8 ms·

Yeah. In general, this is a big problem, not only for VP8/9, but also for h265 (also known as HVEC). My computer struggles to render 1080p HVEC video lag-free.

by motbob 12y ago

Yeah. In general, this is a big problem, not only for VP8/9, but also for h265 (also known as HVEC). My computer struggles to render 1080p HVEC video lag-free. Early adopters should recognize that there are advantages to using h264 that have nothing to do with the quality of the codec itself.

zokier 12y ago
Is HVEC really used anywhere/by anybody yet?
- Sevzinn 12y ago
  My Vizio p series handles it fine (4K netflix).
  - skrowl 12y ago
    Came here to say "A little company called netflix uses it" but you beat me to it, good sir
- motbob 12y ago
  Anime groups are playing with it. Anime fansub groups, in general, are hungry for the absolute best in codec technology. Hardware and media player compatibility be damned. An example: their use of 10-bit color. There are some groups in the anime scene whose sole purpose is to take releases from other groups and convert them into standard h.264 video that can play on basically any device.
  - ancientworldnow 12y ago
    I'm a colorist. I spend all day looking at color intensely with very expensive monitors. It makes me really excited to see people who actually care about color reproduction over things like resolution. With that said, I have to ask why these groups are interested in 10-bit when I'm essentially certain they cannot view in 10-bit. Only workstation GPU's (Quadro and FirePro) output 10-bit (consumer GPU's are intentionally crippled to 8-bit) and I can't really think of any monitors that have 10-bit panels under about $1000 (though there are many with 10-bit processing which is nice but doesn't get you to 10-bit monitoring). There are some output boxes intended for video production that can get around the GPU problem, but by the time you've got a full 10-bit environment, you're at $1500 bare minimum which seems excessive for most consumer consumption. So I guess what I'm asking, are these groups interested in having 10-bit because it's better and more desirable (and a placebo quality effect) or are they actively watching these in full 10-bit environments?
    - algorithmsRcool 12y ago
      I am far from an expert on the matter, but i recall the case was made that acceptable color reproduction could be achieved with lower bitrates by using 10-bit encoding. It was about file size, i don't think anyone in the fansubing community expected people to have professional monitors.
    - motbob 12y ago
      It is a matter of filesize. Testing revealed that using 10-bit allowed for a better picture at similar target bitrates. For an explanation of why this is so, see http://x264.nl/x264/10bit_02-ateme-why_does_10bit_save_bandwidth.pdf http://x264.nl/x264/10bit_02-ateme-why_does_10bit_save_bandw...
    - TD-Linux 12y ago
      Most consumer sources are also-limited to 8-bit precision. 10-bit encodes from these are made using a fancy temporal debanding filter, which only works in certain cases. Keep in mind that there is a range expansion when converting to monitor sRGB. Also several video players now support dithering. So the debanding effect can often be quite visible. Also, x264 benefits from less noise in its references, which means 10-bit gets a small compression performance bump.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    - derf_ 12y ago
      > With that said, I have to ask why these groups are interested in 10-bit when I'm essentially certain they cannot view in 10-bit. The H.264 prediction loop includes some inherent rounding biases and noise injection. Using 10-bit instead of 8-bit reduces the injected noise by 12 dB, which makes a noticeable difference in quality-per-(encoded)-bit, even when the source and display are both 8-bit. I spent some time talking with Google engineers early on in the VP9 design process, and they commented that they had done some experiments, but did not see similar gains by using higher bit depths with VP9. I don't know if that's still true with the final VP9 design, though.
    - drewcrawford 12y ago
- praseodym 12y ago
  iPhone 6 and 6 Plus use H.265 for FaceTime: https://www.apple.com/iphone-6/specs/ https://www.apple.com/iphone-6/specs/ ("FaceTime over cellular uses H.264/H.265")
jk 12y ago
Minor correction: H.265 is HEVC - High Efficiency Video Coding. H.265 and VP9 will (most likely) have a lot of difference when we consider hardware encoders/decoders. I guess H.265 hardware decoders will be present on all platforms in the next couple of years. There are mobile processors that have hardware H.265 decoder. H.265 encoder seems to be a bit far. I am not sure whether someone has a production ready hardware encoder. On the other hand, VP9 is not a priority for most of the companies.
- TD-Linux 12y ago
  I think many thought this a year ago, but it's not the case any more. All of the major SoC vendors are shipping VP9 in their newest system-on-chips. In addition, a new licensing pool for HEVC just formed, and has yet to announce their licensing model or cost [1]. This is all the more reason for companies to look for alternatives. [1] http://hevcadvance.com/ http://hevcadvance.com/
- indolering 12y ago
  YouTube is only going to offer UHD over VP9, meaning that 4K smart TVs and set-top-boxes will have to support VP9. Google can also use their leverage over Android to influence mobile device makers. At $0.40 a pop, it makes sense for most SoCs to support it. Netflix has said they are going to use H.265, but they could adopt the same strategy as Google. They could even force their desktop customers to install the VP9 codec, just as they did for Silverlight. The primary problem is Apple, they simply won't support it. Thankfully, AppleTV hasn't caught fire, relegating their control of the market to the iPhone. Daala will be more amenable to acceleration via generic GPUs. It probably won't match dedicated hardware but if a mobile device can decode it and the bandwidth savings are significant, the lack of licensing fees will make it a very attractive option. Hopefully Daala will be significantly better than H.265 and win over Apple and others based on the merit of their codec alone.
  - semi-extrinsic 12y ago
    Why would anyone want more than 1080p on a phone?

by motbob 12y ago

zokier 12y ago

Is HVEC really used anywhere/by anybody yet?

