12 ms·
X265 3.0 released
- Gys 8y agox265 HEVC Encoder
- atilimcetin 8y agoI wonder if there is an article that compares X265 and https://github.com/intel/SVT-HEVC https://github.com/intel/SVT-HEVC (in terms of speed, feature set, required hardware, software license, etc..) ?
- muizelaar 8y agoThe best I've seen is https://twitter.com/fg118942/status/1092045469981671424 https://twitter.com/fg118942/status/1092045469981671424
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- orastor 8y agoWhy not admit AV1 is all around better and work on it instead
- alexandernst 8y agoCan you post a link to some data so we can compare both, please?
- Koshkin 8y agohttps://duckduckgo.com/?q=av1+vs+x265&t=ffnt&ia=web https://duckduckgo.com/?q=av1+vs+x265&t=ffnt&ia=web
- alexandernst 8y agoI read a few times the results at texpion (the first 4 results from that DDG query), and I must say that I'm confused. I was expecting to see some particularly good results in favor of AV1, but the "Conclusions" section in page 1 state that: * both x264 and x265 take less time to encode and the produce smaller files (lossless compression) * AV1 takes 160x-190x more time than x264 (lossless compression) * AV1 can't take advantage of multi-threading the same way x264 and x265 can. Neither for encoding nor for decoding. * AV1 requires 3.5x-6x more CPU power to decode than x264 I just fail to see how AV1 is "all around better". Can you share another link? Maybe this time more specific so I can read the data you used to get to that conclusion.
- clouddrover 8y ago> AV1 can't take advantage of multi-threading the same way x264 and x265 can. Neither for encoding nor for decoding. Dav1d is an AV1 decoder which takes advantage of multi-threading: https://code.videolan.org/videolan/dav1d https://code.videolan.org/videolan/dav1d https://medium.com/@ewoutterhoeven/dav1d-0-1-0-release-the-first-benchmarks-5404360e44e3 https://medium.com/@ewoutterhoeven/dav1d-0-1-0-release-the-f... BitMovin and Intel both have AV1 encoders which can take advantage of multiple cores. BitMovin demonstrated live AV1 video almost two years ago: https://bitmovin.com/bitmovin-supports-av1-encoding-vod-live-joins-alliance-open-media/ https://bitmovin.com/bitmovin-supports-av1-encoding-vod-live... https://bitmovin.com/constantly-evolving-video-landscape-display-ibc-2017/ https://bitmovin.com/constantly-evolving-video-landscape-dis... https://github.com/OpenVisualCloud/SVT-AV1 https://github.com/OpenVisualCloud/SVT-AV1
- alexandernst 8y agoThe article (nor my comment) doesn't say that AV1 can't do multithreading. What the article at texpion says is that it can't make CPU cores sustain hight loads the same way x264/x265 does. That said, I have no idea whatsoever about video codecs; I'm just saying what I understood from the link I was provided with.
- acdha 8y agoWhat value do you think your comment adds to the conversation? H.265 is a widely-used standard which millions of devices support and since it's older than AV1 anyone who cares about, for example, iOS users has the choice of using either H.265 or H.264 but not AV1. Even if you're using Chrome or Firefox on a desktop, you often don't want AV1 unless you have a burly CPU, aren't running on battery, and don't mind hearing your CPU fans (a quick search will show this is true even for WebM because millions of people still use devices which have hardware H.264 but require CPU-based decoding for WebM). If that's not true for you, a high-quality open-source H.265 encoder is a great tool. Here are the current support stats — note the distinct lack of a common format newer than MPEG-4 even before you consider hardware support: https://caniuse.com/#feat=mpeg4 https://caniuse.com/#feat=mpeg4 https://caniuse.com/#feat=hevc https://caniuse.com/#feat=hevc https://caniuse.com/#feat=webm https://caniuse.com/#feat=webm https://caniuse.com/#feat=av1 https://caniuse.com/#feat=av1
- Dylan16807 8y agoA lot of your argument is based on H.264, which is not part of the question. H.265 is not extremely common and also hard to CPU decode.
