>takes 10 times as long to encode than x264>get a worse quality videowhat were they thinking here?
To this fucking day x264 still has the best psycho visual optimizations lmao. Absolute peak of video encoding and it was all thanks to anime spergs who meticulously tuned every single ASM instruction to perfection.
>>109767705x265's main party trick is hardware encoding. Hardware wants simpler search spaces that can be spread over many parallel tasks and h.264 has to take a massive quality loss to achieve that. h.265 does not. But despite this design goal, NVEnc has a truly pathetic realtime encoder so all the twitch dweebs think h.265 sucks when it's just their crappy proprietary encoder that sucks.x264 is just a better balance between encoding time, quality and disk usage though for general use. It's kinda like MP3 - objectively inferior to AAC but so much effort went into perfecting the encoding in LAME that the results are typically superior to AAC provided you don't care that decoding MP3 is a floating point heavy task that AAC was designed to fix.
>>109767733>it was all thanks to my 2d simple color children's cartoonsyeah. no
>>109767950
>>109767956no offense. but it was mainly people on forums like videohelp and doom9 and communities like hdbits like who spent years experimenting with parameters and figuring out how to reliably get a visually transparent encode of live action at like half the source file size
someone is paying for this thread with how licensing costs have gone up
The secret that they don't want you to know is that "efficiency" as modern video codecs define it is typically antithetical to "transparency" as people on forums and piracy communities define it. They're aiming for an okay result at lower bitrates, not perfection. Why? To cut costs. Shaving pennies off of CDN bills adds up to dollars when it's done at scale. They pretend that the streaming era has made things better and more modern but it's not actually going in a good direction.
>>109767969all the nerds did their part :DMy point still stands that x264's psychovisuals are still king because they were designed around subjective quality rather than simply trying to pass metrics such as SSIM, VMAF etc. which is what I think >>109768072 is hinting at
>>109767705>x265the reason shit pushed is simple af"Apple is one of many organizations that hold Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) for the H.265 (HEVC) video standard, which x265 implements"they used partially (mostly) expired patent portfolio to chain patent 265 after 264USA IP is a scam, just like mickey mouse was patented for 20y or so and expired something 80 or 100y later.ofc if you register something new it not magically scam patented 60y after your death
>>109768243This is why Google pushed VP8/VP9 instead and now AV1 is next up. As consumers the cost is just baked in to whatever products we purchase and it gets passed onto us. But the industry has wised up to how much of a scam it is and prepared to move away from it even before the rates that were asked of them started to become extortionate. Sadly governments haven't caught up and we have the most retarded shit happening, like ATSC 3.0 crippling the future of the broadcast TV industry in the US.
I see 264 I see 265 I pick the bigger number.Simple as
>>109768318isn't it only retarded boomers that watch TV these days anyway?
>>109768352When I still lived in the US I watched it. News and sports programming for free, what's not to like about that? It's higher quality than the pirated internet streams I used for all the cable channels too.
>>109767705they were thinking goyim will gobble it up like polacks gobble up ukrainian shit
>>109768339I pick the lower number because I don't like bloat
>>109767705>takes 10 times as long to encode than x264>t. poopjet with i5 2500kI'm encoding only to av1, which is superior to both h264 and h265
>>109769201>superiorlol
>>109768430Eventually, bus will come for you too, zigger.
>>109769201av1 is only better at very low bitrate, not when you want quality encodes.