Sevzinn 12y ago
My Vizio p series handles it fine (4K netflix).
- skrowl 12y ago
  Came here to say "A little company called netflix uses it" but you beat me to it, good sir
motbob 12y ago
Anime groups are playing with it. Anime fansub groups, in general, are hungry for the absolute best in codec technology. Hardware and media player compatibility be damned. An example: their use of 10-bit color. There are some groups in the anime scene whose sole purpose is to take releases from other groups and convert them into standard h.264 video that can play on basically any device.
- ancientworldnow 12y ago
  I'm a colorist. I spend all day looking at color intensely with very expensive monitors. It makes me really excited to see people who actually care about color reproduction over things like resolution. With that said, I have to ask why these groups are interested in 10-bit when I'm essentially certain they cannot view in 10-bit. Only workstation GPU's (Quadro and FirePro) output 10-bit (consumer GPU's are intentionally crippled to 8-bit) and I can't really think of any monitors that have 10-bit panels under about $1000 (though there are many with 10-bit processing which is nice but doesn't get you to 10-bit monitoring). There are some output boxes intended for video production that can get around the GPU problem, but by the time you've got a full 10-bit environment, you're at $1500 bare minimum which seems excessive for most consumer consumption. So I guess what I'm asking, are these groups interested in having 10-bit because it's better and more desirable (and a placebo quality effect) or are they actively watching these in full 10-bit environments?
  - algorithmsRcool 12y ago
    I am far from an expert on the matter, but i recall the case was made that acceptable color reproduction could be achieved with lower bitrates by using 10-bit encoding. It was about file size, i don't think anyone in the fansubing community expected people to have professional monitors.
  - motbob 12y ago
    It is a matter of filesize. Testing revealed that using 10-bit allowed for a better picture at similar target bitrates. For an explanation of why this is so, see http://x264.nl/x264/10bit_02-ateme-why_does_10bit_save_bandwidth.pdf http://x264.nl/x264/10bit_02-ateme-why_does_10bit_save_bandw...
  - TD-Linux 12y ago
    Most consumer sources are also-limited to 8-bit precision. 10-bit encodes from these are made using a fancy temporal debanding filter, which only works in certain cases. Keep in mind that there is a range expansion when converting to monitor sRGB. Also several video players now support dithering. So the debanding effect can often be quite visible. Also, x264 benefits from less noise in its references, which means 10-bit gets a small compression performance bump.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - derf_ 12y ago
    > With that said, I have to ask why these groups are interested in 10-bit when I'm essentially certain they cannot view in 10-bit. The H.264 prediction loop includes some inherent rounding biases and noise injection. Using 10-bit instead of 8-bit reduces the injected noise by 12 dB, which makes a noticeable difference in quality-per-(encoded)-bit, even when the source and display are both 8-bit. I spent some time talking with Google engineers early on in the VP9 design process, and they commented that they had done some experiments, but did not see similar gains by using higher bit depths with VP9. I don't know if that's still true with the final VP9 design, though.
  - drewcrawford 12y ago
praseodym 12y ago
iPhone 6 and 6 Plus use H.265 for FaceTime: https://www.apple.com/iphone-6/specs/ https://www.apple.com/iphone-6/specs/ ("FaceTime over cellular uses H.264/H.265")

jk 12y ago

Minor correction: H.265 is HEVC - High Efficiency Video Coding. H.265 and VP9 will (most likely) have a lot of difference when we consider hardware encoders/decoders. I guess H.265 hardware decoders will be present on all platforms in the next couple of years. There are mobile processors that have hardware H.265 decoder. H.265 encoder seems to be a bit far. I am not sure whether someone has a production ready hardware encoder. On the other hand, VP9 is not a priority for most of the companies.

TD-Linux 12y ago
I think many thought this a year ago, but it's not the case any more. All of the major SoC vendors are shipping VP9 in their newest system-on-chips. In addition, a new licensing pool for HEVC just formed, and has yet to announce their licensing model or cost [1]. This is all the more reason for companies to look for alternatives. [1] http://hevcadvance.com/ http://hevcadvance.com/
indolering 12y ago
YouTube is only going to offer UHD over VP9, meaning that 4K smart TVs and set-top-boxes will have to support VP9. Google can also use their leverage over Android to influence mobile device makers. At $0.40 a pop, it makes sense for most SoCs to support it. Netflix has said they are going to use H.265, but they could adopt the same strategy as Google. They could even force their desktop customers to install the VP9 codec, just as they did for Silverlight. The primary problem is Apple, they simply won't support it. Thankfully, AppleTV hasn't caught fire, relegating their control of the market to the iPhone. Daala will be more amenable to acceleration via generic GPUs. It probably won't match dedicated hardware but if a mobile device can decode it and the bandwidth savings are significant, the lack of licensing fees will make it a very attractive option. Hopefully Daala will be significantly better than H.265 and win over Apple and others based on the merit of their codec alone.
- semi-extrinsic 12y ago
  Why would anyone want more than 1080p on a phone?