Originally Posted by lightsout
Ha for sure man, yeah xvid those were the days, I myself then primarily downloaded.
I don't plan to do a lot of x264 so the 1700 should fit the bill. Since I recently started messing with NVENC and encoding h264 with an Nvidia card. Sure the quality but not be right at x264 but man the speed makes up for it. I love it, especially for stuff like TV shows which the quality can be close enough and still be fine (for me).
Yes, if you aren't perfectionist, the GPU is quick. The 1700 would be an encoding monster, but if you prefer the NVENC, not much to gain there. I was torn between 2600 and 1700 too. 1 year ago, when i was still encoding a lot, i would have picked the 1700. But nowdays, i preferred the 2600, for the higher stock clock (i don't want to overclock), the better memory compatibility and the improved turbo. Even during full stress test, like Prime95, it still tries to boost. And, frankly, without x264, for me, even the 2600 is now overkill. The only time i 've seen high CPU usage, was while trying to compress a folder that was several gigabytes. And even that wasn't 100% load. Most of the time, the task manager shows half of the threads are parked...
Xvid was the age of the pioneers. A great codec. A great "school" to learn about video. And a great pain in the early days when speed was slow. Same as x264 really... Boy, i remember trying to encode a full film and needing a full day... Heroic times!