View Single Post
Old 9th October 2017, 17:00   #7  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 4,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by pandy View Post
https://jvet.hhi.fraunhofer.de/

Up to 64 more computationally complex than H.265 for encoding and perhaps even 16x times for decoding...

Any thoughts?
Encoding time in a reference encoder doesn't really matter. 64x generally means it has 64x more ways to do things than HEVC, but real-world encoders aren't going to do an exhaustive search of all those modes! They'll use heuristics and early exits to deliver as good quality as possible within available time. As encoders have always done since the beginning of time. x265 is >>100x faster than the HEVC HM reference encoder even with --preset slower, for example.

Decoder time of 16x would be a huge problem. HEVC was carefully designed to have no more than 2x the complexity of H.264 even with all the options on. No one would ever come out with a video codec standard that requires 16x the silicon area or clock speed or memory or anything. Even MPEG-2 -> HEVC was only about 4x the decoder complexity per pixel at a given quality.
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Prime Video

My Compression Book
benwaggoner is offline   Reply With Quote