Elgato Turbo.264 HD: The Turbo Converter

by Phil Olin on November 16, 2009

Post image for Elgato Turbo.264 HD: The Turbo Converter

turbo264HDheader
The Elgato Turbo.264 HD is designed to do only one thing. But sometimes things designed that way are best. Sure, a Leatherman has a ton of functions, but have you ever tried to actually use one? They are awkward and hard to handle, not the best tool for the job. Fortunately, Elgato ain’t no Leatherman.

In the box you’ll find the Turbo.264 HD, a USB extension cable and the application disk, with the license key on the back of the sleeve. Install the software from the disk, and be sure to let it check for updates, I had one the first time I ran it. Plug in the Turbo.264 and you are ready to convert.

turbostart1

Just drag whatever media you want to convert to the Turbo screen. This can be anything from a movie clip, something from your camcorder, or even a DVD (as long as it is not encrypted). If you drag in a DVD that has multiple episodes or videos, the Turbo software will show each clip and you can select which ones you want, and if you want to make them into one long movie instead of individual clips. This will also work by dragging several movies to the Turbo software and telling it to create one long movie.

turboformatsOnce you select the media you want to convert, a pop-up menu appears on the right of the window letting you select the output. The default profiles will probably be fine for the majority of users, but you do have the option of setting a custom profile. I’ve been using the HD 720P profile for use with my media center since my HDTV is 720P. If the source media isn’t of 720P resolution, it will encode it at the source’s native resolution.

Surprisingly, the supplied app is pretty feature complete. If you accidentally record too much, or want to edit out part of a movie, you can do that too, all from within the Turbo app. Click the movie preview, and a larger size preview will be shown with a timeline along the bottom which you can use to edit the movie.

turborun1

Once the Turbo is done encoding your movie, you can have it automatically add it to iTunes or leave it in a specified folder if that is your choice. If you are encoding for YouTube, it asks for your YouTube login credentials and will automatically upload the movie when it is done.

Of course, the highlight of the Turbo.264 is that it’s not limited to just using the supplied application. The Turbo can be used to speed up encode tasks from QuickTime, iMovie, Final Cut Pro, EyeTV and any other application that support the QuickTime engine.

To the test

The Turbo.264 HD is fast. I was used to using Handbrake to encode media for my media center. Handbrake takes about 150 minutes to encode a 3 hour movie, while it took the Turbo to encode the same movie 80 minutes, with approximately the same settings. Encoding a short 2.5 minute clip for the iPhone takes the Turbo about 70 seconds, while it took over 140 seconds for Handbrake. When I first hooked up the Turbo, I expected my CPU usage to go down when using it over using Handbrake. CPU usage was still pretty high, but with the addition of the Turbo’s hardware, encoding was much faster. Just be warned, if viewing flash, the Turbo’s encoding speed takes a significant hit, and will go much slower.

Probably the biggest drawback of the Turbo.264 HD is that it only works apps which use the QuickTime engine. You can’t use it with apps like Handbrake or any other FFMpeg engine based encoder, even though it can output with the same codec.

The Turbo.264 HD requires an Intel Mac, 512MB of RAM, with Leopard on it, so any Mac of recent vintage can use it. Elgato’s Turbo.264 HD goes for $149.99, but you can find it for $129.95 from Amazon.

Reader Comments

Zahadum November 16, 2009 at 11:11 pm

@ phil Olin (reviser)

“feature complete”

FAIL!

No subtitles.

No aux audio tracks.

The Queue can’t be edited in realtime or saved.

multiple turbos can’t be used on independent encoding jobs.

Multiple turbos can’t be used in parallel.

No support for snow leopard key features … eg OPENCL (off-loading CPU tasks to gpu)

no workflow support for AppleScript/osax/Automator.

*** no two-pass encoding ===> much lower visual quality!!

Frequent problems with loss of audio sync in the output file!

loss of USB connectivity (the turbo runs at only 2fps!!!!!)

high consumption of CPU resources (which a co-processor is meant to obviate in the first place! … And which previous models did not do!)

BOTTOM LINE:

1) the turbo is doesn’t even get the basics right, let alone achieve ‘feature completeness’!

The turbo is a toy that is fine only for trivial use.

2) the reviewer is an incompetent moron who shouldn’t be allowed to publish again until he has learned journo 101 (ie stop regurgitating press releases!)

   

Zahadum November 17, 2009 at 12:00 am

oh, forgot to mention other audio shortcomings:

- audio files can’t be accepted an input source - which will be a disappointhent for people with a large iTunes library of mp3’s that they want to transcode to AAC.

