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 > New and alternative video codecs

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 27th April 2019, 22:09   #1641  |  Link
ShogoXT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by foxyshadis View Post
I'd like to solicit opinions on splitting this thread up, especially into aom, rav1e, dav1d, still image (avif) news, as well as solicitations to get the best quality command lines. I'd like to create a separate AV1 forum entirely at this point, but one megathread does not a forum make.
I think for sure that AV1 needs it's whole forum section like hevc has. Within it there for separate threads for rav1e, media industry news, etc.

It's very difficult for a sporadic doom9 reader like myself to follow with what has been discussed in this thread...
ShogoXT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd May 2019, 09:50   #1642  |  Link
VincAlastor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Berlin
Posts: 148
dav1d 0.3.0 decodes AV1 video’s 24% faster on SSSE3, 26% on SSE4.1 and 4% on AVX2 (all PC), and 12% faster on Arm64 (mobile).

https://medium.com/@ewoutterhoeven/d...h-af5bbf845a16
VincAlastor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th May 2019, 16:10   #1643  |  Link
singhkays
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 18
https://www.singhkays.com/blog/its-t...ith-av1-video/

I did a quick comparison of AV1 vs x264 vs VP9 at ultra low bitrates and how it can be used to replace GIFs in the browser
singhkays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th May 2019, 18:47   #1644  |  Link
TomV
VP Strategy, Beamr
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by singhkays View Post
https://www.singhkays.com/blog/its-t...ith-av1-video/

I did a quick comparison of AV1 vs x264 vs VP9 at ultra low bitrates and how it can be used to replace GIFs in the browser
"80% better than H.264".

The claimed 50% bit rate reduction of VP9 vs. AVC is not substantiated by independent studies, or in practice by anyone. Also, you can't add bit rate reductions, you have to multiply bit rate ratios. If B encodes to the same quality as A at 0.5x the bit rate, and C encodes to the same quality as B with 0.7x the bit rate, C theoretically is 0.7 x 0.5 = 0.35x the bit rate of A... a 65% reduction, not 80%. But in practice studies have shown that AV1 is roughly on par with HEVC when measured with objective metrics (PSNR, SSIM, VMAF, etc.), delivering roughly a 50% bit rate reduction over AVC. However, measured subjectively it's behind HEVC. Although all of the above measures video, and not still still image compression, I expect the results for image (I frame only) compression to be quite close. Mozilla published a study in 2013 which confirmed the superiority of HEVC still image compression over other existing formats. Strangely, the link to the study no longer works, but I saved a copy. Maybe one of the Mozilla guys can reshare it.

I agree that content publishers and web sites should be leveraging more powerful video codecs for still image compression. They can start with AVC, as device support is ubiquitous, and it is an improvement over JPEG and GIF. If/when they add support for an advanced codec, they will want the largest range of devices to support that codec, and they will want hardware decoding (for speed and vastly reduced power consumption). They can leverage HEVC (in HEIC container files... based on the ISO Base Media File Format, the evolution of .mov and .mp4) for the majority of devices which already have hardware HEVC support.
See https://nokiatech.github.io/heif/comparison.html

Google developed the WebP standard for still image compression, based on VP8 technology. It's only 10% more efficient than JPEG. What you're proposing would seem to be a new version of WebP.
TomV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th May 2019, 23:27   #1645  |  Link
sneaker_ger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,495
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomV View Post
Mozilla published a study in 2013 which confirmed the superiority of HEVC still image compression over other existing formats. Strangely, the link to the study no longer works, but I saved a copy. Maybe one of the Mozilla guys can reshare it.
http://web.archive.org/web/201603121..._october_2013/
sneaker_ger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2019, 17:28   #1646  |  Link
soresu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Swansea, Wales, UK
Posts: 115
Possible partial GPU acceleration coming in Dav1d during this years GSoC.

I wonder how much latency is incurred for only partial GPU decode, some guy going by atomnuker discussed possible GPU AV1 at FOSSDEM last year I think.
soresu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2019, 18:45   #1647  |  Link
NikosD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 2,704
Quote:
Support for offloading some of the dav1d AV1 video decoder's work to GPUs using compute shaders in OpenGL/Vulkan/Metal/Direct3D.
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...-2019-Projects
__________________
Win 10 x64 (18363.476) - Core i3-9100F - nVidia 1660 (436.15)
HEVC decoding benchmarks
H.264 DXVA Benchmarks for all
NikosD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2019, 19:19   #1648  |  Link
nevcairiel
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 9,818
Don't get too excited quite yet, such efforts have in the past been problematic to get truely faster. We'll have to see.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders
nevcairiel is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2019, 20:57   #1649  |  Link
soresu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Swansea, Wales, UK
Posts: 115
I'd be less interested in faster playback using GPU in favor of lower power for phones prior to decoder ASIC rollouts, which probably wont be until at least next year.

