Small test: XviD vs x264 on HDTV material

[JnZ]

Hi everybody. It's a some time, when I make small codec test, try to figure out, which codec is best for me (x264, Xvid) for my HDTV encodings. Try to compare, how much affect Qpel final quality on xvid encoding. Few days ago I finish my webspace with results, and decide to share all this with you. Such comparsion like this never be done on doom9 and now, I think it's the time to do such compares, coz HDTV is here, and it's the future...

I know...there is new revisions of each codec, but this compare still tells something...so make up your own conclusion, if You want of course. :)

Are You ready? So go there: http://www.jnz.wz.cz/hd/hdtvtest/index.html

P.S.: I have little suspicion, that free webhosting I use, have really slow download rate for foreign countries. If yes, plz don't beat me. :)

EDIT: I'm not x264 guru, so maybe it can be configured better...

[Pookie]

You have too many images on one page. :( Move each test image to it's own separate page.

[mrkazador]

This is a nightmare to load, just cant wait to see your results.

[JnZ]

This is a nightmare to load, just cant wait to see your results.

Hmm, this is not good idea, so I try move each frame to separate page.

EDIT: Finished..

[Sharktooth]

EQMV3 ULR is quite outdated... it's not good for LCD monitors/TVs.
I would have used EQM V3LR instead.

[SeeMoreDigital]

Might be better if you hosted your images on a faster server too!

[shon3i]

First why you use old encoders
XviD 1.03 and x264 rev 474, are very old, especialy xvid.

second in x264 you use mp4_guy's_AVC_Low_Bitrate_matrix_V2.cfg, this matrix is for low bitrate about 700kbps

[JnZ]

shon3i:
- About old codecs: this test is quite old, I make it some time ago...but the decision to make a website takes a long time :)
- About x264 matrix - As I mentioned, I'm not x264 guru...so don't know,which matrix should I use. :(

SeeMoreDigital:
- This free host is very fast, but only for local CZ domain, I suspect. :(

Sharktooth:
- As I mentioned: I make the test some time ago... but thx for advice...at now I use ULR very rarely.

[mrkazador]

It may be best to host the pictures some where else like imageshack.us

[IgorC]

x264 rev 474 was realesed in march of 2006. While Xvid 1.1 was realesed in 1 jan 2006. but there is still Xvid 1.0.3 in this test.
Old Xvid 1.0.3 hasn't BVHQ feature to improve quality of B frames.
Xvid 1.0.3 is oudated more than 2 years old version.
Test is outdated.

[JnZ]

x264 rev 474 was realesed in march of 2006. While Xvid 1.1 was realesed in 1 jan 2006. but there is still Xvid 1.0.3 in this test.
Old Xvid 1.0.3 hasn't BVHQ feature to improve quality of B frames.
Test is outdated by one year.
I use 1.0.3 coz I have little problems with 1.1 in some HD's (sudden falls in some scenes, I remember Resident Evil). So I use 1.0.3 for HD's (to prevent nerve jerking :) ). There is no much difference between 1.0.3 and 1.1, I tested, but this is for another discussion.
At now, I have DC so use 1.2-127 SMP, so far without problems.

EDIT: Yes test is outdated, but still shows something...

[SeeMoreDigital]

XviD, or should I say Xvid 1.1.2 final was released late Oct 2006 ;)

[IgorC]

There is no much difference between 1.0.3 and 1.1,
There was noticeble quality boost.