View Single Post
Old 5th January 2019, 03:42   #12  |  Link
asarian
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,462
Ok, this is slightly weird. My first x265 test I did as follows, with these 'joke' settings:

Code:
VSPipe f:\jobs\%1.vpy - --y4m | x265 - --y4m --preset placebo --sar 1:1 --aud --profile main --vbv-bufsize 160000 --vbv-maxrate 160000 --level-idc 51 --frames %_frames% --crf %2 --aq-mode 3 --qg-size 64 --rc-lookahead 120 --subme 7 --colorprim bt709 --transfer bt709 --colormatrix bt709 --range limited --output "%3:\video\%1.265"
Then I did a regular x264 test, with the same 5 sec sample:

Code:
VSPipe f:\jobs\%1.vpy - --y4m | x264 - --demuxer y4m --opencl --frames %_frames% --crf %2 --sar 1:1 --aud --nal-hrd none --level 4.1 --preset placebo --vbv-bufsize 70000 --vbv-maxrate 60000 --aq-mode 2 --ref %_reframes% --tune film --output "%3:\video\%1.264"
These are the exact commandlines used in my cmd script, for good measure. CRF = 14 in both cases. Now where it gets weird, is where the HEVC result is actually 39k, vs. 38k for the x264 test (Sic!). The former took an order of magnitude longer to process, though.

Now, how can this be?! The whole idea of trying to transition to HEVC (for me), was so as to get smaller files, not larger ones. Average bitrate of both results is about the same: ca. 21.x MBps.
__________________
Gorgeous, delicious, deculture!
asarian is offline   Reply With Quote