>>109767705How the fuck x266 is still not out despite H.266 existing for a long time at this point? MulticoreWare still promises x266 soon on their website since 2023
>>109769201>>109769382>>109769722Sorry for plebbit link but someone who knows what they're doing actually tested whether AV1 is only beneficial at low quality/low bitrate and that doesn't seem to be the case when using a super state of the SSimulacra2 state of the art quality metric. A score of 80 is probably what the library of congress would use for archiving footage, at least lossy variants of said footage, anything beyond "Distortion not noticeable by an average observer in a side-by-side comparison at 1:1 from a normal viewing distance." is probably autism deluxe. Anyway if you're interested in AV1 there's tons of altchans out there that support it, I really recommend you check them out because this place is becoming obsolete.>80 = very high quality. Distortion not noticeable by an average observer in a side-by-side comparison at 1:1 from a normal viewing distance.https://github.com/cloudinary/ssimulacra2https://www.reddit.com/r/AV1/comments/1jpku0s/codec_encoder_comparison/
>>109769739The interest is waning as AV2 gets released. Though both VVC and AV2 will remain niche as they're primarily intended to compress 8K video not little 720p/1080p rips/clips/media floating around right now.
>>109771266god i need it for my vr porn library...
>>109767939>x265's main party trick is hardware encoding...do i even bother reading the rest when you're showing a complete lack of understanding on the subject at the first fucking sentence?x265 is literally a software encoder, retard.
>>109771228>quality metricnot this shit again.
>>109771266>Though both VVC and AV2 will remain niche as they're primarily intended to compress 8K videothis makes no sense, av1 was also aimed at making 8k video possible, and it's what allowed youtube to introduce 8k uploads...but it's still more efficient at lower resolutions, 4k at the bitrates streaming services aim for is still not really feasable and ends up looking like a "1080p+" at best even with av1.av2 is still going to be very useful at 1080p-4k.
>>109767705For me it's AV1+Opus>t. Stallman
>>109771781It's state of the art and backed up countless subjective tests. Not saying it's perfect but it's miles ahead of a simple vmaf inspection that just tells netflix if the average joe will shit his pants or not (ie not good for estimating high fidelity).>>109771791It's because of the Dav1d project. Most people are probably aware that SVT-AV1 encodes faster than the shit ass x265 encoder but in addition to that extensive work was done to make AV1 as backward compatible with older CPUs all the way back from the haswell era without requiring any kind of AV1 hardware decoding ASIC. Thus even if AV2 provides significant compression efficiency gains over AV1 at 1080p it likely won't be used for that due to how decode friendly AV1 is.Similarly this is why a growing trend of adopting WebP over JXL or AVIF is seen on the web as a whole. The loss in compression efficiency is compensated by WebP being so easy to decode even shit ass dual-core chromebooks have no problem with it.
I wish I still gave a shitx265 still being used by the worst encoders out there to produce trash encodes is still so annoying. I don't mind what codec is used but the curryslurpers took that shit and ran with it so I just ignore it mostly at least for 1080p shit. At least when it comes to 4K they curryslurpers don't bother touching those releases for the most part.
>>109767705retard trying to encode x265 (HEVC) on old hardware without hardware acceleration, or at the very least, using a software encoder with terrible settingsmany such cases
>>109771882...why wouldn't av2 also be decode friendly?dav2d is already a thing and it's only like 20-30 heavier than dav1d, cpus from the haswell era will also only become less relevant as time goes on>Similarly this is why a growing trend of adopting WebP over JXL or AVIF is seen on the web as a whole. The loss in compression efficiency is compensated by WebP being so easy to decode even shit ass dual-core chromebooks have no problem with it.avif/jxl is also no problem for that kind of hardware and power consumption of wifi/lte data transmission means on battery constrained devices (such as the chromebooks you're mentioning) jxl/avif are more power efficient than webp, how many times do we need to have this conversation? kys daiz.
>>109771963this is the second time in this thread someone claims x265 can take advantage of hardware accelerationat this point this must be some feature of the encoder i just haven't heard about... care to explain?
>>109771996my nigga,x265 provides identicalor superior visual quality to x264 at half the file size tho you gottaup the CRF bitrate and use thesettings you would for x264also, quick sync solves this problemstop using outdated hardware andterrible software presets, problemsolved
>>109772119and DON'T* use the settings you would for x264
>>109771882>fasterahhh so you're just another poor bottlenecking his CPU with bad software encoder presets and terrible hardware
>>109771882>It's state of the art and backed up countless subjective tests.it put vp9 above x265 so, yeah no thanks.screenshots/video samples only.
