3 ms·
Also expensive is using CABAC, which is much slower (for better compression ratio). H.264 allowed used a faster coder called CAVLC. There are two ways to inte
by baybreeze 10y ago
Also expensive is using CABAC, which is much slower (for better compression ratio). H.264 allowed used a faster coder called CAVLC.
There are two ways to interpret this: either low-powered devices have become much stronger, or h.264 is just not supporting some classes of devices.
- ryuuchin 10y agoI believe CABAC in h265/HEVC should be faster than CABAC in h264/AVC. If you produced CABAC for h264 and h265 with all things being equal you should actually gain in decoding speed moving to h265.
- izacus 10y agoCALVC was really only allowed in baseline profile (which looks hideous compared to main or high) and pretty much any device with H.264 decoder out there supports at least main for years now.