MPEG2 vs H.264

[Chengbin]

I know the question is obvious, but how much more efficient is H.264 than MPEG2? I don't have an MPEG 2 encoder to do the test so I'm gonna ask it here.

Assuming we DO NOT CARE ABOUT ENCODING TIME, using the best quality settings in each encoder, how many times is H.264 more efficient than MPEG2?

I know people will start talking about bitrate range (the fact that H.264 is more efficient under low bitrates) and stuff, so I'm gonna specify it.

500-1000Kbps (SD)

1000-3000Kbps (720p)

3000-6000Kbps (1080p)

Oh BTW the H.264 encoder is x264.

[Blue_MiSfit]

H.264 is HUGELY better than MPEG-2 :)

You will not get watchable video at those bitrates with any MPEG-2 encoder. In contrast, you can get quite decent looking video at those bitrates with x264. I don't think there's any sort of meaningful comparison here.

If you want to do some tests, try HC - it's a fantastic free MPEG-2 encoder. I'm a big fan!

~MiSfit

[shon3i]

MPEG2 loose all battles at low bitrates, but still MPEG2 can easy and fast reach transparency, faster than other codecs.

[Esurnir]

MPEG2 loose all battles at low bitrates, but still MPEG2 can easy and fast reach transparency, faster than other codecs.

for same number of ref frame and buffer size allowed. I don't think there is a way for mpeg-2 to be more efficient than h.264. Even if the exact same choice were made (same motion vector on halfpel position, same quantisation, no deblocking filter) you would still have CABAC that make your pictures smaller than RLE-Huffman and that's a lossless improvement. Of course you never turn the deblocking filter off and that give you a huge improvement on the picture.

[Chengbin]

Let's be clear on this.

I fully understand MPEG2 is terrible compared to H.264. I just wanted to know how bad.

[Sharktooth]

too much. it cant be defined with a number coz it depends on the source you're going to encode.

[Kurtnoise]

I fully understand MPEG2 is terrible compared to H.264. I just wanted to know how bad.
http://mirror05.x264.nl/Dark/website/compare.html

[Chengbin]

http://mirror05.x264.nl/Dark/website/compare.html

Oh my! MPEG2 is terrible.

I'll run some tests with MPEG2 soon, but right now I'm gonna play with the new x264.

[Blue_MiSfit]

:) We told you so!

It's true that MPEG-2 can be quite transparent at higher bitrates, but so can H.264. I wonder how they both compare at extremely high bitrates - say 80mbps for 1080p24?

I will say that real-time hardware encoders are quite terrible. I see visual artifacts sometimes at 80mbps CBR MPEG-2 for 1080p :p

~MiSfit

[shon3i]

MPEG2 loose all battles at low bitrates, but still MPEG2 can easy and fast reach transparency, faster than other codecs.
To be honest I thought the 1080p ~ 30mbps :) but AVC still can always produce better. My point is if you go on realy high bitrate you can safetly use what you want (AVC, MPEG2, VC-1) result must be transparent.

[benwaggoner]

There are some architectural limitations to MPEG-2 that keep it from having a truly impressive PSNR irrespective of bitrate or quantization. VC-1 and H.264 both can outperform MPEG-2 even at the highest rates. I've seen some test samples where not even QP1 MPEG-2 was visually lossless. Something to do with exactly the wrong number of pixels of interframe motion IIRC.

[Manao]

I've seen some test samples where not even QP1 MPEG-2 was visually lossless.You can always change the quantization matrix and code everything in intra (that is, if you are not bitrate limited). From the few tests I have been able to make, when h264 and mpeg2 both reach transparency, the bitrate difference is around 20 to 30% "only".

[Dark Shikari]

You can always change the quantization matrix and code everything in intra (that is, if you are not bitrate limited).Is that even better compression than MJPEG?

[roozhou]

If we DO care about encoding time(e.g. both at playback speed), will H264 do a better job than MPEG2?

[Sharktooth]

that depends on the implementations.

[benwaggoner]

If we DO care about encoding time(e.g. both at playback speed), will H264 do a better job than MPEG2?
H.264 should always beat MPEG-2 on both quality and speed.

I bet H.264 I-frame only could beat MPEG-2 in quality for some pretty common scenarios.

[roozhou]

H.264 should always beat MPEG-2 on both quality and speed.

I bet H.264 I-frame only could beat MPEG-2 in quality for some pretty common scenarios.

In my personal test, at 1:20 compression ratio, x264 I-frame beats jpeg, HD photo and jpeg2000, for both quality and speed.