3 ms·
And how did you measure the quality of the outputted file? This matters a huge amount, it doesn't matter if you are 4 times as quick if the output is not up to
by timc3 15y ago
And how did you measure the quality of the outputted file? This matters a huge amount, it doesn't matter if you are 4 times as quick if the output is not up to the standards needed by the client.
- jon_dahl 15y agoDefinitely - this is important as a control. Every test was done using the same core settings (codecs, profiles, resolution, frame rate, bitrates, two-pass encoding). Beyond that, CloudHarmony used the default settings at each provider. We'll try to publish each video for visual inspection, but suffice it to say that they all look pretty close, especially three of the four, which use the same core encoder (x264) and the same settings. There may be microversion differences and minor variations in settings, but not much. The fourth uses MainConcept, which isn't a bad encoder itself. You'll probably see a bigger spread in audio quality - Encoding.com and Panda rely on faac, I think, which is an abandoned AAC encoder that isn't very good.