3 ms·
How about decoding performance, which is much more important.
by akmittal 9y ago
How about decoding performance, which is much more important.
- bufferoverflow 9y agoBoth are important, especially in the age of user-generated content and 4K camera in every new smartphone.
- akmittal 9y agoMost people spend lot more time decoding than encoding.
- vanderZwan 9y agoYesterday's xiph.org thread had the same discussion - for live-streaming, encoding is the bottleneck. If the encoder drops frames, all recipients drop frames. - for other purposes, decoding is likely the "bottleneck", although even then: the slower and more CPU intensive an encoder is, the more times a video has to be downloaded and viewed to "break even" through the "savings" on the decoder side. So there still is a trade-off to be made with how slow an encoder is allowed to be.
- opencl 9y agoDecoding is going to have be supported in hardware for any sort of mass adoption anyway.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- akmittal 9y agoIsn't same true for encoding. I don't see hardware support hardware support coming in next 2-3 years. Then also everyone is not going to change their hardware immediately. Good Software performance is quite important.