>>109772119You shouldn't post.
>>109772119>superior visual quality to x264>at half the file sizenice meme. av1 also claims that vs h265 so I guess you should be able to show an av1 encode 1/4 size of x264 it's like you guys need glasses
When I feel lazy i use mp4 cause it encodes fastest on my 4090 with NVENC or whatever.I see no difference, takes <2 secs to make a vid like this. It's basically a fancy gif, and I'm happy
>>109767939ur spot on about Twitch dweebs and the limits of ultra-low-latency real-time NVENC bt applying live-streaming logic to archival storage is a massive miss. woo lad the MP3/LAME analogy doesn’t hold up anymore since libx265 has had over a decade of optimization and saves 45% disk space over x264 at identical visual transparency, to boot, x264 is completely useless for 4K, 10-bit depth, and HDR/Dolby Vision if you're building a modern high-tier library, x264 is a dinosaur and shouldn't even be a consideration>>109772353you lost. i accept your concession>>109772354you really are a poor watching encoded videos on a 720p panel
>>109771969Because it's more complex in general and CPUs from the haswell era will only become irrelevant when the computer themselves finally die and we've had gloating about i5-2500K PCs being "good enough" for the last decade or so. I mean I don't know what to tell you man, websites would clearly save billions if not trillions of dollars if they use JXL/AVIF instead of WebP but in real life that doesn't happen because in the end WebP is incredibly decode friendly toward those dual-core chromebooks. If an entire website does not load in 1 second users tend to leave so if a JXL image is pinning both CPU cores, causing the entire fucking thing to lockup for 5 seconds, you're gonna have users not coming back to your website.Even AVIF which "daiz" would be strongly shilling for is seen struggling here despite it benefiting from Dav1d improvements over the years because even that is not enough to match WebP decode complexity.~22% of all images on the Web are now WebP~2% of all images are now AVIFless than 0.1% of all images are now JXLhttps://w3techs.com/technologies/details/im-webphttps://w3techs.com/technologies/details/im-avifhttps://w3techs.com/technologies/details/im-xljpeg
>>109772119>x265 provides identicalor superior visual quality to x264at half the file size tho you gottaup the CRF bitrate and use thesettings you would for x264...this has absolutely nothing to do with what I said, i have no idea why you're casually telling me stuff I already know, besides i'm already onto svt-av1, i don't see any point bothering with an inferior and jew encumbered codec.>also, quick sync solves this problemquick sync has absolutely nothing to do with x265, so once again, what exactly is this "x265 hardware acceleration" you're talking about?are you going to reply with unrelated nonsense again? are you a bot?
>>109772399It's fucking anime and you could probably upload this without transcoding it. If I actually needed to transcode CRF 18 slow with x264 would be fast enough anyway so no reason to use hardware encoding which only really shines for live streaming. I use nvidia cards with patched drivers to get around the encode cap at work for that.>>109772452It's not even worth debunking the things you post because they are complete and utter nonsense. LLMs have made your brain obsolete. They hallucinate less than you get confused and use terms you don't understand. Also they don't write as if they got dropped on their head as a child. They don't even have a head.
>>109768072mostly right, but conflating streaming bitrates with codec capabilitymany such cases
>>109772271No you fucktard, I mean SVT-AV1 will compress video much much faster than x265 for similar quality.>>109772298Why is that surprising? x265 is practically abandonware at this point and Google has every reason to make their VP9 encodes not look like shit because the entire web is using VP9 as a fallback video codec as the development teams grow a spine and stop using shit ass H.264.
