Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Video Encoding > High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 16th May 2013, 20:47   #161  |  Link
kieranrk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 713
I agree to an extent but I don't think the addressable market will be anywhere as big as with MPEG-2 or AVC. Only green-field deployments and 4K are going to use it for DTH broadcasting, though a few European governments are mandating it.

Only web (including mobile) are going to be big consumers of HEVC and arguably the web doesn't have serious video bandwidth restrictions anyway. ARPU for web video is very low anyway.

HEVC won't bring 10-bit mainstream. There's a huge push against it from hardware manufacturers.

Quote:
HEVC royalties could be 10x as much as H.264 and would still be a huge net payoff just from bandwidth and storage savings.
This is definitely not the case for operator-loaned STBs.

Last edited by kieranrk; 16th May 2013 at 20:50.
kieranrk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2013, 21:00   #162  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,395
Quote:
Originally Posted by kieranrk View Post
I agree to an extent but I don't think the addressable market will be anywhere as big as with MPEG-2 or AVC. Only green-field deployments and 4K are going to use it for DTH broadcasting, though a few European governments are mandating it.
For OTA, broadcasting, sure. Huge decoder switching costs, which is why most of that is MPEG-2. South Korea has already done two rounds of OTA HEVC 4K already, though.

I think OTA is a pretty small and shrinking slice of viewership, though.

Quote:
Only web (including mobile) are going to be big consumers of HEVC and arguably the web doesn't have serious video bandwidth restrictions anyway.
That is an argument you'd have to actually make. Until everyone in a household can reliably get 15 Mbps streams simultaneously, the web has serious bandwidth restrictions.

Quote:
HEVC won't bring 10-bit mainstream. There's a huge push against it from hardware manufacturers.
Citation? That's not what I'm hearing for living-room devices. Mobile doesn't seem to have nearly as much taste for 10-bit, certainly.

Quote:
This is definitely not the case for operator-loaned STBs.
Huge switching costs there, which is why they're mostly still getting MPEG-2 anyway. The bandwidth savings of MPEG-2 -> HEVC could make STB replacement cost-effective, however.

But video decoder license fees are a small fraction of a STB's cost, and are a lot higher and uncapped for MPEG-2 anyway. If license fees were a big deal, people would have stopped shipping MPEG-2 decode a long time ago (note that it's not in Win8 by default now). VC-1 and H.264 were both much, much cheaper at the time.
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Instant Video

My Compression Book

Amazon Instant Video is hiring! PM me if you're interested.
benwaggoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2013, 22:56   #163  |  Link
kieranrk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 713
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner View Post
For OTA, broadcasting, sure. Huge decoder switching costs, which is why most of that is MPEG-2. South Korea has already done two rounds of OTA HEVC 4K already, though.

I think OTA is a pretty small and shrinking slice of viewership, though.

That is an argument you'd have to actually make. Until everyone in a household can reliably get 15 Mbps streams simultaneously, the web has serious bandwidth restrictions.
Improved compression isn't holding back any major product developments that will cause a significant revenue stream for web video (though perhaps so for mobile) - it's why a lot of places are happy sending the junk from Elemental "GPU" encoders after all. Apart from being an incremental improvement, what new revenue streams will HEVC bring in? H.264 brought in HD video on the web but in my opinion HEVC brings no new products to the table. I guess there's a possibility for 4K but I would imagine Hollywood would want to charge a premium for that and not give it away to Netflix. It's the same with MPEG-DASH; deployment is sluggish since the benefits don't appear to be financially worthwhile.

In most of the world STBs last for ~10 years or so; Korea is the special case in that there is a short upgrade period. All the more so when people have a lot of PVR'd recordings that can't be easily moved between STB (Device specific DRM).

Quote:
Citation? That's not what I'm hearing for living-room devices. Mobile doesn't seem to have nearly as much taste for 10-bit, certainly.
I think it's public knowledge that there's a row going on about this in DVB, which will in effect set the global agenda for living room devices.

Quote:
Huge switching costs there, which is why they're mostly still getting MPEG-2 anyway. The bandwidth savings of MPEG-2 -> HEVC could make STB replacement cost-effective, however.

But video decoder license fees are a small fraction of a STB's cost, and are a lot higher and uncapped for MPEG-2 anyway. If license fees were a big deal, people would have stopped shipping MPEG-2 decode a long time ago (note that it's not in Win8 by default now). VC-1 and H.264 were both much, much cheaper at the time.
Codec licensing fees are still not insignificant and are the basis of a lot of the audio codec STB wars (Dolby/DTS/AAC). Even on modern platforms there is still a lot of legacy MPEG-2. It's different in Win8 because end-users purchase the product, whereas STBs are given away for free and so a few dollars saved across millions of devices is worth saving, nobody is going to notice a few extra dollars on Win8 RRP.

Last edited by kieranrk; 16th May 2013 at 23:01.
kieranrk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th July 2013, 20:12   #164  |  Link
phate89
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 153
I don't know when it was added, but one of the mirrors of x264.nl is http://x264.x265.net/
phate89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th July 2013, 22:05   #165  |  Link
mandarinka
Registered User
 
mandarinka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 659
Because the guy who has that mirror booked the domain for future use by any FOSS x264-like HEVC encoder - it is explained if you go straight to x265.net.
mandarinka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd July 2013, 15:48   #166  |  Link
lucassp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Romania, Timisoara
Posts: 223
Here's something: https://bitbucket.org/multicoreware/x265/wiki/RoadMap
__________________
[Intel] E8400|[Gigabyte] EP45-UD3 |[AC] Freezer7 Pro|[A-DATA] DDR2 800 2x2GB|[Gainward] 8800GT GS|[Leadtek] TV2000XP Global|[WD] WD6400AAKS|[Samsung] SH-S203B|[Antec] EA430|[Samsung] 2243NW
lucassp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd July 2013, 19:42   #167  |  Link
Selur
Registered User
 
Selur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,300
"Development of x265 began very recently (March 2013)" shouldn't this be March 2012 ?
__________________
Hybrid here in the forum, homepage
Selur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd July 2013, 20:00   #168  |  Link
jkauff
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Doylestown, PA in the U.S.A.
Posts: 371
There's an article on Slashdot today about the release of a pre-alpha version of x265. It includes links to evaluations by Tom's Hardware and Extreme Tech.