I think Rockchip's recently announced RK3588 SoC for 2020 has an AV1 decoder, but details were sparse in the announcement.

The thing which concerns me most is the lack of any announcement from Qualcomm in support of AV1, considering their huge market share in Android devices
soresu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th May 2019, 22:02   #1650  |  Link
sneaker_ger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,495
Yes, hardware support is disappointing.

IIRC for HEVC the Samsung and LG TVs were the first to have hardware decoding in late 2013/early 2014 after HEVC approval by ITU in April 2013. Now AV1 finalization was in June 2018 and still no hardware in sight, really. Intel probably Tiger Lake Q2 2020 at the earliest. Nvidia with Ampere also 2020? Nothing from Qualcomm.
Looks like they all started working on it pretty late.
sneaker_ger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2019, 17:39   #1651  |  Link
alex1399
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 51
However, the feature of VP8 hardware decoding was barely seen in commercial products. When does the VP9 finalization happen?
alex1399 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2019, 20:02   #1652  |  Link
nevcairiel
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 9,818
Quote:
Originally Posted by alex1399 View Post
When does the VP9 finalization happen?
What do you mean?
Majority of new devices has VP9 support now.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders
nevcairiel is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2019, 20:35   #1653  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,966
Quote:
Originally Posted by soresu View Post
I'd be less interested in faster playback using GPU in favor of lower power for phones prior to decoder ASIC rollouts, which probably wont be until at least next year.

I think Rockchip's recently announced RK3588 SoC for 2020 has an AV1 decoder, but details were sparse in the announcement.

The thing which concerns me most is the lack of any announcement from Qualcomm in support of AV1, considering their huge market share in Android devices
I've heard indications that the extra transistors required for AV1 decoding are a lot higher than anticipated, and higher than the delta for HEVC. The cost in increased die size is a lot more than the savings from not paying MPEG-LA fees.

That would indicate a trend towards AV1 decode launching in high end chipsets first, and taking longer to get into lower-cost handsets.
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Prime Video

My Compression Book
benwaggoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2019, 20:37   #1654  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,966
Quote:
Originally Posted by sneaker_ger View Post
Yes, hardware support is disappointing.

IIRC for HEVC the Samsung and LG TVs were the first to have hardware decoding in late 2013/early 2014 after HEVC approval by ITU in April 2013. Now AV1 finalization was in June 2018 and still no hardware in sight, really. Intel probably Tiger Lake Q2 2020 at the earliest. Nvidia with Ampere also 2020? Nothing from Qualcomm.
Looks like they all started working on it pretty late.
The incremental cost to add AV1 into a CPU would be a lot lower than in a SoC, because a GPU already has so many transistors.

The make or break is how many extra mm^2 the decoder takes.
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Prime Video

My Compression Book
benwaggoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th May 2019, 17:19   #1655  |  Link
marcomsousa
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by sneaker_ger View Post
Yes, hardware support is disappointing.

Now AV1 finalization was in June 2018 and still no hardware in sight, really. Intel probably Tiger Lake Q2 2020 at the earliest. Nvidia with Ampere also 2020? Nothing from Qualcomm.
Looks like they all started working on it pretty late.
What? HW support in less that one year? no way...

Quote:
Originally Posted by marcomsousa View Post
1st August 2018, 11:02
(...)

About the AV1 roadmap
We just complete phase 1.
In 1 year we complete phase 2.
In 2 to 3 years we complete phase 3.
In 4 to 5 years we complete phase 4.

So, now we are in phase 2. We need to wait 1 or 2 more years to have HW support. So we are in schedule.

* Next year we will starting see some high end CPU/GPU with AV1 HW decode support.
* In 2021 HW decode for low end CPU/GPU and encode for high end CPU/GPU. (some TVs, consoles)
* And in 2022 for all cpu/gpu. (All modern TVs, consoles)

Note: The first HW with encoding support will have bad quality comparing with software. They have to mature over the years.

