My Ryzen 1800X, 1700, and 2700X systems were stable but I wouldn't call them plug and play.
I'm making my changes in January so supply should no longer be a problem. You might find it's worth waiting it out till then too, Nvidia may have a response to the 6800 series by then too. Rumor was they were increasing VRAM but cancelled the cards.
[0]https://linustechtips.com/topic/1137619-motherboard-vrm-tier...
I have also tried all the options and there is no comparison. It's a night and day difference between software encoding and nvenc. It was more than triple the latency last I tested.
I tested steam, parsec and also the best software available today for game streaming, Gamestream + Moonlight or Gamestream on the Shield TV.
Anybody would notice the difference in quality and input lag between QuickSync, libx264 and NVEnc. The difference really is very large in higher resolutions (talking about 1440p and 4k in 60/144fps).
Well, you'd be wrong.[0] If you can provide timestamps or any sort of reference to backup your claim, as I have, that would help everyone. I'm not sure why you'd even respond if you're not going to bring any measurements or data.
>Also those results are old.
Yes, I was the first to point that out when I said they were from a few years ago, but still suggestive. The conclusion stands unless you have put together something as comprehensive for our review. I'd be happy to take a look at it since it sounds like you challenge the results. A comment on the internet is not good enough though to do that.
If you have all the hardware to test software vs QuickSync vs NVENC, put a video out there. Many would be very interested, but credibility matters and I fully trust Chris from Battle(non)sense on latency and IQ benchmarks as I've been watching his content and methods for years. Sweeping statements with no citations aren't enough to erase data. Not knowing the first thing about you, your competency or setup, my initial bet is that there's something wrong with your setup to possibly get worse results using software over NVENC. As I have also personally compared them, and my conclusions align with my Youtube source.