Maximum bitrate in x264 codec [Archive]

Kostarum Rex Persia

10th February 2006, 02:07

Hello guys. I am asking this, because maximum bitrate, at the moment, for x264 codec is only 5000 kbps. Why so low? I want to make high definition clip and compress it from original uncompressed AVI source, with x264 bitrate at 10000 to 12500 kbps. Resolutions for video clips are 720x576 and 1280x720.

ChronoCross

10th February 2006, 02:15

Well first off you shoule realize that MPEG2 uses 10000-12500kbps for HD. Since h264(x264, ateme, nero) are using MPEG4 it is more efficient. If you can't achive the desired quality with 5000kbps pumping the bitrate higher will do absolutely nothing.

bkman

10th February 2006, 02:24

You should be able to use a constant quantiser to get higher bitrates.

Kostarum Rex Persia

10th February 2006, 02:25

Well, I heard that HD MPEG2 movies use much higher bitrate, about 15000 to 20000 kbps, which is exact about double from 7000-9000 kbps for ordinary DVD film in resolution 720x576.

So, movies on HD-DVD will use about 8000 or more kbps for resolution 1280x720, and I don't even know exact proposed bitrate for full HD resolution, 1920x1080. Perhaps about 12000-14000 kbps.

asdfsauce

10th February 2006, 04:13

If you can't achive the desired quality with 5000kbps pumping the bitrate higher will do absolutely nothing.

Yeah, I'm not sure about this. Have you ever done any 720p+ encoding?

ChronoCross

10th February 2006, 04:30

Yeah, I'm not sure about this. Have you ever done any 720p+ encoding?
yes I have.

Sirber

10th February 2006, 04:37

Well first off you shoule realize that MPEG2 uses 10000-12500kbps for HD.More likely 7-10mbps, if it's from satelite.

akupenguin

10th February 2006, 05:41

KRP is just complaining that the slider bar in VfW only goes up to 5000, right? Because x264cli has no such limit.
Yet another reason not to use VfW ;)

puffpio

10th February 2006, 06:24

I've encoded 1280x720 @ 24fps w/ x264 with around 3000-4000 bitrate (can't remember exactly) and it looks GREAT

woah!

10th February 2006, 06:32

my 1080i HD caps from cable are about 15mbps and off of OTA about 18mbps. 19mbps is the max spec for HD OTA at the moment i think..

720p is lower at about 9mbps on cable. but looks nice at that too.

Sirber

10th February 2006, 13:33

KRP is just complaining that the slider bar in VfW only goes up to 5000, right? Because x264cli has no such limit.
Yet another reason not to use VfW ;)We should add that to "What x264 VFW is missing and will never get" :)

Kostarum Rex Persia

10th February 2006, 21:20

Well, I never stop using vfw, because it's much simplier and easier to use. I already tryed MeGUI, but it's too much work and it's too much complex for me.

About High Definition compressing, I will try to compress AVI source(uncompressed, of cource) in 720x576 and bitrate will be about 10000 kbps or even higher value.

acidsex

10th February 2006, 21:39

I've encoded 1280x720 @ 24fps w/ x264 with around 3000-4000 bitrate (can't remember exactly) and it looks GREAT

Agreed quality is awesome but the time it takes to encode a movie 2 hrs at 720p or higher takes what seems like an eternity. Nearly 24 hours for me on a AMD64 3700+.

What I have been doing is splitting (HJSplit) my OTA captures up and archiving to DVDrs until GPU assisted quality encoding or speed improvements.But 3000-5000k does an excellent job for archiving 720p and 5000-8000k for 1080 encodes.

Egladil

10th February 2006, 21:52

OT post:

I've encoded 1280x720 @ 24fps w/ x264 with around 3000-4000 bitrate (can't remember exactly) and it looks GREAT

Well, I don't believe you that the quality is awesome :) I'm encoding a lot of HD stuff, and I found that one needs at least 5-6 mbit/s to keep the details. I'm using the -crf mode and anything above 16 eats just too much texture details.

