Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×
Graphics Software

Moscow State University Releases 10th HEVC Video Codec Comparison (compression.ru) 51

An anonymous reader writes: The Graphics and Media Lab Video Group of Moscow State University has released its tenth video codecs comparison. This latest comparison focuses on HEVC codecs and includes some non-HEVC codecs such as x264 and VP9. The report concludes that Intel's MSS HEVC Software codec leads the pack in the "fast transcoding" use case whereas x265 takes the lead in the "ripping" use case. VP9 compares favorably to the HEVC codecs in the fixed quality and the speed versus quality test cases. See the PDF version of the report for more details.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Moscow State University Releases 10th HEVC Video Codec Comparison

Comments Filter:
  • Bandwidth savings using these codecs are remarkable. I can't wait until more hardware support for low power recording and decoding on most devices, and wider app support on the desktop. I've been wanting to transcode some of my media to fool around with quality and size settings but haven't seen much support in common apps yet.
  • by QuantumReality ( 3756741 ) on Sunday October 18, 2015 @08:48AM (#50753257)
    Encoding times. You can't squeeze more in less space without cost, cost here are cpu cycles. Encoding times of higher quality stuff which i did was about 5-6 times longer than comparable quality of x264. But it's size was around 40-50% smaller than x264 one. There is a cost not only in encoding, there is a cost in decoding too, it takes a lot more cpu cycles to decode x265. Either way HEVC is VERY GOOD codec.
    • by Anonymous Coward

      HEVC doesn't work with low power devices. I can't show a 1080p video on a 5 year old laptop, and it runs pretty clunky on one I bought last year. So before you go mad encoding everything in it realize that it uses about 2-4x the cpu to show the same video. This basically can break them for anything not running a discreet gpu. Pardon me if I sit out the "public beta" period of the codec. :)

      • HEVC is not supported by most HW. This situation is a similar one as when 1080p started to become popular less than ten years ago. Software like KMPlayer were the thing to have installed. Either you have supporting SW and HW or you are going to suffer a lot. I just hope that most HW video decoding blocks in computers can be of any use for HEVC. I know most appliances like SmartTVs will not.
        • Most desktop computers are powerful enough play back HEVC through software decoding. Many newer ARM-based SoCs already include HEVC hardware decoding support for 720p and 1080p video, the most common video quality found in the web and the torrent scene. An example is the Qualcomm Snapdragon 410 [qualcomm.com]:

          1080p HD video playback and capture with H.264 (AVC)
          720p playback with H.265 (HEVC)
          DASH is supported

          Most of the major Chinese semiconductor design companies already produce mid-range SoCs capable of decoding 4K HE [wikipedia.org]

        • by slaker ( 53818 ) on Sunday October 18, 2015 @10:47AM (#50753637)

          The first time I played an MP3, my 486 sputtered and couldn't manage an unbroken audio stream. The first time I played a DVD, I needed a dedicated daughterboard to handle decoding.

          Right now, HEVC needs decent hardware and encoding takes a good long while. But it does play back fine on everything I have sitting around, going back to 3rd generation Core i CPUs, even with just Intel graphics. The i3 NUC in my living room doesn't have any problem with it at all. My STBs can't do it, but I can hand transcoding off to Plex and then they're fine as well. Given another year and everybody well catch or surpass Amazon's FireTV and have support for it as well. At that point, just like MP3s, MPEG2 and x.264, we'll be back to taking hardware support for granted.

        • HEVC is not supported by most HW.

          HEVC is actually pretty well supported by mobile - devices and "smart-TVs" provided they are 2-3 years old or newer. Support on desktops and laptops is still lagging behind, but it's getting better fast there, too.

      • Whilst this is currently true, the situation is improving rapidly. I've been periodically testing the OpenELEC Kodi Jarvis alpha builds [forum.kodi.tv] on my Raspberry Pi 2.

        The previous time I tested it (a month or so ago), 720p HEVC was just playable - ~100% CPU on both cores, but only dropping the occasional frame. The time before that, 720p HEVC was unwatchable. But with build #1016 (which includes FFMPEG 2.8.1) I was getting smooth playback and averaging around 60% CPU on both cores.

        HEVC will obviously never have the s

      • by Hodr ( 219920 )

        It certainly does, just needs to be newer hardware. I have a $130 Braswell based NUC that I play x265 media on (1080p, no 4k) without issues. And it runs sub 15 watts for the total system.