>>109772597It's not as if they care about how much bitrate is required with which encoder in order to get a transparent result. Codec capability is just theory a lot of the time and in practice what happens depends on the encoder, settings, and what bitrate is required to create faithful reproduction of the source material. So just spamming bitrate with a shitty encoder as they do on bluray discs results in better encodes than Amazon's bitrate constrained x264 encoded streams, even though those Amazon streams are fairly decent as far as internet streams go.
>>109772608>Google has every reason to make their VP9 encodes not look like shitNTA but google's vp9 encodes are done in hardware with their custom made fpga chips, that graph is most likely using libvpx, why would google develop libvpx further when they don't really use it?
>>109772741They want people to use it beyond just YouTube's use so hardware support is more than just capitulation to them. I think Netflix does.
>>109772741Because other websites might not have this fancy 1 million dollar fpga accelerator so when AV1 is too hard to decode then VP9 serves as a perfect fallback. Despite all the work that has gone into Dav1d there will still be computers out there that do not have enough CPU horsepower to decode AV1.Webpsites have to contemplate between going all the way back to ancient and shitty H.264 or spend some CPU time with libvpx to give users acceptable quality at low bitrates.https://streaminglearningcenter.com/codecs/tesla-rolls-back-youtube-from-av1-to-vp9.html
>>109772586>It's animeYeah!
>>109772584it being incredibly pedantic about terminology and dropping edgelord remarks about HEVC licensing fees to dodge the point. is this why you ran was mm away away to SVT-AV1?>quick sync has absolutely nothing to do with x265>what is x265 hardware accelerationthis shit is so embarrassingly wrong for someone acting like an expert kek my niggah Intel Quick Sync Video (QSV) has native, dedicated hardware blocks for HEVC (H.265) 8-bit/10-bit encoding and decoding since Intel's Skylake architecture 6th gen and perfected it in Alder Lake 12th gen. fk is u talking about? It is LITERALLY a hardware chip ASIC designed specifically to process H.265 streams without melting CPU CORES my niggah and SVT-AV1 is fantastic for 1080p and standard 4K SDR/HDR10 streaming, but it is useless for your specific high-tier setups, stop telegraphing it a poor. not a bot, just laughing at you claiming Quick Sync has absolutely nothing to do with x265. kek>>109772586i accept your concession, sorry you're so upset>>109772608now ur just moving uber goalpost. I went from complaining about x265 taking 10 times as long to encode than x264 to claiming SVT-AV1 is much faster than software x265 (libx265) for similar quality? again, you are conflating the two and seething over the facts. SVT-AV1 is only faster if ur tanking the efficiency on a high preset like 6-8 to match a poorly optimized x265 config bt at equivalent archival quality metrics (SVT Preset 4 vs x265 Slow) the encoding times level out and SVT eats a disgusting amount of RAM to do it.Keep coping with ur licensing-free AV1 encodes meanwhile we the entire high-end 4K Blu-ray REMUX and Dolby Vision FEL scene will keep running laps around you on HEVC. enjoy the stream-tier encodes.
>>109773095ur*
>>109773095Insults directed at you are not an invitation to formal debate. There was never anything to concede except the fact thatkek i literally am writing like u now nigga im retarded but acting like i know shit i just struggled to write multiple paragraphs with word salad from technical specifications i dont understand nigga
>>109773095>it being incredibly pedantic about terminology and dropping edgelord remarks about HEVC licensing fees to dodge the point....to dodge which point again? that bunch of stuff that had nothing to do with this discussion?>this shit is so embarrassingly wrong for someone acting like an expert kek my niggah Intel Quick Sync Video (QSV) has native, dedicated hardware blocks for HEVC (H.265) yet another thing i know already, thanks, except this has nothing to do with x265 yet again>not a bot, just laughing at you claiming Quick Sync has absolutely nothing to do with x265. kek"not a bot just completely retarded"oh wow thanks for confirming
>>109773236sorry you're so upset, faggot
>>109773095You're confusing x265 and h265.