Sagittaire

10th February 2006, 22:03

Agreed quality is awesome but the time it takes to encode a movie 2 hrs at 720p or higher takes what seems like an eternity. Nearly 24 hours for me on a AMD64 3700+.

always same error -> http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=105763

X264 is fastest than XviD or DivX with best quality setting (fastest than XviD with VHQ1 for example)

Use the best and low speed setting is not a obligation ... lol

xyloy

10th February 2006, 22:04

Well, I never stop using vfw, because it's much simplier and easier to use. I already tryed MeGUI, but it's too much work and it's too much complex for me.
The VFW doesn't give x264's true capabilities at all in the quality department anyway.

MeGUI is very easy to use, there is just some time needed to be used to it, that's all.

Once I had tasted x264 CLI's higher quality (thank to the 3 pass, RDO for B-frames, No Fast P-Skip, Trellis Quantization, Bidirectionnal M.E. and Chrome M.E.), VFW was outta my way to superior quality. :)

Kostarum Rex Persia

10th February 2006, 22:04

OT post:

Well, I don't believe you that the quality is awesome :) I'm encoding a lot of HD stuff, and I found that one needs at least 5-6 mbit/s to keep the details. I'm using the -crf mode and anything above 16 eats just too much texture details.

:goodpost: :goodpost:

I agree with you.

Kostarum Rex Persia

10th February 2006, 22:10

The VFW doesn't give x264's true capabilities at all in the quality department anyway.

MeGUI is very easy to use, there is just some time needed to be used to it, that's all.

Well, perhaps you are right, but.... But, MeGUI is very buggy, at the moment, and VFW doesn't.:devil:

xyloy

10th February 2006, 22:14

Very buggy ? Not at all... I would know it, I use it almost everyday...

acidsex

10th February 2006, 22:16

MeGUI is not very buggy however, I have no desire to start all over again. Hopefully they will implement the file fetching/install features like Stax uses. Once that happens, Ill go back to it. For now, I use either Stax or Recode.

DigitalDeviant

10th February 2006, 22:26

A thought occured to me. What if all the options were added to the VFW interface? Wouldn't that make it as complicated and probably as buggy as MeGUI (which it really isn't.) And as the previous poster indicated, there are other GUI's out there.

Oline 61

10th February 2006, 23:30

If MeGUI has bugs I haven't seen them, and I screw around and make it bend over backwards for me everyday I can.

ChronoCross

11th February 2006, 00:08

Well, perhaps you are right, but.... But, MeGUI is very buggy, at the moment, and VFW doesn't.:devil:

vfw is buggy in that the output that it puts out is buggered in the true sense of MPEG4 AVC. Hacking a file format will always produce something that is not of the quality of its meant format.

Plus theis updating the vfw debate is pretty much over as no one will be doing it anytime soon. As for using meGUI being hard: you should probably go back to school and learn how to read as there is a very good guide on how to use it. There is also a dedicated thread if your having problems. Even a monkey can learn how to use it. Not to mention the codec config dialog is easier than the vfw to understand. Put in some effort to learn something new and you will benefit more than continuing to be on this tangent about continuing the use of old technologies.

Kostarum Rex Persia

11th February 2006, 01:41

Ok, guys, this is thread about maximum bitrate for x264 codec. Can anyone talk about this, some experiences, please.

@ ChronoCross, I know how to use MeGUI, I learn it before two months.

akupenguin

11th February 2006, 02:11

Ok, guys, this is thread about maximum bitrate for x264 codec.
You have your answer: there isn't a maximum. What's left to discuss?

ChronoCross

11th February 2006, 02:22

@Kostarum Rex Persia
There is no visible bitrate limit in the commandline x264. MeGUI limits to 9999 cause n one in their right mind needs more atm. Lossless mode has no bitrate limit, and quant mode is also not bitrate limited. So basically as far as I can tell this topic is really a mute point.

Oline 61

11th February 2006, 02:54

If I get an opportunity maybe I will attempt a short encode at 1,000,000 kbit/s. :)

foxyshadis

11th February 2006, 05:40

Sure, megui is buggy as hell at the moment, current releases and compiles are barely alpha code during the transition to v2. That's why you should stick with the older versions that came with sharktooth's December compiles, unless you really must have b-ime or don't mind alpha software. =p

Try the ones around 0.2.3.1024-1030 on sourceforge (http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=156112&package_id=174059), I think some of those are from before the upheavals started.

