4 ms·
We aren't having a coherent conversation here. I mentioned two things: (1) the bigger issue, h264 decoder, Cisco already paid royalties for OpenH264 (when link
by tagrun 6y ago
We aren't having a coherent conversation here.
I mentioned two things: (1) the bigger issue, h264 decoder, Cisco already paid royalties for OpenH264 (when linked to their binary) so they simply have no real excuse for not having H264 decoding on Linux (2) lack of CPU encoder on Linux (it's not clear to me why you're bringing up Adobe since it has nothing to do with encoding on Linux), x264 is the gold standard for encoding H.264. NVENC isn't. The x264 binary can be shipped with proprietary products and they also offer a licensing option for linked usage. Similar comparison (NVENC vs x265) goes for H.265.
- Erlich_Bachman 6y agoYou are right, I guess they could make a better product. My point was that BM is still the company (maybe even the only one?) that gives most to Linux world, of all the big media software companies. A free version of an editor of the top tier that is Resolve, supported (!) on some version of Linux, is just unheard of. My other point was to show that other comparable companies are also having issues with encoding output, that this aspect is not always taken seriously for some reason. And yes, NVENC sucks and AFAIK it is impossible to configure it to produce the same resulting quality (per Mbps) of encoding than what is possible x264/x265, regardless of whether one wants to sacrifice encoding time or not.