Alliance for Open Media codecs

[hajj_3]

MPC-BE 1.5.2.3976 Beta has been released which can play my 1920x800 551kbps bitrate AV1 file that i have smoothly, used up to 46% cpu on core i3-7100U 2.4ghz

Link: https://sourceforge.net/projects/mpc...atest/download

[LigH]

New uploads: (MSYS2; MinGW32: GCC 7.3.0 / MinGW64: GCC 8.2.0)

AOM v1.0.0-643-gaf3e5cc66

rav1e 0.1.0 (d330de0 / 2018-09-23)

dav1d 0.0.1 (5e05e65 / 2018-09-23)

[marcomsousa]

AV1 already have 3 encoders and/or decoders, it's a good start..

[olduser217]

I heard that Ateme demonstrated 4k60 AV1 decoding on TV (seems like LG TV) during the recent IBC Show.
Anybody attended the show and saw it?

[marcomsousa]

Originally Posted by olduser217

I heard that Ateme demonstrated 4k60 AV1 decoding on TV (seems like LG TV) during the recent IBC Show.
Anybody attended the show and saw it?

At NAB Conference:

ATEME: Video
Other AOMedia: Video1 Video2 Video3 Video4

[SmilingWolf]

32/64bits binaries:
av1-1.0.0-654-gd0076f507: https://mega.nz/#!kto20KoR!XbcrlXv7Q...lZx3X0tfeVwJx4

64bits binaries only (I don't have a 32bits toolchain in my MSYS2 env):
dav1d-0.0.1-37-9075f0e: https://mega.nz/#!co5wFQyQ!EZhG33K4z...mdYdPPtDJqCWBw

The dav1d build has been patched so that the input/output files are opened in binary mode, for the reasons previously explained. Band-aid solution until the PR is accepted upstream.

[savage747]

I dusted off my own automated codec testing setup so I can track AV1-development. Of course, objective metrics do not replace subjective testing, but this should still be okay to get some very rough estimates.

The following graph takes about 45 minutes to generate on my Ryzen 2700 (8 cores, 16 threads). To keep things sane, I'm using --cpu-used=4, which is a somwhat "fast" setting.

The modern codecs may perform even better on HD resolutions.

[benwaggoner]

Originally Posted by savage747

I dusted off my own automated codec testing setup so I can track AV1-development. Of course, objective metrics do not replace subjective testing, but this should still be okay to get some very rough estimates.

It can be VERY rough. It would be pretty typical for a new psychovisual feature to result in improved quality AND reduced scores with objective metrics. That is pretty much the defining feature of a psychovisual optimization .

The following graph takes about 45 minutes to generate on my Ryzen 2700 (8 cores, 16 threads). To keep things sane, I'm using --cpu-used=4, which is a somwhat "fast" setting.

The modern codecs may perform even better on HD resolutions.

HEVC certainly has a bigger advantage over H.264 at UHD resolutions.

It's hard to say with AV1 since the encoders are so slow that there isn't a substantial corpus of high-quality HD AV1 encodes to evaluate yet. In theory it should also scale well, but today's encoders obviously haven't been able to get a lot of resolution-tuned psychovisual optimization yet.

A whole lot of AV1's discussed capabilities are more informed speculation than anything based on real-world demonstrations of real-world scenarios.

[IgorC]

Would it make sense just drop a bitdepth of 8 bits already? Especially now when AV1 was just realesed. All right, decoder optimizations and hardware support will come anyway.
Yes, 8 bits is faster to encode/decode but banding ruins a major part of quality gains at quite large range of bitrates.

VP9 8-bits vs 10 bits is a day and night difference.
https://sonnati.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/10bit2.png
https://sonnati.wordpress.com/2016/0...ntion-part-ii/

Even VP9/HEVC 10-12bit are already so advanced to produce block-free video even at quite low bitrates.
I wouldn't be surprised if AV1 8 bits would look worse than VP9/HEVC 10-12 bits (or just comparable)

[olduser217]

Originally Posted by marcomsousa

At NAB Conference:

ATEME: Video
Other AOMedia: Video1 Video2 Video3 Video4

Thanks for the video link.
Just curious whether the Ateme demo was done with existing TV hardware (assuming software decoding with ARM based SOC), or the TV was just been used as a display for decoding done with PC.

[Blue_MiSfit]

Well, they were using the player in the TV (at least, it looks like the standard LG player UI) - so my guess is a special engineering prototype TV with an FPGA or something in it

[benwaggoner]

Originally Posted by IgorC

Would it make sense just drop a bitdepth of 8 bits already? Especially now when AV1 was just realesed. All right, decoder optimizations and hardware support will come anyway.
Yes, 8 bits is faster to encode/decode but banding ruins a major part of quality gains at quite large range of bitrates.

VP9 8-bits vs 10 bits is a day and night difference.
https://sonnati.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/10bit2.png
https://sonnati.wordpress.com/2016/0...ntion-part-ii/

Even VP9/HEVC 10-12bit are already so advanced to produce block-free video even at quite low bitrates.
I wouldn't be surprised if AV1 8 bits would look worse than VP9/HEVC 10-12 bits (or just comparable)

HEVC eliminates most of the 10-bit advantage over 8-bit that H.264 had. If the source doesn’t have banding, you don’t get much new banding even at lower bitrates. I think AV1 should have ballpark similar improvements.

