Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 23rd May 2010 09:41 UTC
Benchmarks Now that Google has opened up VP8, the big question is obviously how it'll hold up to H264. Of course, VP8 already wins by default because it's open source and royalty free, but that doesn't mean we should neglect the quality issue. Jan Ozer from StreamingMedia.com has put up an article comparing the two codecs, and concludes that the differences are negligible - in fact, only in some high-motion videos did H264 win out. As always, this is just one comparison and most certainly anything but conclusive. Update: Another comparison. I can't spot the difference, but then again, I'm no expert.
Thread beginning with comment 426160
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: H.264 vs VP8 comparison
by vpalmisano on Sun 23rd May 2010 12:49 UTC in reply to "RE: H.264 vs VP8 comparison"
vpalmisano
Member since:
2010-05-23

Yes, the results are quite the same. I used the same encoding rate of this test (http://doom10.org/compare/). I will include other results on the same page soon.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: H.264 vs VP8 comparison
by n4cer on Sun 23rd May 2010 13:50 in reply to "RE[2]: H.264 vs VP8 comparison"
n4cer Member since:
2005-07-06

The VP8 encode is worse than VC-1 and x264 Baseline in that comparison.
Check the water, grass, and the fenceline.
The image overall is softer/blurrier.

Edited 2010-05-23 13:51 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

MissTJones Member since:
2010-03-25

Can you post an original frame for comparison too?

I can't tell what's actually a true detail and what's just an artifact on the H.264 one. The grass and trees look more "detailed" but on the human figures they just look a different kind of odd.

Is the extra detail on the trees just an illusion? It looks like someones run a sharpen filter over everything. And is the lady with the boa really wearing insane clown posse-style face makeup?

Edited 2010-05-24 15:27 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1