Whats the best H.264 encoder to date ?

[Hell255]

Hello,
1. i really want to start encoding my vids with AVC encoder. Which encoder is the best one? Is Ateme still the best encoder or did x264 take the lead?

2. Where can i get Ateme or is it still not public and which x264 build would you recommend ?

thank you for your time,
mika

[foxyshadis]

Neuron's going to get after you about that "best". xD Check http://www.doom9.org/codecs-final-105-1.htm for doom9's results. But you still can't get ahold of Ateme's.

With x264 "best" is always the latest version, with or without the AQ patch. See x264.nl.

[Hell255]

thank you very much. :-) I've read the doom9 codec comparison and just wondered if x264 had reached or even surpassed atemes encoding quality.
-mika-

[Manao]

Ateme's is available through Nero Recode, though at the present time, the version used in Nero is an old one ( the main profile one that won the shootout the year before ). x264 is better than that version, and still has a slight edge against the version tested by doom9 in the last shootout.

[neuron2]

Whats the best H.264 encoder to date ? Please read and follow forum rules, specifically, rule 12: do not ask what's best. Thank you.

http://forum.doom9.org/forum-rules.htm

[fight2win]

Ateme's is available through Nero Recode, though at the present time, the version used in Nero is an old one ( the main profile one that won the shootout the year before ). x264 is better than that version, and still has a slight edge against the version tested by doom9 in the last shootout.

nero guys updated their nero 7 pack a few days ago, don't tell me they are still packing that old blocky encoder with it?

[Romario]

nero guys updated their nero 7 pack a few days ago, don't tell me they are still packing that old blocky encoder with it?

Unfortunately, the answer is YES:angry:

[Kostarum Rex Persia]

Well, Ateme is acting a bit strange, because we don't know anything about final release of their new powerfull H.264 encoder.

[ChronoCross]

Well, Ateme is acting a bit strange, because we don't know anything about final release of their new powerfull H.264 encoder.

Their not acting strange. they are just busy improving it. besides even after the last beta there were still bugs to be worked out. I'm actually glad their not rushing it. means that it'll be better once it comes out.

[shon3i]

What's happened with XviD AVC nobody talk about this.

[fight2win]

What's happened with XviD AVC nobody talk about this.
me waiting eagerly for CoreAVC, those guys usually put up very high standards, and that coreavc decoder is simply great!

[shon3i]

and that coreavc decoder is simply great!I agree with you

[BetaBoy]

The product release schedule for CoreAVC (atm) is:

March 15th CoreAVC Standard and Professional Editions
April 15th CoreAVC Enterprise
May GPU Additions

After that our CoreAVC Encoder will be released.... I will not comment on more specific features of the CoreAVC encoder atm.

[Sirber]

What are the prices?

[MeteorRain]

i would prefer the free x264 XD

[Sagittaire]

actually the best AVC encoder are x264, Ateme and Elecard AVC with really close result for objective and subjective quality.

[Oline 61]

Actually the "most goodest" MPEG-4 AVC encoders are probably whatever hardware encoders that TV stations that broadcast in h.264 use. Good luck finding one for less than 10 grand tho.

[nm]

Not if the current breed of hardware MPEG-2 encoders used for DVB broadcasts is a sign of what to expect. At least here in Finland the image quality is much worse than what can be achieved in real time with libavcodec's MPEG-2 encoder.

[neuron2]

@Hell255

Why haven't you corrected the title to adhere to forum rules? Please do so or some mod might strike you.

[snacky]

Actually the "most goodest" MPEG-4 AVC encoders are probably whatever hardware encoders that TV stations that broadcast in h.264 use. Good luck finding one for less than 10 grand tho.
The hardware encoders are tuned for realtime performance, and are targetted for the specific characteristics that broadcasters want. These are often totally the opposite of what people want for DVD ripping. Just to name two examples, the video you want for broadcast or streaming uses way more I-frames and way smaller ratecontrol buffer sizes than what you'd want to use for playback on a software player, from a seekable medium.

I'd be surprised if any of the hardware encoders used by broadcasters could beat x264 if we wanted larger I-frame intervals, drastically larger ratecontrol buffers, etc. In my experience, they can't. And, FWIW, other than interlacing support, the hardware encoders out there do not implement the standard nearly as completely as x264 does.

[Manao]

And, FWIW, other than interlacing support, the hardware encoders out there do not implement the standard nearly as completely as x264 doesHum... Since interlacing support is clearly the most complicated part ( especially when you have to implement it ) of the standard, I wouldn't brag that much about x264's "almost" standard completness. And some of those encoders only lacks high profile support (8x8dct, cqm), both features that are relatively easy to implement.

I'd be surprised if any of the hardware encoders used by broadcasters could beat x264 if we wanted larger I-frame intervals, drastically larger ratecontrol buffersWell, they sure won't do two passes encoding, if that's what you're thinking of. But Iframe interval shouldn't trouble them, nor would a larger vbv. They'll do only CBR though.

[snacky]

Hum... Since interlacing support is clearly the most complicated part ( especially when you have to implement it ) of the standard, I wouldn't brag that much about x264's "almost" standard completness. And some of those encoders only lacks high profile support (8x8dct, cqm), both features that are relatively easy to implement.
And 4x4 intra, and 4x4 inter, direct and b_skip, multiref, b-frames used as reference (b-pyramid), weighted biprediction... Just some of the things I noticed. Some popular HW encoders ARE using some of these things, some popular ones are using NONE of them (yet). x264 is actually doing quite well when it comes to completeness.
Well, they sure won't do two passes encoding, if that's what you're thinking of. But Iframe interval shouldn't trouble them, nor would a larger vbv. They'll do only CBR though.
I haven't personally seen any HW encoder that doesn't do VBR at all. But I also don't think their vbr code is nearly as well quality-tuned as x264's ABR.

On the other hand, I've had little luck reducing the bad I-frame beating when using x264 with a very small IDR frame interval (say, 10-20 frame interval). Some of the HW encoders are doing surprisingly well with this problem. I'm not quite sure what the trick is.