But yeah, it would be great if the “Main” profile for future codecs always supported at least 10-bit. That’s required for HDR, which is quickly becoming mainstream. It’s not like the SoC or GOU vendors are developing 8-bit only decoders anymore, even if some display pipelines are 8-bit RGB. But 10-bit 64-960 4:2:0 Y’CbCr makes for better 0-255 RGB 4:4:4 anyway.

[benwaggoner]

Originally Posted by Blue_MiSfit

Well, they were using the player in the TV (at least, it looks like the standard LG player UI) - so my guess is a special engineering prototype TV with an FPGA or something in it

If it’s a fast 8-core ARM or something, software decode should be feasible, especially if the GPU was leveraged for some operations. Decoder optimization is a LOT easier and faster than encoder optimization, since there is only one right answer for decoding. We’ll have a good idea of the potential performance of AV1 decoders way before we will for encoders.

[blurred]

Interesting discussion: https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comme...utube_netflix/

It points some FSF licensing issues from 2010:
- https://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/...p8-for-youtube :"Until we move to free formats, the threat of patent lawsuits and licensing fees hangs over every software developer, video creator, hardware maker, web site and corporation -- including you."

- https://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/...d-webm-license : "Unfortunately, the interaction between the copyright license and the patent license made the result GPL-incompatible. Based on the concerns of developers writing GPL-covered software, Google publicly stated that they would take some time to review the WebM license and try to address the community's concerns. Today, they released a revised license, and it is GPL-compatible."
"The most important part of the change is that Google has separated the patent license from the copyright license. Now the copyright license on the software is a totally standard three-clause BSD license, which is clearly compatible with the GPL. The patent license, in turn, provides distributors with permission to exercise all the rights, and meet all the conditions, in the GPL, as required by GPLv2 section 7; and those permissions are consistent with the ones provided by the patent grant in GPLv3 section 11. All this means that developers distributing GPL-covered software can take advantage of the patent license without running afoul of the GPL's conditions, whether they're using GPLv2 or GPLv3."

Does it still apply to AV1?

[SmilingWolf]

MSYS2/GCC 8.2 builds:
av1-1.0.0-692-g16c9affcb: https://mega.nz/#!U1AVFI5R!jPhrtngqf...l8p05ACp9Fn4Ok
dav1d-0.0.1-103-deab253: https://mega.nz/#!xpAHSYwB!hA4Unc81j...3oODqiV3cs3ZP8

dav1d builds are also available here: https://code.videolan.org/videolan/dav1d/pipelines
Cloud button on the right

The first ASM routines for dav1d have been checked in! Time to benchmark again

[TEB]

Originally Posted by olduser217

I heard that Ateme demonstrated 4k60 AV1 decoding on TV (seems like LG TV) during the recent IBC Show.
Anybody attended the show and saw it?

Yupp saw it, but infact it was a HEVC encoded output from a AV1 source (high bitrate) as far as i know..

[Mr_Khyron]

https://www.twoorioles.com/

Offering unprecedented compression gains, high video quality and broad industry support, AV1 promises to be the next universal video compression standard. With 20 to 30 percent better quality than VP9 and HEVC, AV1 has buy-in from such technology leaders as Google, Apple, Microsoft, Netflix, Amazon, Intel, Cisco, Facebook and Mozilla. We’re helping to lead the charge with the industry's first commercial encoder for AV1. As part of our EVE (Efficient Video Encoder) family, EVE for AV1 is in beta testing with several industry partners. With our 16 years of video compression innovation, we’re making the promise of AV1 a reality.

https://www.twoorioles.com/eve-for-av1/

[Mr_Khyron]

Alibaba Cloud, the cloud computing arm of Alibaba Group, has joined the Alliance for Open Media (AOMedia) as a Promoter member. Alibaba Cloud will collaborate with AOMedia and other industry leaders in pursuit of an open and royalty-free AOMedia video codec, AV1.

https://aomedia.org/alibaba-cloud-jo...or-open-media/

[benwaggoner]

Originally Posted by Mr_Khyron

https://www.twoorioles.com/

https://www.twoorioles.com/eve-for-av1/

I really wish PR and such would stop throwing around this "20-30% better than HEVC and VP9" stuff. There is no way to know if that's achievable or not yet, without mature AV1 encoders. And we know that the best HEVC encoders can outperform the best VP9 encoders by easily 20-30% for real-world scenarios, so a quote assuming VP9 and HEVC are equivalent just invalidates the AV1 comparison.

Honestly, finding real-world scenarios where libvpx can deliver better quality @ bitrate @ perf than x264 is a challenge, although I suspect that's primarily due to x264's massively greater psychovisual tuning and perf optimization efforts, not differences in the bitstream standards.

[NikosD]

Originally Posted by benwaggoner

I really wish PR and such would stop throwing around this "20-30% better than HEVC and VP9" stuff. There is no way to know if that's achievable or not yet, without mature AV1 encoders...
Honestly, finding real-world scenarios where libvpx can deliver better quality @ bitrate @ perf than x264 is a challenge, although I suspect that's primarily due to x264's massively greater psychovisual tuning and perf optimization efforts, not differences in the bitstream standards.

I think the same could be said for HEVC too compared to AVC.

I remember the days when x265 was claiming 50% more compression for the same quality compared to x264, but you have to dig too much to find such a case, if any.