[tential]

Yes, but also considerably reduced quality compared to x264 on even fairly low settings. I tried using QuickSync for my Blu-Ray encodes and not only was the quality poor but the file size was large. I'd rather spend 8 hours encoding using x264 CRF 20 than 1.5 hours using QuickSync.

This is very true. QuickSync has shown reduced quality. I wouldn't say considerably, but I also need glasses. Up to the user to tell.

I don't need glasses, my brother does. The difference was readily apparent to both myself and my brother (my brother was doing a blind test, I wasn't). The biggest complaint we had was that the colours felt slightly washed out and the entire image was blurry - his comment was that it felt more like a high-quality upscale from DVD than an encode from Blu-Ray.

This was using the highest-quality settings for QuickSync that Handbrake would let me use vs my normal CRF 20 x264 encode.

Ya, after reading the anandtech review on this, and seeing the QuickSync stuff, I decided I wouldn't use it. I am curious though as to whether x265 encodes will see speed increases on Haswell, or whether we'll need intel to release a whole new much faster CPU to handle encodes.

From Intel's recent releases CPU wise, (Sandybridge to Ivybridge to Haswell), It seems like they are interested in only the mobile platform, and desktop is an afterthought. It doesn't feel like we'll be getting quick x265 encodes soon, but who knows what intel has up their sleeves.