>>109773095>using paid, proprietary, inferior, patent encumbered technology is a flexokay
>>109773294Why would I be upset when I went to the circus and a clown appeared? I came here to point and laugh at you. You're delivering my money's worth. This is why I pay my internet bill.
>>109773336>>109773294
109773358I didn't click your link to your other post. If you want me to read your post you need to post it again. Work for your (You)s clown.
>>109772399I thought this was a medieval or Renaissance fantasy series? She's eating a popsicle? My interest in checking this out just tanked
>>109773310ahhh the ultimate pedantic baby cope>ur confusing the codec with the software encoderkek ur technically right about the naming convention but using it as a "gotcha" after getting completely wrecked on Quick Sync and encoder speeds is hilarious. notwithstanding that this that is a cope thread for poors. ur technically right about the naming convention, but using it as a "gotcha" after getting completely wrecked on Quick Sync and encoder speeds is hilarious. technically right about the naming convention, but using it as a "gotcha" after getting completely wrecked on Quick Sync and encoder speeds is hilarious.technically right about the naming convention, but using it as a "gotcha" after getting completely wrecked on Quick Sync and encoder speeds is hilarious. everyone knows x265 is the software encoder library and H.265/HEVC is the codec standard but u literally asked what 'x265 hardware acceleration' meant and claimed Quick Sync has nothing to do with it. Quick Sync encodes H.265 directly onto the silicon my niggah. u lost like 3 posts ago. log off
>>109773777seems like your chatgpt thingy got stuck there for a sec kek
>>109773905naw faggot, this is what happens when posting over LTE. u wouldn't know because you're a shut-in loser
>>109767950>>109771228>>109772119>>109773095
>>109767705they weren't.SVT exists anon. stop living in the past.
>>109773969poors mad lmao
>>109773777>quick sync has absolutely nothing to do with x265still digging, still wrong.quick sync has absolutely nothing to do with x265, just apologize and move on.
>>109773934that's the most retarded excuse evernot to mention, most people here aren't phonefaggots and being a phonefaggot isn't something to brag about
>>109774128yes most of you are shut-in losers. sorry you're so upset>>109774082ah, the classic I'm losing the structural argument so I will hyper-fixate on a colloquial shorthand defense. please see>>109773777
>>109773491lol what pathetic faggotyou lost sorry you're so upset
>>109767950there was a touhou preset built into x264https://github.com/mirror/x264/blob/2451a7282463f68e532f2eee090a70ab139bb3e7/common/common.c#L382
>>109774198I'm not opening that shitty mspaint drawing to look at the text on it but it's cool that you saved it on your phone or whatever instead of pictures of the girlfriend you don't have
>>109772399I can do better
>>109774204>there wasit's literally still there
I've tried to watch a 300Mb HEVC and a 1,4GB h264 and I can't tell the difference
>>109774320tou're right but I couldn't find it in a code search to permalink because github sucks ass and they refactored that at some point.
If I am really annoying on the internet everyone will think I'm a super cool guy. Yeah I'm outside! Don't you wish you were outside too? In the real world? Looking like a hobo stinking up your local Starbucks having barely coherent arguments about video codecs on the anime incel website? In a world where even a homeless man can have a smartphone he can also post on 4chan. The next time you see a bum on the sidewalk don't forget to put a dollar in his cup. Cause that bum might be me and if I can't get drunk or high I'm gonna get real snippy with you on /g/.
>>109774246I see the extra detail, the wall and colors. Impressive. Too bad 4chan won't allow modern codecs like H.264 or AV1 for some reason. I understand the rationale for lack of audio on some boards, but I see zero reason for a lack of modernity otherwise. Baffling.
>>109774362I plan to make a thread on umigalaxy and link it here. Just have to find a good fork to see significant gains compared to VP9 else you could make the argument to just keep using VP9 on 4chan desu.
>>109774222awww u sound terrified lel
>>109774422Why would I be terrified of an ugly jpeg? It's not like it's gore or something. It's just ugly. Why do you like ugly things?