- acdha 8y agoI’m aware of that but did you notice where I mentioned iOS and linked to https://caniuse.com/#feat=hevc https://caniuse.com/#feat=hevc at the bottom? That was why I mentioned the lack of a common option beyond MPEG-4 — iOS has H.265 support in hardware so if you want a newer codec that’s your only option for a fairly large group of people, especially in the United States, and it’s where battery life matters a great deal. https://www.scientiamobile.com/growing-support-of-hevc-or-h-265-video-on-mobile-devices/ https://www.scientiamobile.com/growing-support-of-hevc-or-h-... has it at 80% of iOS and 60% of Android, which is a LOT better than 0% for AV1, and might even allow only doing 2 formats if enough of the devices with WebM also support HEVC.
- clouddrover 8y agoI think you're better off going with VP9 as your next-gen codec for now rather than HEVC despite the lack of iOS support. That's what Twitch is doing, for example. They say VP9 is a particularly good fit for them because they're getting a 25% bitrate reduction over H.264 in live streaming, they don't want the licensing headaches of HEVC, and because most of their viewers are using Firefox or Chrome on the desktop. Apple joined the Alliance for Open Media so they'll be adding AV1 support eventually. It'd be good if they also added VP9 support, especially because some of their laptops already have hardware decoding for VP9 in the CPU. Most Android phones have VP9 support so iOS joining in would be great.
- babypuncher 8y agoThe lack of hardware support in my home theater ecosystem makes AV1 a non-starter for me.
- microcolonel 8y ago> The lack of hardware support in my home theater ecosystem makes AV1 a non-starter for me. What is a home theater ecosystem? If you're using a HTPC with Kodi or Windows, you'll either soon have good realtime AV1 decoding, or already have it. It takes time, but it is coming along faster than other rollouts over the last couple decades. Microsoft had a usable AV1 decoder in the windows store basically a few weeks after the bitstream was frozen; and as dav1d is hooked in to more applications, the decode performance on commodity hardware (which can be cooled passively) is becoming good enough to be practical.
- babypuncher 8y agoI use my Nvidia Shield as well as the built in "smart" functionality on my TV, and a Roku Premiere+ in the basement. I also use an iPad Air to watch TV shows on the treadmill. Since a large chunk of the TV and movies I watch are ripped from disks I bought, I need to stick to formats these devices support. Apple put out a surprisingly competent software HEVC decoder for my iPad Air, and everything else here supports it natively.
- vetinari 8y agoBy the same criteria, HEVC is non-starter for me. Unfortunately for me, the world around me didn't stop developing, just to fulfill my wishes. Expect the same with AV1.
- babypuncher 8y agoh.264 is still completely viable, it's just a matter of storage. I have no burning desire to go back and re-rip my older blu-rays in HEVC.
- skunkworker 8y agoBetter? There isn't AV1 hardware decoding, encoding takes much much longer than h.264/h.265. We are only now starting to be able to target devices with h.265 reliability.
- shmerl 8y agoIt is surely better in the long term. AV1 encoders need a lot of work still to be usable though in real time, which is critical for something like WebRTC. For example, rav1e still needs multithreading support: https://github.com/xiph/rav1e/issues/132 https://github.com/xiph/rav1e/issues/132 And once encoders are ironed out, hardware support is also needed.
- qualityfirst 8y agoIn the end AV1 will likely have about the same level of adoption as VP9 ... pretty much googe/youtube only. Allowing Google to monopolize video standards is not something that the hardware world is going to accept. HEVC already has near universal hardware support. Why bother with supporting AV1?
- vetinari 8y agoGoogle, Netflix, Amazon... so basically overwhelming majority of the video on the Internet. Left is broadcast video, where the HEVC support can be relegated to set-top boxes. So yes, hardware world is going to accept AV1.
- clouddrover 8y agoIt's not just YouTube. Netflix uses VP9: https://medium.com/netflix-techblog/more-efficient-mobile-encodes-for-netflix-downloads-625d7b082909 https://medium.com/netflix-techblog/more-efficient-mobile-en... https://medium.com/netflix-techblog/performance-comparison-of-video-coding-standards-an-adaptive-streaming-perspective-d45d0183ca95 https://medium.com/netflix-techblog/performance-comparison-o... Twitch uses VP9: https://blog.twitch.tv/how-does-vp9-deliver-value-for-twitchs-esports-live-streaming-35db26f6322f https://blog.twitch.tv/how-does-vp9-deliver-value-for-twitch... Both Twitch and Netflix will use AV1 in the future.
