That won't make much sense without specific testing parameters. Even though x265 is nowhere near "feature complete", it is already able to encode in visually transparent quality with a certain bitrate or quality level. And it will, of course, have compression artefacts with a lack of.
In such an early testing stage, there are not even comparable default values. You will certainly not be able to make up "similar-quality options" for both encoders. The default quantization level in x265 (=32) is very coarse, limits the pixel-bitrate to values where compression artefacts are not only obvious but even annoying.
For a sensible comparison, one would have to find a quantization for x265 which gives a good result with still recognizable artefacts, and run x264 in 2-pass mode with the resulting bitrate as target; x265 does not even have a 2-pass mode, and 1-pass ABR is not optimal.
|