Linked by Brooss on Tue 15th Mar 2011 23:32 UTC
Benchmarks A comment on the recent article about the Bali release of Googles WebM tools (libvpx) claimed that one of the biggest problems facing the adoption of WebM video was the slow speed of the encoder as compared to x264. This article sets out to benchmark the encoder against x264 to see if this is indeed true and if so, how significant the speed difference really is.
Thread beginning with comment 466365
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

"People don't encode videos on mobile devices, and decoding WebM has less overhead than decoding H.264. Try again.


But yes, they do. 99% of SoC chipsets on mobile devices these days are capable of encode and decode. Any mobile device recording video is doing encoding. The abundance of 1st and 3rd party on-device (iMovie for iPhone, etc.) software speaks for itself as to consumer adoption.

As for WebM, repeat after me: WebM SoC/DSP acceleration is not yet widely available. Right now it is completely irrelevant to even attempt to assert that CPU usage is less than H264 when H264 devices are using SoCs/DSPs with no battery drain.

Last, we can fight about this all day but the only real thing that counts is that consumers don't care as long as their content can be recorded and viewed without problems. WebM has a long way to go.
"

Every Android device from this point onwards (Android 2.3.3 or higher) will support WebM.

The following chips will support WebM decoding hardware acceleration:

Rockchip RK29xx
TI OMAP 4 and OMAP 5
Chips&Media BODA9/ CODA9
VeriSilicon ZSP Digital Signal Processor Cores and SoC Platform
Qualcomm Adreno 3xx
ARM with Neon extensions
Nvidia Tegra 2 and 3

These are just the devices found within a few minutes web search. The latter two (at least) also have support for WebM encoding in hardware.

Just about the only new ARM SoC design announced lately that does not support WebM in hardware is the one used in the iPad 2.

Most of the Android 3 (Honeycomb) tablets announced recently use the Nvidia Tegra 2.

http://mashable.com/2010/01/27/9-upcoming-tablet-alternatives-to-th...

http://www.andro-tablets.org/

If you are wondering if that is significant:

http://www.andro-tablets.org/android-tablets-should-dominate-the-ma...

Edited 2011-03-16 09:58 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5

konfoo Member since:
2006-01-02

As for WebM, repeat after me: WebM SoC/DSP acceleration is not yet widely available.


...

These are just the devices found within a few minutes web search. The latter two (at least) also have support for WebM encoding in hardware.


Note where I said 'not widely available'. Try reading my response next time.

Reply Parent Score: 1

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

"As for WebM, repeat after me: WebM SoC/DSP acceleration is not yet widely available.
...
These are just the devices found within a few minutes web search. The latter two (at least) also have support for WebM encoding in hardware.
Note where I said 'not widely available'. Try reading my response next time.
"

The points are orthogonal, neither is wrong.

Yes, WebM hardware acceleration is not in most mobile devices currently out there in use in the field.

But no, you will find that a lot of the Android mobile devices on the market right now for sale do in fact include WebM hardware acceleration.

It comes down to how one would interpret "not yet widely available". It is indeed available, it is on the store shelves right now. It is actually a featured selling point for the latest offerings in Android mobile devices.

Reply Parent Score: 3