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/13/07...ckles-hevch265

Last edited by Guest; 23rd July 2013 at 20:07. Reason: added link
jkauff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd July 2013, 20:07   #169  |  Link
Guest
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 21,924
Interesting. Thanks for the heads up!
Guest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd July 2013, 20:16   #170  |  Link
anonymlol
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 17
Thanks for the link.

Here's a build: x265 23.07.2013 (x86).zip
anonymlol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd July 2013, 21:42   #171  |  Link
filler56789
SuperVirus
 
filler56789's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Antarctic Japan
Posts: 795
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymlol View Post
Thanks for the link.

Here's a build: x265 23.07.2013 (x86).zip
Your intention is good, but that URL does not work with Opera, nor with Internet Explorer 8.
filler56789 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd July 2013, 21:59   #172  |  Link
Bigmango
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 380
Quote:
Originally Posted by filler56789 View Post
Your intention is good, but that URL does not work with Opera, nor with Internet Explorer 8.
Link is working fine here with latest versions of Internet Explorer, Chrome, Firefox.

Seriously, who is using outdated browsers like IE 8 in 2013, and then posting on forums to complain about it?

Thanks for the links.
Bigmango is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd July 2013, 22:01   #173  |  Link
mandarinka
Registered User
 
mandarinka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 659
I saw some articles about x265 already, today. I guess the era of rapture has begun!

There is a piece written by Tom's hardware and another one that is in czech language, so not much use unless you like google translate or something (link is here for those who understand that language.)
mandarinka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd July 2013, 22:07   #174  |  Link
xooyoozoo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkauff View Post
There's an article on Slashdot today about the release of a pre-alpha version of x265. It includes links to evaluations by Tom's Hardware and Extreme Tech.

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/13/07...ckles-hevch265

From the Tom's Hardware article:

Quote:
We could have used the --tune psnr switch to generate higher values, though this negatively affects subjective quality compared to the settings used here.
Which means that they didn't use tunings. By one line, they forwent any real analysis and trivialized their entire article, which can now be summarized as "why yes, this is a multithreaded HEVC encoder".

I forget how bewildering rookie codec comparisons can be.

Edit: Having issues compiling this on OSX 10.9 DP. Oh well, I'm gonna try the linked binary above on a Windows rig later.

Last edited by xooyoozoo; 23rd July 2013 at 22:11.
xooyoozoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd July 2013, 22:09   #175  |  Link
filler56789
SuperVirus
 
filler56789's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Antarctic Japan
Posts: 795
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigmango View Post
Link is working fine here with latest versions of Internet Explorer, Chrome, Firefox.

Seriously, who is using outdated browsers like IE 8 in 2013, and then posting on forums to complain about it?
Opera is NOT an outdated browser, and I did mention it.
But thanks for your pointless reply anyway.
filler56789 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd July 2013, 22:10   #176  |  Link
Selur
Registered User
 
Selur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,300
from the "x265 Evaluation Guide 07-23-13.pdf":
Quote:
SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
Hardware: AVX capable CPU recommended
At least 8GB of RAM
Software: Win7/8 x86_64
Microsoft Visual C++ Redistributable Update 3
assuming this is correct -> no x265 for me , since my i7 875k doesn't support AVX.
__________________
Hybrid here in the forum, homepage
Selur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd July 2013, 22:12   #177  |  Link
mandarinka
Registered User
 
mandarinka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 659
Oh, I missed that at first, but there is already an announcement in the news section of the forum.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Selur View Post
from the "x265 Evaluation Guide 07-23-13.pdf":
assuming this is correct -> no x265 for me , since my i7 875k doesn't support AVX.
That's a recommendation - I'm pretty sure they won't explicitly require anything higher than SSE2 (SSSE3 at worst?).
mandarinka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd July 2013, 22:12   #178  |  Link
Guest
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 21,924
Quote:
Originally Posted by filler56789 View Post
Opera is NOT an outdated browser, and I did mention it.
But thanks for your pointless reply anyway.
I'm not sure why you are trying to stir up trouble here, but if you continue there will be consequences. Please take any reponse to PM. Thank you.
Guest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th July 2013, 01:16   #179  |  Link
foxyshadis
ангел смерти
 
foxyshadis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Lost
Posts: 9,175
Wow, I completely missed that x265 was being commercially funded now, no wonder it's getting up to speed so quickly. The bleeding edge looks very promising, I just hope they can integrate Avisynth soon; at least they have Y4M, so you can use an ffmpeg intermediary instead of straight raw video.
__________________
There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order. ~ Ed Howdershelt
foxyshadis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th July 2013, 01:27   #180  |  Link
mandarinka
Registered User
 
mandarinka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 659
I sort of got used to avs2yuv already (10-bit filtering, testing of VP9), so as long as that is supported, I guess it is relatively fine, input-wise.
mandarinka is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:56.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.