Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Video Encoding > High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 11th October 2019, 08:43   #7101  |  Link
excellentswordfight
Lost my old account :(
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by NikosD View Post
x265 is not optimized for speed/multi-threading and AMD CPUs.
What are the basis for that statement? The lower clocked 3700X is on par or faster then 9900k at the same amount of threads. First and second gen wasnt that strong per thread, but that is much cause of avx speed and other cpu-design causes. And I have recieved several Epyc 7402p servers, no issue there either, blazing fast.

Last edited by excellentswordfight; 11th October 2019 at 08:52.
excellentswordfight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th October 2019, 12:43   #7102  |  Link
redbtn
Registered User
 
redbtn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Russia
Posts: 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rousseau View Post

I've also noticed AQ2 seems to have problems in HDR encodes (3.1 & 3.2 builds I've tested), leaving a lot of blotchy grain/puddling in flat areas of some scenes. AQ1 does much better. It's not that visible when you look at it without tone mapping, but in MPV it's very obvious. I tried AQ3 & 4 with no improvement.
I always use AQ2 for HDR encodes, and I never thought about it, cuz somewhere here I read that AQ2 is optimal for HDR. But now, it seems like I should make some tests.
How much bigger bitrate you get with AQ1 vs AQ2?
redbtn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th October 2019, 14:06   #7103  |  Link
mandarinka
Registered User
 
mandarinka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 729
Quote:
Originally Posted by excellentswordfight View Post
What are the basis for that statement? The lower clocked 3700X is on par or faster then 9900k at the same amount of threads. First and second gen wasnt that strong per thread, but that is much cause of avx speed and other cpu-design causes. And I have recieved several Epyc 7402p servers, no issue there either, blazing fast.
I think what he meant is that results with Beamr can't be taken as something indicating how fast will x265 run.

Last edited by mandarinka; 11th October 2019 at 14:14.
mandarinka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th October 2019, 09:49   #7104  |  Link
mini-moose
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 385
Quote:
Originally Posted by redbtn View Post
How much bigger bitrate you get with AQ1 vs AQ2?
I think that's because in AQ1 the aq-strength for all frames is the same, while AQ2 uses auto-variance, and x265 applies separate aq-strength for each frame (based on complexity).

At least on paper AQ2 sounds better to me and it is now the default.

One would hope the devs switched to that for a good reason (i.e it's not just slightly faster but also gives a better result).

Last edited by mini-moose; 12th October 2019 at 09:51.
mini-moose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th October 2019, 10:52   #7105  |  Link
rco133
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 44
There seems to be a lot of discussion about AQ mode 1 vs 2.

When it comes to 4k HDR encodes what I found is that with mode 2 the Average QP result is in average 1 higher in mode 2.

For example mode 1 is 21.33 and mode 2 is 22.15.

I have measured the vmaf values of quite a few 4k HDR encode cuts, and not in one single instance has the vmaf score been worse on the aq mode 2 encode. Every single time the vmaf value is higher on the aq mode 2 encode.

Yes, the file size is smaller, and the average QP a bit higher.

The switch from aq mode 1 to aq mode 2 must have been made for a reason. If mode 2 gives worse quality than mode 1, why would the devs change the default.

Either the devs knows nothing about qhat they are doing, or the actually know what they are doing.

All I can say is that I am yet to find a mode 1 encode with a higher vmaf score than the identical mode 2 encode.

rco133
rco133 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th October 2019, 11:09   #7106  |  Link
Boulder
Pig on the wing
 
Boulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Finland
Posts: 5,718
But have you made any visual comparisons? In my old tests, I found out that mode 2 causes problems in flat backgrounds.

Many of the changes in the default values have been made without any explanation, so we don't really know what the use case for each of them has been. I sometimes feel that many settings are based on squeezing everything out of the material with the least possible amount of bits, even if it means oversmoothing etc. which can then be irritating to others (like me).
__________________
And if the band you're in starts playing different tunes
I'll see you on the dark side of the Moon...
Boulder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th October 2019, 12:52   #7107  |  Link
redbtn
Registered User
 
redbtn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Russia
Posts: 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boulder View Post
But have you made any visual comparisons? In my old tests, I found out that mode 2 causes problems in flat backgrounds.