- acdha 8y agoVP9 is the same generation as HEVC and performs about the same so the only reasons to favor one over the other would be financial and client support. For many providers this means 3 copies: VP9 for Android, HEVC for iOS/Mac, and H.264 for older devices. AV1 is newer and should offer improvements over both previous generation codecs. Hardware support will be a significant factor but it’s looking as if in a few years you’ll have the option to use one better format on most modern devices.
- Havoc 8y agoMust say I'm massively surprised at how low adoption of 265/hevc is in ahem the eyepatch wearing part of the internet.
- babypuncher 8y agoThat whole scene perplexes me. They're still obsessed with their 10bit h.264 videos which just don't even play on a Roku or smart TV. I've been using x265 for my personal rips for about two years now.
- josteink 8y agoSimple guess/answer: in quantity upload time/bw (x2 for x264) is massively cheaper than encoding time (x100 for x265). Also: if you’re doing 2160p 10bit HDR, there’s no chance those Rokus are going to play them anyway. Disclaimer: not involved with the scene at all, so this is mostly educated speculation.
- dahfizz 8y agoThey make 4k hdr Rokus
- paulmd 8y agoYou do encoding once, you pay for space/bandwidth forever. Same logic that Youtube uses.
- josteink 8y agoFor the scene BW costs are largely distributed so it doesn’t matter. Being furstcwith the release is. And then you don’t want to spend 10x-50x more time on your encode. The incentives here are nothing like YouTube.
- babypuncher 8y ago>10x-50x more time on your encode. x265 is nowhere near that much slower unless you are using a very high preset. Even preset #9 ("slow") is only about 2-3x slower than x264, in my experience.
- mrmondo 8y agoGreat to see Dolby Vision in the features there - I've been very impressed with it vs HDR10.
- shmerl 8y agoCan't wait for fast AV1 encoders, and especially hardware support.
- AceyMan 8y agoAm I the only one who came to TFA looking for a screaming ThinkPad with a 7-row keyboard? <snaps fingers> (downvotes—rly? That really was my first thought when I saw the title ...)
- userbinator 8y agoHaving spent time reading the standards recently (and implementing some toy decoders) I've noticed a pattern in video codec designs, starting from the very first one: H.261 - simple, not much more than MJPEG with P-frames. MPEG-1 - basically '261 with B-frames, pretty simple MPEG-2/H.262 - MPEG-1 with more complex interlacing stuff H.263 - no more interlacing, better low-bitrate performance MPEG-4 - absurd complexity that no one turned out to use most of anyway (3D scenes, face animation(!?), etc.) H.264 - back to regular video, with better I prediction H.265 - complex again? Of course they do get more complex over time, but it seems like a cycle that alternates between incremental-yet-significant changes and huge redesigns that don't seem quite worth it.
- richardwhiuk 8y agoH.264s intermediate frames are none trivial. Some features do get dropped, but in the majority later standards are more complex.
- ksec 8y agoYes they are all built on top of previous innovation and work. So it is a long evolution in terms of video codec. And there is H.266 coming in 2020.
- speedplane 8y agoIt is an evolution, but technological evolution doesn't necessarily follow an exponential curve. It took many years for H.264 and it looks like many more for H.266. The next version may take even longer. Innovation is slowing, and it has pretty profound effects for a variety of industrial sectors.
- nyuszika7h 8y agoPlease don't use code formatting when not necessary, it's really hard to read on mobile.
- tagrun 8y agoFilm grain synthesis of AV1 is apparently worth it: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8416572 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8416572
- nisten 8y agoFrom completely personal opinion and that of close friends: x265 movies look way cleaner while having way smaller file sizes. Also it's the best tradeoff between quality/filesize by factor of 2 or more. I'd personally notice artifacts in x264 movies unless they were over 7gb in size. With x265 i'll grab a 3gb version of a movie in a heartbeat (well a few heartbeats on gigabit fiber :) and not worry about picture quality at all. at 15gigs or more for a 1080p movie x264 is pretty much perfect, unless you really want to see the film-grain.
- ddalex 8y agoI'm re-coding all my drone footage from H.264 (hardware encoders on the drone) to x264. It's about 1/4th size with the same visual quality, so it's win-win