And if you are asking, all the nextgen consoles that will release next year will not have AV1 HW decode support (because they release with a cpu of this year).
__________________
AV1 win64 VS2017 builds
Last build here | History
I also open source the build scripts at Github: here

Last edited by marcomsousa; 9th May 2019 at 17:24.
marcomsousa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th May 2019, 17:57   #1656  |  Link
EwoutH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: Delft, Netherlands
Posts: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner View Post
I've heard indications that the extra transistors required for AV1 decoding are a lot higher than anticipated, and higher than the delta for HEVC.
Hmm, this is quite strange. From what I've heard hardware vendors had a large say at the table with AV1 design, with the purpose of minimizing the complexity of encoding and decoding hardware. Do you know which functions or aspects of the fixed function hardware takes more die size than expected?

Also some two detail from Google Stadia: At launch they will use VP9 hardware encoding and somewhere in the future they will switch to AV1, but only when hardware encoding is available.15:19 for VP9, 22:53 for AV1, 31:45 for hardware video encoders.
EwoutH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th May 2019, 08:33   #1657  |  Link
Mr_Khyron
Member
 
Mr_Khyron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 113
Allegro DVT announces AL-E210 Encoder IP with AV1 Profile 0 support

https://www.reddit.com/r/AV1/comment...r_ip_with_av1/
Quote:
Allegro DVT released the first AV1 hardware encoder IP publicly known. The AL-E210 succeeds the AL-E200 with the main addition being support for the AV1 codec. It supports Profile 0, meaning 4:2:0 chroma subsampling with 8 and 10 bit color depth.

It claims support real-time encoding up to 4K, but with multiple cores up to 8K or (/ and?) 120fps. With the AL-E200 one core could encode 4K at 30fps, so with multiple cores this could be higher
Mr_Khyron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th May 2019, 11:37   #1658  |  Link
Djfe
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner View Post
I've heard indications that the extra transistors required for AV1 decoding are a lot higher than anticipated, and higher than the delta for HEVC. The cost in increased die size is a lot more than the savings from not paying MPEG-LA fees.
now I'm wondering, whether PVQ from the daala folks would've made it smaller ^^
IIRC PVQ was less complex so easier to realize by hw, but was decided against, because of needed additional development time, even though it would've increased efficiency, too.

We'll know when gen2 will be realized (in 5 or 10 years) hehe
Djfe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th May 2019, 11:49   #1659  |  Link
Djfe
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomV View Post
They can start with AVC, as device support is ubiquitous, and it is an improvement over JPEG and GIF.
That was like 5 years ago hehe (for animated pictures on major sites)
https://blog.embed.ly/what-twitter-i...s-e1b74068cebd
https://rigor.com/blog/optimizing-an...th-html5-video

they do it for reduced memory footprint, pause/play, reduced size, better caching, hw decoding, partial decoding, fast first playthrough, higher possible bit depth for animations etc.

EDIT:
for regular pictures it needs to be an image format people can download and share
https://www.cnet.com/news/facebook-t...-users-squawk/

hevc in ISOBMFF (heic/heif) might turn out a good solution if windows users don't need to add support manually through the microsoft store and android switches to it.
then whatsapp could switch to it as well (with transcoding back to jpeg for older devices)

EDIT2:
at least Firefox finally added WEBp support (including animations) so it counts as an alternative (especially when they update their internal codec again)
https://hacks.mozilla.org/2019/01/fi...r-new-tooling/

Last edited by Djfe; 10th May 2019 at 11:55.
Djfe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th May 2019, 16:49   #1660  |  Link
foxyshadis
ангел смерти
 
foxyshadis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Lost
Posts: 9,414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djfe View Post
now I'm wondering, whether PVQ from the daala folks would've made it smaller ^^
IIRC PVQ was less complex so easier to realize by hw, but was decided against, because of needed additional development time, even though it would've increased efficiency, too.

We'll know when gen2 will be realized (in 5 or 10 years) hehe
PVQ is smaller purely in the frequency domain, where Daala tried to keep everything. But it couldn't stay in the frequency domain with the current state of the art, so it ended up being both less efficient after everything was combined and optimised. Of course, Monty is constantly throwing new things at the wall to see what sticks, so maybe AV2 will change that.
__________________
There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.
foxyshadis 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 09:54.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.