  • I might be reading the partial report wrong, but as far as I understood, x264 is not scoring low against HEVC. Either that or HEVC encoders are not mature enough. I get that the "real-time" encoder has very specific constraints, but how about the others?
    • by Kjella ( 173770 ) on Sunday October 18, 2015 @10:54AM (#50753661) Homepage

      I might be reading the partial report wrong, but as far as I understood, x264 is not scoring low against HEVC. Either that or HEVC encoders are not mature enough. I get that the "real-time" encoder has very specific constraints, but how about the others?

      From what I understand there's three areas where HEVC does very well:
      - Extremely low bitrates, because there's more blurring and less blocking that looks less bad.
      - 4K/UHD resolution because it supports larger block sizes that are more efficient at high resolution.
      - Better parallelism (WPP) for software decoding, if you have full hardware support it doesn't matter.

      For moderate resolutions like 1080p at moderate bit rates x264 is still performing very well and it's highly optimized. HEVC brings some new tricks that should improve compression further, but nothing really revolutionary like 20-30%. I mean there's better picture compression than JPG and better audio compression than MP3 but they're "close enough", at this point there's no big need to hurry unless you control the entire ecosystem like say Netflix or YouTube and can do HEVC where it's supported and downgrade to H.264 where it's not. For encoding to a broad number of unknown devices it's going to be H.264 for a long time to come. Looking at broadband speeds most people will either have so fast connections it doesn't matter or so slow connections it doesn't matter, there aren't many in the gap where the size difference is really significant. And I got a feeling 100GB for 4K BluRay is plenty, there are many movies now using only 20-40GB of the possible 50GB so I suspect we'll see H.264 used quite a bit there too. And the commercial terms for HEVC are worse, so there's very little compelling need to use it really.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      > I might be reading the partial report wrong, but as far as I understood, x264 is not scoring low against HEVC.

      That was my take away. At very, very low bitrates HEVC produced superior results, but once you got to around 4mbps the difference between x264 and the best HEVC encoders was negligible. For me, ~4mbps is the bare minimum for 1080p anyway, so that makes HEVC useless to me as of now. That is kind of disappointing, actually.

      > Either that or HEVC encoders are not mature enough.

      I am confide

  • by Anonymous Coward

    My experience with x265 and 4K video has been quite poor. Transcoding speeds are slow, like under 10fps on a i7-4790K CPU @ 4.00GHz.

    Decoding/playback is barely OK. VLC playback of 4K HEVC video crushes the processor and there are far too many hangs/glitches.

    The fact that x265 doesn't, and perhaps won't, have any sort of hardware acceleration support just makes it awful to do 4K work.

    • The fact that x265 doesn't, and perhaps won't, have any sort of hardware acceleration support just makes it awful to do 4K work.

      x265, just like x264, are software-encoders; of course they're going to be slow. If you want hardware-accelerated encoding you could, for example, get yourself a GTX 960 and compile ffmpeg with NVENC - support. I have a GTX 970 and I've played around with ffmpeg with NVENC quite a bit and if my memory serves correctly I get around ~90 FPS when encoding 1080p - source using NVENC. I haven't tried with 4K - video, I'll grant you that, so I have no idea how fast it can encode that. I could try it, I suppose, i

  • How the hell does Microsoft manage to get away so such dismal compatibility?

    • by Anonymous Coward

      No web browser supports H.265 (aka HEVC) video. In contrast Firefox, Chrome, Opera, and soon Microsoft Edge [windows.com] support VP9 video. So don't worry about H.265 for browsers. Just use VP9 and be happy.

  • by RenHoek ( 101570 ) on Sunday October 18, 2015 @11:50AM (#50753897) Homepage

    Doesn't matter how good x265 is, as long as patent litigation clouds keep forming over it, it will not succeed.

    • by delt0r ( 999393 )
      these codec specs reads like there are 100 engineers each with 2 lawyers and a patent attorney trying to get there little block filter or other obvious optimisation into the spec. Each little "feature" is another patented "invention". It is litterly designed by committee to *be a licensing nightmare*.
      • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

        these codec specs reads like there are 100 engineers each with 2 lawyers and a patent attorney trying to get there little block filter or other obvious optimisation into the spec. Each little "feature" is another patented "invention". It is litterly designed by committee to *be a licensing nightmare*.

        Which is why patent pool organizations were set up. Instead of trying to figure out which of the thousands of people you have to negotiate with, you go to the patent pool, and buy your licenses. No negotiations

"I prefer rogues to imbeciles, because they sometimes take a rest." -- Alexandre Dumas (fils)

Working...