Oline, make sure you resize it to 12000x7000 first. :D

bob0r

11th February 2006, 16:42

Start > Run: calc

type: 1 + 1 and keep the enter button pressed, when it stops, you have x264's max bitrate

*.mp4 guy

12th February 2006, 03:04

vfw is buggy in that the output that it puts out is buggered in the true sense of MPEG4 AVC. Hacking a file format will always produce something that is not of the quality of its meant format.

That is completely untrue, trellis isn't part of the mpeg4-asp specs, its a hack albiet one that conforms to the specs, but still a hack and it improves quality. you may not like "buggered" mpeg4-avc, but that doesn't mean that the "quality" is any worse. The mpeg specs are not the be all end all of video compression, every mpeg4-asp codec worth a damn "buggers" the mpeg specs quite well.

Oline 61

12th February 2006, 03:39

That is completely untrue, trellis isn't part of the mpeg4-asp specs, its a hack albiet one that conforms to the specs, but still a hack and it improves quality. you may not like "buggered" mpeg4-avc, but that doesn't mean that the "quality" is any worse. The mpeg specs are not the be all end all of video compression, every mpeg4-asp codec worth a damn "buggers" the mpeg specs quite well.
Trellis is an encoder optimization, and has nothing to do with the output stream other than that it helps the encoder better allocate bits to optimize the picture. It is not a hack, and the output streams from an encoder using trellis are 100% compliant with the spec, whether the spec includes trellis or not. Trellis isn't in the output bitstream, it is in the encoder.

AVC in AVI is another matter altogether, and a fully fledged hack. It has everything to do with the output stream, and is no compliant with spec, unlike Trellis which is 100% compliant.

That is an apples to oranges comparison.

*.mp4 guy

12th February 2006, 04:57

My point was that just because its not in the specks doesn't mean that it reduces quality :sly: . Quality has nothing to do with the output bitstream (it doesn't matter how the bitstream handles data aslong as everything needed is there). The only thing the specs are good for is compatibility.

Inventive Software

16th February 2006, 22:06

It's quite easy to change the VFW source to have the max bitrate higher. Edit the config.c source file and find the part you're looking to change. It does work, because I have done it.

Kostarum Rex Persia

16th February 2006, 22:57

Ahh, good. But, because I am not a programmer, I can't do that. Perhaps you can give me a link to your build, Inventive Software?

Sharktooth

16th February 2006, 23:47

post a diff and make pengvado commit it to the svn.

bratao

17th February 2006, 00:42

Cannot be easyest than this.
If you could read this, you can change the VFW max bitrate.
Go to ../vfw/config.c
and change
#define BITRATE_MAX 5000
to your desire

akupenguin

17th February 2006, 02:03

Tell me again why is a patch even needed?
Bitrate has a textbox. You type your number in it. x264 encodes with the specified bitrate. No maximum.

If for whatever reason it doesn't work that way, that's the bug that should be fixed. Not replacing one arbitrary slider range with another.

Revgen

17th February 2006, 02:08

You have your answer: there isn't a maximum. What's left to discuss?

That answer is too simple and easy.

We must keep asking and continue to extend this useless thread until a complicated answer eases our conscience.;)

Oline 61

17th February 2006, 02:19

Until 1 frame is bigger than your hard drive there is no maximum. Thats all the analysis that is possible.

foxyshadis

17th February 2006, 02:33

Can x264 handle 64-bit bitrates? Because I am upset at this lack of functionality and demand an immediate update. I must have it, along with a 500,000-frame GOP for a project. Also make sure it's at least 2x as fast ok?

Please email me details of where I can find such a codec at lol.what@this-madness.com.

Oline 61

17th February 2006, 02:42

I'm pretty sure you can have 500,000 frame GOP's if you have a long source, a high max keyframe int and a low scene detection thingy.

Revgen

17th February 2006, 02:56

@Oline 61

I could be wrong, but I think foxyshadis was joking.

foxyshadis

17th February 2006, 06:36

It was partly a reference to this thread (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=106973); if x264 really can do a one-gop encode of an entire movie I'll be shocked. (All p/b, only one i/idr.)

akupenguin

17th February 2006, 20:59

Yes, x264 can put an entire movie in one GOP. Just disable scenecut detection and set keyint = 500000.
Sorry about the 32bit bitrates though, you'll have to make do with 2 terabit/s ;)