6 ms·

Why not admit AV1 is all around better and work on it instead

by orastor 8y ago

alexandernst 8y ago
Can you post a link to some data so we can compare both, please?
- Koshkin 8y ago
  https://duckduckgo.com/?q=av1+vs+x265&t=ffnt&ia=web https://duckduckgo.com/?q=av1+vs+x265&t=ffnt&ia=web
  - alexandernst 8y ago
    I 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 ago
        The 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.
        clouddrover 8y ago
        dav1d can make use of the CPU at sustained high loads if you want it to. It can do over 30 frames a second on even a single core of an Apple A12X, and over 100 frames on an A12x using multiple cores.
    - paulmd 8y ago
      AV1 isn't mature enough to make it worth sinking a bunch of time into optimizing an encoder for yet. There will eventually be multi-threaded AV1 encoders but the format needs to stabilize first. There is no guarantee that a file you encode today will play on anything in the future. It is in no way ready for primetime, maybe in another 3-5 years it will be at the enthusiast/pirate stage and commercial usage in 7-10 years. Also, do bear in mind that the primary use-case here is for Youtube to cut down their bandwidth consumption, and other similar users who don't mind doing a one-time encode that either takes a while, or needs to be run with process-level parallelism (different files at the same time). Multi-threaded encoders are not really a primary design goal here. The format is practically worthless until there is a hardware decoder for it, nobody will software-decode AV1 on their smartphones or laptops. Nobody is going to design a hardware encoder until the standard stabilizes. Google can do all the Youtube encodes they want but they are going to have to keep developing and serving H264 for a long, long time.
      - clouddrover 8y ago
        > nobody will software-decode AV1 on their smartphones or laptops Dav1d (https://code.videolan.org/videolan/dav1d https://code.videolan.org/videolan/dav1d) runs fine on my laptop for 1080p AV1 decoding. Your mileage may vary. > Nobody is going to design a hardware encoder until the standard stabilizes. NGCodec will release a hardware encoder this year. They use FPGAs for their encoders. Twitch uses NGCodec for their live VP9 streaming: https://ngcodec.com/news/2019/1/7/ngcodec-announces-av1-support-and-a-2x-performance-improvement-in-broadcast-quality-live-video-encoding https://ngcodec.com/news/2019/1/7/ngcodec-announces-av1-supp... 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...
        galad87 8y ago
        It might run fine, but it won’t compare to the hardware decoder when running on battery.
        clouddrover 8y ago
acdha 8y ago
What 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 ago
  A 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 ago
    I’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 ago
      I 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 ago
The 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 ago
    I 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 ago
  By 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 ago
    h.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 ago
Better? 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 ago
It 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 ago
In 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 ago
  Google, 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 ago
  It'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 ago
  VP9 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.

Why not admit AV1 is all around better and work on it instead

alexandernst 8y ago

Can you post a link to some data so we can compare both, please?

Koshkin 8y ago
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=av1+vs+x265&t=ffnt&ia=web https://duckduckgo.com/?q=av1+vs+x265&t=ffnt&ia=web
- alexandernst 8y ago
  I 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 ago
      The 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.
      - clouddrover 8y ago
        dav1d can make use of the CPU at sustained high loads if you want it to. It can do over 30 frames a second on even a single core of an Apple A12X, and over 100 frames on an A12x using multiple cores.
  - paulmd 8y ago
    AV1 isn't mature enough to make it worth sinking a bunch of time into optimizing an encoder for yet. There will eventually be multi-threaded AV1 encoders but the format needs to stabilize first. There is no guarantee that a file you encode today will play on anything in the future. It is in no way ready for primetime, maybe in another 3-5 years it will be at the enthusiast/pirate stage and commercial usage in 7-10 years. Also, do bear in mind that the primary use-case here is for Youtube to cut down their bandwidth consumption, and other similar users who don't mind doing a one-time encode that either takes a while, or needs to be run with process-level parallelism (different files at the same time). Multi-threaded encoders are not really a primary design goal here. The format is practically worthless until there is a hardware decoder for it, nobody will software-decode AV1 on their smartphones or laptops. Nobody is going to design a hardware encoder until the standard stabilizes. Google can do all the Youtube encodes they want but they are going to have to keep developing and serving H264 for a long, long time.
    - clouddrover 8y ago
      > nobody will software-decode AV1 on their smartphones or laptops Dav1d (https://code.videolan.org/videolan/dav1d https://code.videolan.org/videolan/dav1d) runs fine on my laptop for 1080p AV1 decoding. Your mileage may vary. > Nobody is going to design a hardware encoder until the standard stabilizes. NGCodec will release a hardware encoder this year. They use FPGAs for their encoders. Twitch uses NGCodec for their live VP9 streaming: https://ngcodec.com/news/2019/1/7/ngcodec-announces-av1-support-and-a-2x-performance-improvement-in-broadcast-quality-live-video-encoding https://ngcodec.com/news/2019/1/7/ngcodec-announces-av1-supp... 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...
      - galad87 8y ago
        It might run fine, but it won’t compare to the hardware decoder when running on battery.
        clouddrover 8y ago

acdha 8y ago

What 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 ago
A 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 ago
  I’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 ago
    I 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 ago

The 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 ago
  I 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 ago
By 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 ago
  h.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 ago

Better? 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 ago

It 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 ago

In 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 ago
Google, 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 ago
It'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 ago
VP9 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.