7 ms·
Hugely slower, and there is little (maybe zero?) hardware encoding support out there, which makes it too expensive for most use cases. You are completely right
by spenczar5 7y ago
Hugely slower, and there is little (maybe zero?) hardware encoding support out there, which makes it too expensive for most use cases.
You are completely right about Netflix’s needs here. Spending thousands of dollars on re-encoding video to shave off 1% of its size in bytes can easily be profitable at the scale of a hit show like Stranger Things.
- microcolonel 7y agoAnd the savings are much better than 1%, if they really do spend that much time encoding. The complexity of encoding is relatively similar for equivalent quality/bitrate (at least with some of the encoders).
- tambre 7y ago> there is little (maybe zero?) hardware encoding support out there There are companies offering cloud AV1 FPGA encoding on beefy servers. I'd imagine the performance and quality is much better than what is available to mere mortals right now.
- MayeulC 7y agoYeah, I was going to comment to that effect as well. Another comment implied they went for SVT-AV1, but (provided the IP is available) encoding on a big FPGA makes sense, regardless of the codec. Plus, you buy the HW once, and can use it multiple times thereafter.