3 ms·
Huh. I wonder how encoding speeds compare. I rarely chose h265 over h264 because similar levels of visual quality took massively more time.
by donatj 6y ago
Huh. I wonder how encoding speeds compare. I rarely chose h265 over h264 because similar levels of visual quality took massively more time.
- corty 6y agoMy guess is, encoding speed will be worse. Video codecs for non-realtime applications are optimized for size and acceptably cheap playback. Encoding performance doesn't really matter since you encode only once but play and store more often.
- ctdeneen 6y agoBut for most situation you encode once and play multiple times. Wouldn't it be better to reduce storage and bandwidth costs with a smaller file (assuming the same quality)?
- donatj 6y agoIt's a trade off. When I have a batch of 40 videos and encoding h264 takes 20 minutes per video and h265 takes 4 hours means the difference between 13 days and 160 days. The latter isn't practical, I'll eat the couple hundred MB in order to save a lot of time.
- waterhouse 6y agoI think by "13 days and 160 days" you mean "13 hours and 160 hours".