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.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Video Encoding > High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 16th February 2021, 13:15   #1  |  Link
YaBoyShredderson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 71
X265 Veryslow no better than slow???

I tested out several different crf values with the veryslow preset, and found that crf 20 gave me an average bitrate of about 7 accross different kinds of content. I then found the clips that had a bitrate around the average and encoded them with 2 pass 7mbits, with slow, slower and veryslow. I used the staxrip video comparison tool, and as far as i can twll, there is essentially no difference between them? Did i do something wrong here? There is a difference in the background noise, but its mot better or worse really, just a bit different flipping between the frames. Only in a few frames did i actually see a very very minor difference in small details, a single hair being a bit less blurry etc. Have i done something wrong or is veryslow really not that much more efficent than slow? Is it maybe because of the high bitrate?
YaBoyShredderson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th February 2021, 01:35   #2  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 3,943
With x265, using higher presets doesn't reduce the bitrate nearly as often as it increases quality. At the same bitrate, slower presets will look better. But sometimes a slower preset with CRF can increase bitrate AND quality, as new tools find new places to spend bits to improve quality.
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Prime Video

My Compression Book
benwaggoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th February 2021, 01:51   #3  |  Link
YaBoyShredderson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner View Post
With x265, using higher presets doesn't reduce the bitrate nearly as often as it increases quality. At the same bitrate, slower presets will look better. But sometimes a slower preset with CRF can increase bitrate AND quality, as new tools find new places to spend bits to improve quality.
I used abr to test different presets at the same bitrate. In a normal encode i would use crf 20, averaging around 7mbits.
YaBoyShredderson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th February 2021, 19:42   #4  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 3,943
Also, for typical continuous tone film and video content, veryslow and slower aren't going to look that different. It'd take a pretty big double-blind comparison to get statistics on the quantitative difference; there won't be much of a qualitative one since the same tools are generally used, just less aggressively in slower. Qualitative difference are more visible between the faster presets. Slow to slower can look different in a way that slower to placebo rarely does.

However, for atypical content qualitative differences can be seen. For example, in lossless compression, placebo can have a bigger jump in reduced file size from veryslow than from slower to veryslow, which is the opposite for normal encoding. And things like graphics and text can benefit more from more exhaustive use of tools.
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Prime Video

My Compression Book
benwaggoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
efficiency, hevc, preset, slow, x265

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 19:01.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.