Linked by Brooss on Wed 23rd Mar 2011 23:14 UTC
Benchmarks A new set of x264 and vpxenc encoder benchmarks have been published. The new benchmarks address many of the concerns raised in the comments about the methodology used in the previous article, such as using SSIM for quality measurement. Theora is also included in these tests.
Thread beginning with comment 467599
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Too little too late
by WereCatf on Thu 24th Mar 2011 00:25 UTC in reply to "Too little too late"
WereCatf
Member since:
2006-02-15

Very impressive indeed, at how unimpressive this is.

By the time release a decent and competitive encoder of WebM, H265 will be out.


There is already successor for VP8/WebM in the works, too, so we'll see.

Besides, even if H.265 actually did come out suddenly it still wouldn't have a "decent and competitive encoder" yet anyway.. Oh, sorry if I ruined your trolling attempt.

Reply Parent Score: 7

v RE[2]: Too little too late
by tuzor on Thu 24th Mar 2011 00:32 in reply to "RE: Too little too late"
RE[3]: Too little too late
by lemur2 on Thu 24th Mar 2011 00:45 in reply to "RE[2]: Too little too late"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

What trolling you tool. It's hard facts, I apologise if this is too difficult for you to grasp. WebM is inferior in most ways and it arrived too late. H265 is a fact an in development for a long time now. Would love some info on your part about a VP8 successor.


There is only one factor in which x264 beats WebM and that is encoding speed. Most people would use a video encoder once in a blue moon ... so in practice this simply means that if you want your occasional video encoded in WebM at the same quality as you would have had with x64 you will have to wait a little longer for it to encode. Depending on the size of the video clip, this could mean a minute or so of your time.

Meh. Big deal.

If you encode the video clip in h264 instead and put it on a website, you could be up for thousands of dollars in license fees.

Worse: If you encode the video clip in h264 instead and put it on a website and you don't get a license, you could be up for hundreds of thousands in fines and court costs.

Edited 2011-03-24 00:52 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[3]: Too little too late
by WereCatf on Thu 24th Mar 2011 00:46 in reply to "RE[2]: Too little too late"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

What trolling you tool.
It's hard facts, I apologise if this is too difficult for you to grasp.


It's not "facts": yes, H.265 (or whatever they'll call it when it's out) is in development, but it takes time to create a complete and optimized encoder. Go ahead and take a look at how long it took for x264 encoder to come where it is now. It didn't just happen overnight the next day when H.264 was released. And it won't happen with H.265 either. There will still be a transition time from old codecs to the new codec.

WebM is inferior in most ways and it arrived too late.


Considering how much support WebM has gotten from major international corporations I'd say they disagree with you.

Would love some info on your part about a VP8 successor.


Go ahead and browse the VP9 git repository.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: Too little too late
by _txf_ on Thu 24th Mar 2011 00:53 in reply to "RE[2]: Too little too late"
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

What trolling you tool.

Calling someone a tool isn't the best way to create a healthy discussion.

H265 is a fact an in development for a long time now.

The spec has been in development a long time, implementations of it have not. Only once software is released will there be any optimisation. I should point out that reference implementations tend to less optimised for code clarity etc.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Too little too late
by tanishaj on Thu 24th Mar 2011 02:22 in reply to "RE[2]: Too little too late"
tanishaj Member since:
2010-12-22


It's hard facts...
WebM is inferior in most ways and it arrived too late.


Regardless of which format you favour, "too late" seems like a stretch. WebM arrived before the H264 royalty collectors caused widespread damage. It also arrived before the HTML5 video tag has gone mainstream. I would say that is not too late.

While there is no doubt that H264 is currently the superior format, I think it is an open question if it is enough better to offset it's disadvantages. I see no reason by WebM cannot become the dominant video standard on the web.

Today, most people get their web video via Flash. The user does not care if it is H264 or WebM as long as Flash plays it. Flash supports WebM. In the future, most video will likely be served natively via HTML5.

WebM is (and will be) much better supported by desktop browsers than H264. Firefox, Chrome, and Opera all support WebM exclusively. Internet Explorer and Safari (desktop) support WebM if it is an installed video codec on the OS. Android supports WebM obviously. So, that leaves only iOS where WebM would currently be unwelcome. The fastest growing platforms all support WebM.

There are a huge number of companies implementing WebM in hardware:

http://www.webmproject.org/about/supporters/

WebM is less expensive and safer for content producers and hardware manufactures to adopt. WebM may soon have an even bigger addressable audience online than H264.

So, the question is really why H264?

Quality? WebM is the same quality as H264 baseline and getting better. IMHO, WebM is "good enough" for the mainstream Internet user. This is not enough of a reason to keep it from being used for video on the web.

Really, the only reason to use H264 is because Microsoft or Apple have made it impractical/impossible to choose and they have chosen for you. That may be a difficult line for them to hold. Microsoft is already giving ground and smartphones have short lifetimes.

If WebM takes the web, it has a real shot at other niches. This is not MP3 vs Ogg.

Too late? We will see.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[2]: Too little too late
by westlake on Thu 24th Mar 2011 13:23 in reply to "RE: Too little too late"
westlake Member since:
2010-01-07

Besides, even if H.265 actually did come out suddenly it still wouldn't have a "decent and competitive encoder" yet anyway.. Oh, sorry if I ruined your trolling attempt.


I would expect HEVC/H.265 encoders to mature as the HEVC/H.265 standard matures.

WebM has about two years to gain traction before HEVC/H.265 becomes reality. That is a very small window of opportunity.

Reply Parent Score: 0