Quote:
Originally Posted by Emulgator
anyway for such content type I would call 4,5Mbps @ FHD starved for x264, wet patches coming up where HF coefficients had been dropped and LF coefficients sustain.
|
I only show x264 for comparison. With my eyes, the x264 bitrate-starved encode shows better results than the x265 encode. I generally encode using CRF but 2-pass for testing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner
Also, I strongly recommend you don't compare with --crf, as you wind up with output that varies in both quality and size. Better to use 2-pass encoding at the same average bitrate, so you're comparing quality at a given bitrate between encoders/modes.
|
I lost some of the log files so only posted examples of those with logs. The x264 vs x265 at the same bitrate is a good example of 2-pass at the same bitrate, with reasonably comparable parameters (to a point).