Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Audio and Video Talk
General Discussion
WAV vs FLAC Study
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support AVForums:
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="PaganMcLoud" data-source="post: 700562" data-attributes="member: 17169"><p>Flac playback, much like any other lossless codec will put significant strain on ANY CPU that isn't modern IF... the audio is either multi-channel, hi-res or both. The strain here can actually be more CPU-intensive than encoding 1080p videos. This is because unlike the delays of video transcoding, constant high audio bitrates are processed in real-time and during playback. </p><p></p><p>*FLAC is not CPU-intensive... but Hi-res (in any format) IS!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="PaganMcLoud, post: 700562, member: 17169"] Flac playback, much like any other lossless codec will put significant strain on ANY CPU that isn't modern IF... the audio is either multi-channel, hi-res or both. The strain here can actually be more CPU-intensive than encoding 1080p videos. This is because unlike the delays of video transcoding, constant high audio bitrates are processed in real-time and during playback. *FLAC is not CPU-intensive... but Hi-res (in any format) IS! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Audio and Video Talk
General Discussion
WAV vs FLAC Study
Top
