XVid or DivX5.05Pro?

[gurabli]

I have an extreamly stupid question.
Which codec is better to use?
XVid or Divx 5.05Pro?
I made experiments, but I am not sure about the results.
For me it looks that DivX makes sharper and nicer picture, but I know it is maybe because the codec settings I used in Xvid.

Also it seems to me that the XVid is much slower than DivX, is it true?

Gurabli

[Swede]

Well, if you like DivX more use it. If you're not sure, search the forum and see what other thinks.

[BiaTch 5.0]

Xvid is risky you have to find which features, settings to use also you have lower compatabilty & is still alpha software. Divx you need to pay for or have to take spyware. As far as quality I think like most it's a matter of taste, Xvid for me looks sharper & some what clean if look from a distance, I find DivX suffer a lot with high motion however with the new 4 pass+, you get an unbeatable image quality.

[snowbeach]

Your PROs:
Better picture!
Faster!

Your CONs:
There are none!

Conclusion:
Use DivX!

Otherwise read this article regarding different codec comparison:
http://www.doom9.org/codec3-1.htm

In my opinion, there are 2 things that makes me use DivX and not XviD!
1. There are cases where XviD is better than DivX and cases where DivX is better than XviD in encoding the movie (e.g. scences with little/much action). But in the end the DivX codec gives you a better overall impression of the movie than XviD. Because DivX gives you always very good/mid quality, but never really low quality, while I heard that XviD cannot give you mid quality for some difficult scenes where DivX can!
2. Many friends of mine use DivX and some of them never heard of XviD. Making video evenings it is better to use a DivX encoded movie than XviD than. ;) Most of them won't be amused of downloading a codec to watch a movie I bring to them!

[gldblade]

Better picture! Highly subjective, depends on who you ask.

Faster! Depends on settings.

There are none! Costs you money, or you install spyware or a dumbed-down version.
Not open source.
Long intervals before updates.

I heard that XviD cannot give you mid quality for some difficult scenes where DivX can! Did you do any testing on your own to confirm this? What you hear is not always true. Also, there are also many difficult scenes where XviD can perform better than DivX, so both codecs are good in different situations.

Most of them won't be amused of downloading a codec to watch a movie I bring to them! Install ffdshow, which you should have anyway since its a superior to the DivX decoder.

Heh, I must seem aggressive in defending XviD. Please bear with me, I'm an avid XviD supporter.

[snowbeach]

No problema! Of course, it always depends on the movie, your settings etc. The PROs and CONs were related to that what gurabli wrote!
I encoded Forrest Gump with DivX505 and GKnot 0.28 to 2 CDs with 1237 Kbit/s. The first scene after the intro where you can see the trees/wood (if you have the movie), the picture was really bad/blurry! :angry: I am going to encode it with XviD now and than we will see!

[leadman584]

Both Divx 5.05 and Xvid are fine codecs. Divx is easier to set up, while Xvid is far more cusotmizable to your needs. I'm basically lazy, and prefer to spend my set up time editting my .avs for optimal codec input, instead of trying to find the sweet spot for the codec as well. The latest release from Divx is by far the most stable to date, as well as producing great results.

In the end it's a personal decision for each person to make.

[bond]

divx5 and xvid both improved a lot since the last doom9's codec comparison.
according to my small test, you can gain a lot more compressibility with xvids pro features than with divx, although the final results now seem to be very similar and great in both cases, at least in 1cd bitrate ranges (forget divx502!)

[TheWEF]

Originally posted by gurabli
I have an extreamly stupid question.
Which codec is better to use?

forum rule #12: Do not ask "what's best".

closed.

wef.