Many of the changes in the default values have been made without any explanation, so we don't really know what the use case for each of them has been. I sometimes feel that many settings are based on squeezing everything out of the material with the least possible amount of bits, even if it means oversmoothing etc. which can then be irritating to others (like me).
Can I ask what settings do you use for 4k HDR encodes? I mean like --aq-strength --qcomp and CFR. I would like to know for example aq-strength is depends of bitrate or not. Cuz with low bitrate video may be very blocky and requires high aq-strength, but what about for bitrate ~ 20-22mb?
I usually use aq-strength 0.8 and I'm thinking should I raise it to 0.9 or even 1.0?

Last edited by redbtn; 13th October 2019 at 13:35.
redbtn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th October 2019, 14:34   #7108  |  Link
Boulder
Pig on the wing
 
Boulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Finland
Posts: 5,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by redbtn View Post
Can I ask what settings do you use for 4k HDR encodes? I mean like --aq-strength --qcomp and CFR. I would like to know for example aq-strength is depends of bitrate or not. Cuz with low bitrate video may be very blocky and requires high aq-strength, but what about for bitrate ~ 20-22mb?
I usually use aq-strength 0.8 and I'm thinking should I raise it to 0.9 or even 1.0?
It's been quite a long time since I did any HDR encodes, but I would start with aq-mode 1 with the default strength 1.0. I use qcomp 0.7 and HDR requires a much lower CRF. My base for SDR HD is CRF 18 so I would use CRF 13 for HDR.

The encoder has probably gone through many changes so I would need to test things before doing any HDR encodes. But those would be a good starting point.
__________________
And if the band you're in starts playing different tunes
I'll see you on the dark side of the Moon...
Boulder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th October 2019, 15:40   #7109  |  Link
redbtn
Registered User
 
redbtn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Russia
Posts: 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boulder View Post
It's been quite a long time since I did any HDR encodes, but I would start with aq-mode 1 with the default strength 1.0. I use qcomp 0.7 and HDR requires a much lower CRF. My base for SDR HD is CRF 18 so I would use CRF 13 for HDR.

The encoder has probably gone through many changes so I would need to test things before doing any HDR encodes. But those would be a good starting point.
Thx for your reply! For 1080p HDR I use crf 10-13, but for 2160p HDR crf 13 is too low. With crf 20 I usually get 17-18mb and for grainy films I get 22-24mb.
I'll try to use strength 1.0, but I did some tests and it raise bitrate by 10-11%.
redbtn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th October 2019, 16:27   #7110  |  Link
Boulder
Pig on the wing
 
Boulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Finland
Posts: 5,718
Yes, CRF 13 is probably quite low for UHD because any problems arising from too few bits will not be as apparent on a 4K TV as with 1080p and lower where they are enlarged during playback.
With aq-strength, you could probably go down to 0.8 or so with grainy sources as grain tends to attract bits anyway, so the flat parts of the image will not look bad.
__________________
And if the band you're in starts playing different tunes
I'll see you on the dark side of the Moon...
Boulder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th October 2019, 16:27   #7111  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 4,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by MeteorRain View Post
From different point of view, you can say HEVC is the present, you can say it's not. For example, online streaming still uses AVC (some like Youtube may be using VP9 but still), we still buy Blu-rays instead of UHDs, majority of the content distributors are still using AVC. The use of HEVC would still be quite limited so far, even if assuming HEVC can be encoded at a faster speed. I admit there are other factors like royalty, but still.
There are tons of devices where HEVC is the only supported 10-bit codec. I'd expect pretty much all streaming of 4K or HDR content to those devices to be in HEVC. I don't know of anyone doing HDR or >1080p in H.264.

It'd probably take something like Wireshark to figure out what is being used in other cases. In the adaptive streaming world, there can be dozens of encoded variants of a given title, in different frame sizes, bitrates, DRM, and codecs.

As a wild personal guess, I'd expect a lot more premium content is delivered in HEVC than in VP9+AV1. The On2 stuff has always been most focused on browser-based user generated content without DRM, and there aren't any AV1 HW DRM + decode products in the market, or even announced.

As for quality versus speed, At the same encoding speed, x265 beats x264 in the cases I've tested in the last couple of years. Sure, it doesn't take full advantage of what HEVC can do, but it's still better for most content (there are likely edge cases with a lot of grain). The fastest possible x264 will be faster than the fastest possible x265, of course. x265 and HEVC in general takes better advantage of AVX, multithreading, and 64-bit than x264, so the newer the processor, the better quality @ perf HEVC has.
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Prime Video

My Compression Book
benwaggoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th October 2019, 13:54   #7112  |  Link
sonnati
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner View Post
There are tons of devices where HEVC is the only supported 10-bit codec. I'd expect pretty much all streaming of 4K or HDR content to those devices to be in HEVC. I don't know of anyone doing HDR or >1080p in H.264.

