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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
19th April 2017, 18:01 | #1 | Link |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Study comparing HEVC HM, HHI HEVC, x265, H.264 JM and AOM AV1
A very interesting study...
http://iphome.hhi.de/marpe/download/...VC-PCS2016.pdf |
19th April 2017, 23:25 | #2 | Link | |
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 4,750
|
Quote:
It is surprising than AV1 does so badly on this, however, as the VPx series development was highly focused on PSNR for years. |
|
20th April 2017, 06:46 | #3 | Link |
Derek Prestegard IRL
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 5,988
|
Yeah... yawn.
I get the academic value of this comparison but it's so far divorced from the real world (VP9 losing to x264... wut) that I can't place much value in it, personally. x265 is bloody impressive - no doubt |
20th April 2017, 09:50 | #4 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 332
|
Quote:
https://bitmovin.com/bitmovin-suppor...ce-open-media/ But i'm ok to say that at this moment x265 is really really good if you take the speed/quality ratio. AV1 speed is too slow for the moment ( no optimizations ) And VP9 with the new MT option is now better than in the past, cpu usage from ~40% to 80% and x2 speed~for me , but quality/speed is not as good as x265 yet. Last edited by easyfab; 20th April 2017 at 09:59. |
|
20th April 2017, 17:36 | #5 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 11
|
Quote:
Overall HEVC does well against other formats for free use (e.g. with the x265 codec), but blows everything away for commercial use (with HHI or Intel Media SDK). Of course it will be great if x265 can significantly narrow the gap with the commercial encoders, or alternatively if the commercial encoders release free versions for non-commercial use. |
|
21st April 2017, 02:08 | #6 | Link | |
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 4,750
|
Quote:
Plus if you wanted to do a real placebo full test of x265, you'd include --tskip --cu-lossless --bframes 16 --subme 7. And (if --tune psnr doesn't turn them off) --psy-rd 0 --psy-rdoq 0 --aq-mode 0. And comparing encoder speed in this whacked-out scenario is pretty meaningless. Placebo is slow by design, and not intended for any reasonable price/performance tradeoff. And turning off all threading makes it even less real-world relevant. Moreover, PSNR in itself is the objective metric with the least correlation with subjective quality. This is really more of an Excel comparison of a highly artificial scenario than actionable info. I'm not going to care much about a suggested video quality difference without seeing some video in a relevant scenario. But such is the way of academic codec research. They do it this way because they've always done it this way. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|