Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner
For someone doing private testing where that's not feasible, I recommend using 2-pass encoding and compare encodes at the same bitrate.
|
I test posibility to use new codecs in business.
First we encoded x264 with 2pass, but 2pass with the same bitrate is not good solution for encoding different movies. I have 2 movies: one is single continuos shot (interview) and the second is movie from car's camera.
Encoding with
constant quality: first movie save 70% of size... and second is bigger (with crf) becouse movie is very dynamic.
Encoding with constant quality we save about 20% of network bandwith (becouse we have a lot of interviews) and give us sure of quality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner
Also, remember we are comparing encoders, not the actual bitstream formats. The bitstream's capabilities provide an upper bound on what an encoder can do. But the psychovisual and rate control features of a given encoder can make a bigger difference than those between bitstreams. Hence x264 beating libaom in lots of real-world scenarios even though AV1 is inarguably the more capable bitstream. But x264 is just a much more mature and tuned encoder than libaom.
|
I understand that these codecs are in development ... so I made my own tests. Both codecs are great and will be better, but they are terribly slow. I do not know how to speed up these encoders. processor with AVX2?, faster clock? I tested scalability. The growing number of threads does not give noticeable acceleration