It'd probably take something like Wireshark to figure out what is being used in other cases. In the adaptive streaming world, there can be dozens of encoded variants of a given title, in different frame sizes, bitrates, DRM, and codecs.

As a wild personal guess, I'd expect a lot more premium content is delivered in HEVC than in VP9+AV1. The On2 stuff has always been most focused on browser-based user generated content without DRM, and there aren't any AV1 HW DRM + decode products in the market, or even announced.

As for quality versus speed, At the same encoding speed, x265 beats x264 in the cases I've tested in the last couple of years. Sure, it doesn't take full advantage of what HEVC can do, but it's still better for most content (there are likely edge cases with a lot of grain). The fastest possible x264 will be faster than the fastest possible x265, of course. x265 and HEVC in general takes better advantage of AVX, multithreading, and 64-bit than x264, so the newer the processor, the better quality @ perf HEVC has.
I would be no surprised if Netflix delivered H.265 to connectedTV even when content is below 4K. This would increase the market share of H.265 considerably because vast majority of Netflix's traffic is on TV and a wide % of those TV has H.265 decoding capabilities. Add to this the 100s millions of iOS devices supporting H.265 (with possible use by Netflix) and the real share should be higher than what can be derived classically from the share seen by cloud encoders vendors or similar.

Last edited by sonnati; 16th October 2019 at 13:57.
sonnati is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th October 2019, 21:29   #7113  |  Link
Barough
Registered User
 
Barough's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 480
x265 v3.2+7-37648fca915b (32 & 64-bit 8/10/12bit Multilib Windows Binaries) (GCC 9.2.0)
Code:
https://bitbucket.org/multicoreware/x265/commits/branch/default
Barough is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th October 2019, 21:52   #7114  |  Link
stax76
Registered User
 
stax76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: On thin ice
Posts: 6,837
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barough View Post
x265 v3.2+7-37648fca915b (32 & 64-bit 8/10/12bit Multilib Windows Binaries) (GCC 9.2.0)
Code:
https://bitbucket.org/multicoreware/x265/commits/branch/default
Thanks for the build. Why is it that large? 20 MB is too much for staxrip as it consumes 550 MB disk space and 200 MB download space, build by Patman is 2 MB.
stax76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th October 2019, 21:57   #7115  |  Link
Barough
Registered User
 
Barough's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 480
Quote:
Originally Posted by stax76 View Post
Thanks for the build. Why is it that large? 20 MB is too much for staxrip as it consumes 550 MB disk space and 200 MB download space, build by Patman is 2 MB.
I guess that Patman use some kind of compression on his EXE.

Skickat från min SM-G975F via Tapatalk
__________________
Do NOT re-post any of my Mediafire links. Download & re-host the content(s) if you want to share it somewhere else.
Barough is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th October 2019, 16:33   #7116  |  Link
Atak_Snajpera
RipBot264 author
 
Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by stax76 View Post
Thanks for the build. Why is it that large? 20 MB is too much for staxrip as it consumes 550 MB disk space and 200 MB download space, build by Patman is 2 MB.
UPX is your friend.
https://upx.github.io/
Atak_Snajpera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th October 2019, 18:18   #7117  |  Link
stax76
Registered User
 
stax76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: On thin ice
Posts: 6,837
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera View Post
UPX is your friend.
https://upx.github.io/
I'll use that if it's easy enough, thanks.
stax76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th October 2019, 18:30   #7118  |  Link
Atak_Snajpera
RipBot264 author
 
Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by stax76 View Post
I'll use that if it's easy enough, thanks.
Basically drag and drop
Atak_Snajpera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th October 2019, 18:47   #7119  |  Link
stax76
Registered User
 
stax76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: On thin ice
Posts: 6,837
That's easy. I use context menu.

https://github.com/stax76/OpenWithPlusPlus
stax76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st October 2019, 08:42   #7120  |  Link
LigH
German doom9/Gleitz SuMo
 
LigH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany, rural Altmark
Posts: 6,753
^ Nice extension.
__________________

New German Gleitz board
MediaFire: x264 | x265 | VPx | AOM | Xvid
LigH is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 23:56.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.