5 ms·

Why is this being done, when AV1 exists? It's hard to see HEVC as anything else than a legal liability.

by snvzz 4y ago

alwillis 4y ago
From https://www.dignited.com/93186/av1-vs-hevc/ https://www.dignited.com/93186/av1-vs-hevc/: Compared to HEVC, AV1 is still relatively new hence it suffers limited hardware support. Again it is key to note that Intel, AMD, Nvidia, Qualcomm, and most hardware manufacturers already had support for the incumbent HEVC. That means that a hardware accelerated encoder can run HEVC 5x faster than AV1. And… A vast majority of devices in the market; phones, TVs, tablets, cameras, browsers, professional-grade applications, etc come with a built-in ability to decode HEVC. Even those coming from the founding fathers of the AV1 codec have added support for HEVC.
- snvzz 4y ago
  >Even those coming from the founding fathers of the AV1 codec have added support for HEVC. Shameful.
chrisseaton 4y ago
> Why is this being done To play HEVC files. > when AV1 exists? In case your files aren't AV1, or in case you don't have the hardware to play AV1. Not a mystery is it?
- bubblethink 4y ago
  The mystery is who is paying whom ? Is Microsoft paying for HEVC licences ? Google ? Distributor ? Silicon vendors ? All of them ? The question above is, "Why use HEVC(pay) when AV1 exists ?". Or, "Why care about AV1 if everyone is paying ?"
  - chrisseaton 4y ago
    > The mystery is who is paying whom ? Hardware IP people are paying licenser people, with consumers eventually paying hardware IP people. > "Why use HEVC(pay) when AV1 exists ?" Because HEVC has hardware support, right now, so it's faster. > "Why care about AV1 if everyone is paying ?" People don't much.
    - int_19h 4y ago
      > Hardware IP people are paying licenser people, with consumers eventually paying hardware IP people. On Windows, at least, the end users have to purchase individual HEVC licenses.
      - fomine3 4y ago
        "HEVC Video Extensions from Device Manufacturer" is also available for free. It should be already paid by device manufacturer.
    - bubblethink 4y ago
      >Because HEVC has hardware support, right now, so it's faster. Most new hardware supports hardware decode for AV1 too. There were 1-2 generations prior to the current one that had HECV but not AV1, but that sample size will become irrelevant over time. >People don't much. Well, clearly people who make decisions do. If you ask an average person on the street if they care about HEVC or AV1, they don't. If you ask Netflix or Google, they do.
      - threeseed 4y ago
        PS5, XBox One, Chromecast, iPhone, iPad, AppleTV support HEVC but not AV1. And they represent a significant proportion of video consumption devices.
        CameronNemo 4y ago
        Chrome runs on a fraction of those platforms...
crazygringo 4y ago
Gigantic performance improvement (and battery life) because it's (only) for when you have hardware decoding. Why would there be legal liability when it's just passing through to the existing hardware decoder?
eklitzke 4y ago
There are a bunch of devices today that have hardware acceleration for HEVC decoding but don't have hardware acceleration for AV1.
threeseed 4y ago
Because HEVC is significantly more popular than AV1. It is the default video format of iPhones and the standard for Torrents.
bitL 4y ago
Most older hardware has HEVC decoding but only the last few gens have AV1. My 10980XE is like 96% occupied while watching AV1 without HW acceleration so many smaller devices can't do anything resembling a smooth playback.
- snvzz 4y ago
  >My 10980XE is like 96% occupied while watching AV1 without HW acceleration That shouldn't be the case. I play AV1 (via dav1d, software) w/o issue on much weaker CPUs than that (a zen1 laptop cpu and a haswell i7). The CPU is mostly idle.
- clouddrover 4y ago
  > My 10980XE is like 96% occupied while watching AV1 without HW acceleration That seems high. What resolution and frame rate is the video? And which decoder are you using? dav1d is a highly optimized software decoder so that's the one to try: https://code.videolan.org/videolan/dav1d/ https://code.videolan.org/videolan/dav1d/ It's used in Firefox, Chrome, ffmpeg, etc.
  - bitL 4y ago
    I tried it on some 8K HDR test video on YouTube on Linux/Firefox... All 18 cores and 36 threads at ~96%. NUC with an older Atom (7PJYH) gave like 0.1fps...
    - clouddrover 4y ago
      Which video and when did you try it? dav1d has improved a lot over time. You should try it again. You should also try any other AV1 video on YouTube. There's a lot of it there these days.
LeoPanthera 4y ago
> It's hard to see HEVC as anything else than a legal liability. I actually think the truth is the exact reverse. HEVC has easy-to-license patent pools. A couple of clicks and done. The patent situation surrounding AV1 is complex. It claims to be a free format but multiple entities claim patents that cover it. A submarine patent lawsuit seems likely.
- shmerl 4y ago
  Submarine patent lawsuits have the same probability for both of them. But guaranteed patent leeching applies only to HEVC. So HEVC has only downsides, no upsides in comparison.
  - chrisseaton 4y ago
    If you've paid for HEVC you can say 'hey, I tried to do the right thing'. If you don't pay for AV1 it looks like you were trying to avoid doing the right thing.
    - Dylan16807 4y ago
      > If you don't pay for AV1 it looks like you were trying to avoid doing the right thing. No it doesn't.
    - shmerl 4y ago
      That sounds like "if you paid your racketeer, you can expect you'll be OK". However tomorrow you can get an additional racketeer to the first and both will demand payment then. First won't care to protect you from the second. Unlike mob protection racket they aren't exclusive. The right thing here is use something that doesn't have a default protection racket attached.
      - chrisseaton 4y ago
        I wasn't personally endorsing it - I was explaining how some people think.
    - deleted 4y ago
Conan_Kudo 4y ago
It's probably being done for Apple TV+ compatibility. Apple uses HEVC for that.