>>109774353>>109774353holy kek dis niggah is throwing a massive unhinged copypasta-style temper tantrum because they ran out of technical arguments. lmao having a melty mate? hahaha>>109774451I are absolutely SEETHING. LMFAO. when someone on an anonymous Mongolian basketweaving imageboard resorts to analyzing the file format of a jpeg and calling "ugly" and asking semantic questions about aesthetics >Why do you like ugly things?it only shows they have been utterly mind broken lmao hallucinating versions of me to attack because u lost! haha
>>109774451my niggah it’s an ' ugly jpeg bcuz it’s a lossy compression of ur absolute melty in this thread I thought you loved high-efficiency compression? go finish your SVT encodes man ur done here
>>109774506If anything I'm being fairly calm and you're the one having a little spergout here. I don't know what has you so animated but I hope you find the help you need soon.>>109774525It's ugly because it's a shitty drawing that isn't nice to look at. I like beautiful things. Not ugly things. I can tell it's ugly from the thumbnail so I don't need to open it. It's ugly. Like your soul.
>>109774539holy projection-flip hahai have have officially reduced a retarded technical gatekeeper faggot into an online philosopher talking about the "beauty of your soul." lmao hahaha wtf yyping an entire paragraph about the aesthetics of my soul because u didn't know what Quick Sync does is the ultimate copekys sanjeet
>>109774574That looks ugly too. Like some skibidi toilet shit. What draws you to this aesthetic? What is it's appeal to you? Are you capable of answering a question that someone asks you without having a complete meltdown? Maybe you should try to take a deep breath before furiously tapping your sweaty fingers on that glass.
>>109774592>lost the tech debate>lost the speed debate>now crying about the beauty of my soul and jpegs jahathe absolute state
>>109774613I never claimed to be a master debater. Nor did I challenge you to a sperg duel. It's much too late for that and I need to sleep soon. You see I have a job where understanding all of these things actually matters. I wish I could just be lazy about it all but being able to deinterlace at scale has become important. So there's the question of quicksync versus nvenc. We use both. Quicksync is especially useful for the SD channels and I think Intel's deinterlacing is good enough. Nvidia's blows donkey cocks but there are cuda implementations of actual decent deinterlacing filters you can use in ffmpeg like yadif. Software encoding is basically always better and in a perfect world I would just use that for everything but it is computationally expensive and doesn't scale. I don't think you understand the difference between any of these things or why someone would choose one codec over another, let alone bring hardware encoding into their pipeline.
>>109774676goddamn ur hurt. what's wrong anon, aside from our exchange about x264 vs x265
>>109774362I don't know if you meant to say H.265, but you can upload AVC in an mp4 container.
>>109774730Hurt? I just demonstrated that I know what I'm talking about. Just a little flexing. As a treat. I didn't get into anything about x264 vs x265 with you except reply to you once or twice basically pointing and laughing. Your posts have been so misguided that it's not really worth trying to correct them. I have wrote extensively about that topic in the past but that's a flame war for another day when I have time to kill.
>>109768318At least AV1 has good compression ratios
>>109774754>it's not really worth tryingyet, here you are. how do I unsubscribe from your blog my niggah jfc
>>109774766It's easy. Press alt+f4, then enter and turn 360 degrees and walk away.
>>109774779>360 lmao you really are desperate for a win.
>>109774786I don't care about winning. That's your bit. So here's my concession. It's like your very own participation trophy. You don't get anything for winning it but it might make you feel better. Until next time.
>>109774800trying to frame ur defeat as a noble act of charity lmao thanks for the trophy. next time, just read the intel ark page before u start an argument about Quick Sync
>>109772399>>109774246Nice. Now lets see Paul Allen's transcoding.
In 5 years from now, nobody's going to know what any of these encodings are. They're just going to download 720p videos and use AI to upscale them to something that satisfies the hyper-real sensibilities du jour.
