Linked by lemur2 on Wed 9th Mar 2011 00:18 UTC
Multimedia, AV The WebM project Blog has announced an update release of the VP8 Codec SDK codenamed the "Bali" release. The Bali release was focused on making the encoder faster while continuing to improve its video quality.
Permalink for comment 465390
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: One request...
by galvanash on Wed 9th Mar 2011 04:07 UTC in reply to "RE: One request..."
galvanash
Member since:
2006-01-25

I don't understand where you get this "bad" idea from. When it was released, comparisons between WebM and H264 showed that WebM was only slightly behind the best H264 encoder (x264) in quality. WebM has improved over 12% in objective quality since then, and significantly in subjective quality as well.


Dude... I USE webm. And I am not talking about quality at all, only speed.

WebM is fast enough to encode at acceptable quality to be used real time:
http://blog.webmproject.org/2011/02/vp8-for-real-time-video-applica...


Anything is fast enough if you throw enough hardware at it and set the presets right. The statement that it is "fast enough" for realtime encoding simply doesn't mean anything relative to other codecs.



I know that, and I appreciate them immensely. I am a supporter of the format. However, overstating the facts doesn't help anyone. Webm was and is not "slightly" slower than x264, it varies depending on the presets, the source materials, and the number of cores you have, but for Aylesbury it is still about 5-10 times slower when run single threaded on MY source files... Running it multi-threaded affects quality negatively (at least it did in Aylesbury), x264 does not suffer from that issue. Running them both multi-threaded closes the gap to about 3-6 times slower, but it is still ALOT slower.

I'm pretty sure that the original encoding speed comparisons compared hardware-accelerated H264 against software-only WebM encoding.


No. They were not. It was x264.

Hardware acceleration of WebM encoding is now becoming available in production hardware with the Nvidia Tegra 2 platform, and ARM Platforms with Neon extensions.


That will certainly help, but my point about not reporting real performance still stands. I'm not ragging on the state of webm - it is what it is and it will get better. I simply don't see the point of not reporting absolute performance.

As far as I know, there has never been an apples-with-apples comparison of the two using equivalent levels of support.


I will happily post a comparison as soon as I get Bali working.

Reply Parent Score: 5