Why is this being done, when AV1 exists? It's hard to see HEVC as anything else than a legal liability.

by snvzz 4y ago

Why is this being done, when AV1 exists? It's hard to see HEVC as anything else than a legal liability.

From https://www.dignited.com/93186/av1-vs-hevc/ https://www.dignited.com/93186/av1-vs-hevc/: Compared to HEVC, AV1 is still relatively new hence it suffers limited hardware support. Again it is key to note that Intel, AMD, Nvidia, Qualcomm, and most hardware manufacturers already had support for the incumbent HEVC. That means that a hardware accelerated encoder can run HEVC 5x faster than AV1. And… A vast majority of devices in the market; phones, TVs, tablets, cameras, browsers, professional-grade applications, etc come with a built-in ability to decode HEVC. Even those coming from the founding fathers of the AV1 codec have added support for HEVC.

snvzz 4y ago
>Even those coming from the founding fathers of the AV1 codec have added support for HEVC. Shameful.

chrisseaton 4y ago

> Why is this being done To play HEVC files. > when AV1 exists? In case your files aren't AV1, or in case you don't have the hardware to play AV1. Not a mystery is it?

bubblethink 4y ago
The mystery is who is paying whom ? Is Microsoft paying for HEVC licences ? Google ? Distributor ? Silicon vendors ? All of them ? The question above is, "Why use HEVC(pay) when AV1 exists ?". Or, "Why care about AV1 if everyone is paying ?"
- chrisseaton 4y ago
  > The mystery is who is paying whom ? Hardware IP people are paying licenser people, with consumers eventually paying hardware IP people. > "Why use HEVC(pay) when AV1 exists ?" Because HEVC has hardware support, right now, so it's faster. > "Why care about AV1 if everyone is paying ?" People don't much.
  - int_19h 4y ago
    > Hardware IP people are paying licenser people, with consumers eventually paying hardware IP people. On Windows, at least, the end users have to purchase individual HEVC licenses.
    - fomine3 4y ago
      "HEVC Video Extensions from Device Manufacturer" is also available for free. It should be already paid by device manufacturer.
  - bubblethink 4y ago
    >Because HEVC has hardware support, right now, so it's faster. Most new hardware supports hardware decode for AV1 too. There were 1-2 generations prior to the current one that had HECV but not AV1, but that sample size will become irrelevant over time. >People don't much. Well, clearly people who make decisions do. If you ask an average person on the street if they care about HEVC or AV1, they don't. If you ask Netflix or Google, they do.
    - threeseed 4y ago
      PS5, XBox One, Chromecast, iPhone, iPad, AppleTV support HEVC but not AV1. And they represent a significant proportion of video consumption devices.
      - CameronNemo 4y ago
        Chrome runs on a fraction of those platforms...

crazygringo 4y ago

Gigantic performance improvement (and battery life) because it's (only) for when you have hardware decoding. Why would there be legal liability when it's just passing through to the existing hardware decoder?

eklitzke 4y ago

There are a bunch of devices today that have hardware acceleration for HEVC decoding but don't have hardware acceleration for AV1.

threeseed 4y ago

Because HEVC is significantly more popular than AV1. It is the default video format of iPhones and the standard for Torrents.

bitL 4y ago

Most older hardware has HEVC decoding but only the last few gens have AV1. My 10980XE is like 96% occupied while watching AV1 without HW acceleration so many smaller devices can't do anything resembling a smooth playback.

snvzz 4y ago
>My 10980XE is like 96% occupied while watching AV1 without HW acceleration That shouldn't be the case. I play AV1 (via dav1d, software) w/o issue on much weaker CPUs than that (a zen1 laptop cpu and a haswell i7). The CPU is mostly idle.
clouddrover 4y ago
> My 10980XE is like 96% occupied while watching AV1 without HW acceleration That seems high. What resolution and frame rate is the video? And which decoder are you using? dav1d is a highly optimized software decoder so that's the one to try: https://code.videolan.org/videolan/dav1d/ https://code.videolan.org/videolan/dav1d/ It's used in Firefox, Chrome, ffmpeg, etc.
- bitL 4y ago
  I tried it on some 8K HDR test video on YouTube on Linux/Firefox... All 18 cores and 36 threads at ~96%. NUC with an older Atom (7PJYH) gave like 0.1fps...
  - clouddrover 4y ago
    Which video and when did you try it? dav1d has improved a lot over time. You should try it again. You should also try any other AV1 video on YouTube. There's a lot of it there these days.

LeoPanthera 4y ago

> It's hard to see HEVC as anything else than a legal liability. I actually think the truth is the exact reverse. HEVC has easy-to-license patent pools. A couple of clicks and done. The patent situation surrounding AV1 is complex. It claims to be a free format but multiple entities claim patents that cover it. A submarine patent lawsuit seems likely.

shmerl 4y ago
Submarine patent lawsuits have the same probability for both of them. But guaranteed patent leeching applies only to HEVC. So HEVC has only downsides, no upsides in comparison.
- chrisseaton 4y ago
  If you've paid for HEVC you can say 'hey, I tried to do the right thing'. If you don't pay for AV1 it looks like you were trying to avoid doing the right thing.
  - Dylan16807 4y ago
    > If you don't pay for AV1 it looks like you were trying to avoid doing the right thing. No it doesn't.
  - shmerl 4y ago
    That sounds like "if you paid your racketeer, you can expect you'll be OK". However tomorrow you can get an additional racketeer to the first and both will demand payment then. First won't care to protect you from the second. Unlike mob protection racket they aren't exclusive. The right thing here is use something that doesn't have a default protection racket attached.
    - chrisseaton 4y ago
      I wasn't personally endorsing it - I was explaining how some people think.
  - deleted 4y ago

Conan_Kudo 4y ago

It's probably being done for Apple TV+ compatibility. Apple uses HEVC for that.