- no control which audio track will be selected/designated as the master input source (eg mix-down from dss or 5 1 etc), and …

- no control over the output format for the mixdown.

   

BUD November 17, 2009 at 1:19 am

AND NO PONY!

I ASKED FOR A PONY!

   

Keith November 17, 2009 at 3:20 am

The thing I don’t like about it is, chapter stops are rarely accurate. Minor annoyance but enough. Also, file size tends to be larger than what Handbrake produces. However, it is blazingly fast and picture quality is very good.

   

Phil Olin November 17, 2009 at 5:37 am philolin.me

@Zahadum it’s feature complete for the average user, which is what the Turbo Software is designed for. It’s not really something a professional video editor would use, they’d probably use the hardware with FCP.

1. Subtitles - don’t use subtitles, so never tried to keep them with it.
2. I set my queue and double check it before I start encoding.
3. You can only run one copy of the software at a time, what makes you think you’ll be able to run multiple to encode more items?
4. Snow Leopard has only been out for a few months. Not every developer has added features to their software that complement SL’s features.
5. No, it doesn’t have 2-pass encoding, but on my 720P HDTV, it looked just as good as a copy of the movie encoded by Handbrake with 2-pass encoding.
6. Audio has been in sync with all the items I’ve encoded.
7. I didn’t have any issues with it losing connectivity. All my encodes were at 70+FPS, usually over 120FPS.
8. I agree here, CPU usage was still epically high.
9. Audio encodes? I’m sorry, I thought I was reviewing the Turbo.254 HD, for video, as a video encoder. I didn’t know I was also supposed to attempt to re-encode my iTunes library to see if a VIDEO encoder could re-encode my music.
10. My sources already had the audio track that I wanted to keep with them, so I didn’t attempt to try to select a different audio track

Bottom line: It handled everything I threw at it very well, other than the epic CPU usage. The movie files it output were good enough for me and my media center, which is what I’d be looking for if I were to purchase one.

   

Zathras November 17, 2009 at 11:57 pm

I think you really need to get inoculated against buzzwords and check your facts before you write nonsense like this:

Turbo does support AppleScript. The queue is locked during encodes, but I’m not surprised, considering you can merge several files, they probably do some preparation work. And last I checked, Handbrake didn’t let you enqueue anything while it’s encoding either. There’s probably a technical reason for that. I *can* edit it in real time though, why would I not be? I click add and it adds a file, that’s as real-time as it gets.

And you’re contradicting yourself: First you say it shouldn’t use so much CPU, then you ask for it to use OpenCL (which balances out stuff on the CPU and GPU). OpenCL is used for decoding if the codecs support it (but none on the Mac do, it seems). Since encoding happens on the frigging encoder chip, it would be *nonsense* to try and drag that out into the GPU or CPU again.

And I haven’t had sync issues. Maybe your files are damaged? VLC can play any garbage you give it, but most players don’t. So I’m not surprised if the Turbo has problems playing stuff you just grabbed from /dev/random.

   

Sagit November 26, 2009 at 5:32 pm applenosol.com

The hardware work well with Leopard, leaving free CPU ISe, but in Snow Leopard the 100% of CPU is used. :(

The soft that come woth Turbo HD is poor, yes, but Road Movie is competible with this Hadrware…

It was Better with Leopard, Elgato must review software and give more options.

   

Osprey December 31, 2009 at 9:13 pm

Zathras is correct. Elgato has serious audio out of sync problems with over 500 TS files I have converted todate. 100% failure rate. This is not due to malformed vdieo files as some has suggested. The same files can be converted with Handbrake without any sync problems & Handbrake is freeware.

Recently, through experimentation, I found that if I convert my TS files stored on a local harddisk instead of on my network’s RAID drive with Elgato Turbo HD, there are less audio sync problems. It appears that Elgator’s sync problem cannot deal with files stored on networked RAID drives. The same files stored on networked RAID drives can be converted with Handbrake without sync problems.

Elgato;s engineers do not take the sync problem seriously as they always assume that the problem is caused by mal formed video files. That is why they have not solve the problem so far.

   

Peter Norman January 24, 2010 at 5:03 am durancevile.net

I’m using a late 2007 aluminum iMac 2.4GHz, Snow Leopard, Turbo.264HD, 4 GB Memory

When encoding ripped DVDs to AppleTV or iPhone format, the Turbo.264HD produces files that are easily three times as big as those produced by Handbrake.

Handbrake encodes a 1 hour film into AppleTV/iPhone in about 2 hours. Turbo.264HD encodes a 1 hour film into AppleTV format in about 1 hour.

I see no difference in video quality between Handbrake and Turbo.264HD. Is this the price we pay for the quicker encoding?

   

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: