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 > VP9 and AV1

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 12th June 2019, 13:11   #1721  |  Link
soresu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Swansea, Wales, UK
Posts: 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by birdie View Post
Weird results from BBC: https://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/blog/2019-0...ssing-hevc-vvc: no source videos, no codecs version, nothing.
It's not weird, they have a stake in VVC - so unfortunately they seem to be pushing a FUD angle against the nascent, standardised AV1 in an attempt to make VVC look better.

I'd hoped for better from the BBC considering the quality of their iPlayer platform. As it is, from these barely veiled attacks I'm in doubt that they will use AV1 at all.

Has anyone tried using SVT-AV1 on AMD hardware yet, especially Threadripper 16-32 cores? I'm curious to see how far Intel specific optimisations gimp AMD performance.
soresu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th June 2019, 18:09   #1722  |  Link
`Orum
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by soresu View Post
Has anyone tried using SVT-AV1 on AMD hardware yet, especially Threadripper 16-32 cores? I'm curious to see how far Intel specific optimisations gimp AMD performance.
I don't have a threadripper but I can test on a R7 1700 when I get home, if that interests you.

As for the "Intel specific" optimizations, that could help or hurt on AMD, but at the very least they seem to use Visual Studio instead of icl (which is really more "AMD specific degradation" than "Intel specific optimization").

Edit: Does anyone have a binary available? It seems to require VS 2017 or 2019, and I won't install those while I have 2015 installed. Alternatively I can use their release, but it's several weeks old and a very active project.
__________________
My filters: DupStep | PointSize

Last edited by `Orum; 12th June 2019 at 18:23.
`Orum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th June 2019, 04:20   #1723  |  Link
`Orum
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 178
Alright, here are some numbers on my R7 1700. Source was a 1080p BD I had handy. Options were: -q 30 -n 1000 -i stdin -w 1920 -h 1080 -enc-mode 4
Code:
Total Frames            Frame Rate              Byte Count              Bitrate
        1000            30.00 fps                  5734937              1376.38 kbps

Channel 1
Average Speed:          1.853 fps
Total Encoding Time:    539574 ms
Total Execution Time:   541517 ms
Average Latency:        47668 ms
Max Latency:            64363 ms
Encoder finished
__________________
My filters: DupStep | PointSize

Last edited by `Orum; 13th June 2019 at 04:23.
`Orum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th June 2019, 15:27   #1724  |  Link
iwod
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 756
Quote:
Originally Posted by soresu View Post
It's not weird, they have a stake in VVC - so unfortunately they seem to be pushing a FUD angle against the nascent, standardised AV1 in an attempt to make VVC look better.

I'd hoped for better from the BBC considering the quality of their iPlayer platform. As it is, from these barely veiled attacks I'm in doubt that they will use AV1 at all.

Has anyone tried using SVT-AV1 on AMD hardware yet, especially Threadripper 16-32 cores? I'm curious to see how far Intel specific optimisations gimp AMD performance.
And they are also part of the Open Media Alliance. So we now consider anything that is better than AV1 as FUD?
iwod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th June 2019, 17:46   #1725  |  Link
dapperdan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 201
https://medium.com/vimeo-engineering...o-a2115973314b

Vimeo adopting AV1, specifically the rav1e encoder with an explicit wish to make it the new x264.
dapperdan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th June 2019, 10:27   #1726  |  Link
unpause
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by `Orum View Post
Alright, here are some numbers on my R7 1700. Source was a 1080p BD I had handy. Options were: -q 30 -n 1000 -i stdin -w 1920 -h 1080 -enc-mode 4
Using the same options I got the following results on an R7 2700X. Ubuntu 19.04, release mode built from HEAD (5fd69642f40655d2ec7ac6ffb8cb2c678650e1e7):

Code:
SUMMARY --------------------------------- Channel 1  --------------------------------
Total Frames		Frame Rate		Byte Count		Bitrate
        1000		30.00 fps		  13116427		3147.94 kbps


Channel 1
Average Speed:		2.653 fps
Total Encoding Time:	376893 ms
Total Execution Time:	378036 ms
Average Latency:	33390 ms
Max Latency:		47422 ms
Encoder finished

Last edited by unpause; 14th June 2019 at 10:31.
unpause is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th June 2019, 18:06   #1727  |  Link
soresu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Swansea, Wales, UK
Posts: 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by iwod View Post
And they are also part of the Open Media Alliance. So we now consider anything that is better than AV1 as FUD?
I actually live in the UK, have friends that have worked for the BBC, and I personally consider their motives to be suspect here - joining the AOM is by no means any guarantee that they did so with good intentions at that point, or at any point since, any more than nVidia's presence in the Khronos standards body guarantees their good intentions towards future efforts with OpenCL.

I'm not saying that AV1/libaom are without their failings, but the graphs in the blog articles seem to show worst case scenario numbers for AV1 from what I've seen from other sources in the past (including here), while showing only improvement for VVC - the only positive thing they can write is that AV1/libaom has gotten much faster since their last test.

The best I can say is that they are being somewhat disingenuous towards AOM's efforts thus far, though their potential patent stake in VVC causes me to lean towards a more nefarious angle on the matter.

I would add that I don't in any way believe that VVC or MPEG codecs are intrinsically bad, in fact as an avid follower of ML/AI tech in media I am quite interested to see how it performs once implemented.
It is the vortex of financial incentives that churn around MPEG efforts that has me reaching for my FUD colored glasses.

Last edited by soresu; 14th June 2019 at 18:36.
soresu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th June 2019, 22:11   #1728  |  Link
mandarinka
Registered User
 
mandarinka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 729
And you think the companies like Google with vested interest in VP9/AV1 have no incentive to astroturf or paint their product in better light and competing in worse than is fair?

Actually, it might be open source enthusiasts and evangelists that volunteer/vigilante/follow these things as a hobby and not as a job/living that are the worst offenders with FUD ("Fear, uncertainty and doubt") or untrue claims, because companies are actually somewhat afraid of being held accountable.
These folks probably often don't even get they do something dishonest or if they do, they think it's fine because "we are the good guys" (no, principles should hold for everybody.). Even if we put apart more controversial fields for sake of not starting offotpic flame... good example is for example the twitter/phoronix forums marketing of the Raptor Engineering (Power9 vendor) that routinely uses strongly dishonest FUD against x86 to sell their stuff to paranoid people as a company that does it, libreboot as non-profit people that do it and then the general fandom of this free hardware(firmware) movements as general internet people that then perpetuate it further. You could probably find a lot of that blinded hypocrisy here too.
mandarinka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th June 2019, 23:10   #1729  |  Link
MoSal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 95
No need for multi-paragraph comments arguing who is FUDing who (old-style FUDing is a tired tactic anyway).

BBC R&D (not necessarily representative of everyone in the organization) provided zero info that would allow anyone to replicate their results, let alone analyzing and arguing their usefulness. Period.
__________________
https://github.com/MoSal

Last edited by MoSal; 14th June 2019 at 23:16.
MoSal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th June 2019, 18:48   #1730  |  Link
soresu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Swansea, Wales, UK
Posts: 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by mandarinka View Post
And you think the companies like Google with vested interest in VP9/AV1 have no incentive to astroturf or paint their product in better light and competing in worse than is fair?
I think that's a false equivalency, AV1 and VP9 are a means to an end for Google, Netflix, Cisco etc - the end being pushing more video for a given bandwidth without being encumbered by uncertainty fostered by divergent patent pools, as happened with HEVC (and I absolutely believe it will happen again with VVC given time).

The end may not be 'just' patent royalties for all MPEG members, but it will certainly be a top consideration for most of them.

The difference is actually in the product wording you mentioned:
For Google and the other AOM content creators, the product is the content and increased access created by the codecs existence.
For MPEG members, the product is the codec itself.

Obviously that oversimplifies the matter somewhat, but I think that represents the main gist of it.

Last edited by soresu; 15th June 2019 at 18:51.
soresu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th June 2019, 14:37   #1731  |  Link
bstrobl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 55
First SoC launched by Realtek: https://www.realtek.com/en/press-roo...-cas-functions
bstrobl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th June 2019, 14:40   #1732  |  Link
EwoutH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: Delft, Netherlands
Posts: 15
Press release: https://www.realtek.com/en/press-room/news-releases/item/realtek-launches-worldwide-first-4k-uhd-set-top-box-soc-rtd1311-integrating-av1-video-decoder-and-multiple-cas-functions
EwoutH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th June 2019, 20:07   #1733  |  Link
soresu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Swansea, Wales, UK
Posts: 196
Faster than I expected for a hardware ASIC release, with HDMI 2.1 support no less - though HDMI 2.1 is obviously overkill for 4K60p video, the release doesn't say anything about higher than 4K support.
soresu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th June 2019, 21:04   #1734  |  Link
hajj_3
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,120
nice to see but realtek charges a lot more for their chips than amlogic, allwinner, huawei, mediatek and rockchip which is why cheap android tv boxes don't use them.
hajj_3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th June 2019, 22:25   #1735  |  Link
IgorC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,315
https://www.reddit.com/r/AV1/comment...han_x264_x265/

Everybody compares AV1 to VP9 on 8 bits for both.

What about VP9 10 bits?
It makes also sense to compare AV1 8 bits vs VP9 10 bits.

VP9 10 bits has several advantages over AV1 8 bits at this moment:
  • Significantly faster encoding
  • Significantly faster decoding
  • Hardware support
  • Should has ~10-20% better compression than VP9 8 bits (not that far from AV1’s 25-30%)

It makes sense to employ VP9 10 bits at least for 2-3 years more until a final jump to AV1. It will give additional time for AV1 to develop better encoders and decoders.

Well, Google and Netflix already use VP9 10 bits for their HDR content but SDR could benefit as well.

Plus VP9 benefits a LOT from 10 bits because it suffers from blocking and banding not less than H.264 as it indicates here https://sonnati.wordpress.com/2016/0...ntion-part-ii/

Last edited by IgorC; 17th June 2019 at 22:28.
IgorC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th June 2019, 09:24   #1736  |  Link
soresu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Swansea, Wales, UK
Posts: 196
Always interesting to hear about AI/ML tidbits related to video encoding, the Visionular speaker at the Big Apple Video conference (26th June) has this in her summary:

"Finally, we will introduce certain AI+codec techniques that could provide certain novel coding tools leveraging the use of deep learning for the next AOM standard, possibly AV2."
soresu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th June 2019, 18:33   #1737  |  Link
dapperdan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 201
I think this paper covers one such proposal for AV2 and has the speaker as an author:

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10...319-94361-9_18

Couldn't quickly find a public version, but the citations took me to this which I think was another technique discussed:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1804.09291

Last edited by dapperdan; 19th June 2019 at 18:36.
dapperdan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th June 2019, 08:56   #1738  |  Link
foxyshadis
ангел смерти
 
foxyshadis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Lost
Posts: 9,558
Reminds me of NNEDI, both in that there can be surprising visual gains and in that it will require enormous CPU & GPU power just to decode.

But isn't discussion of AV2 getting way off topic? We have an entire forum for discussing new and potential codecs, this thread is just getting more polluted and useless every week.
foxyshadis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th June 2019, 19:40   #1739  |  Link
benwaggoner
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 4,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by IgorC View Post
https://www.reddit.com/r/AV1/comment...han_x264_x265/

Everybody compares AV1 to VP9 on 8 bits for both.

What about VP9 10 bits?
It makes also sense to compare AV1 8 bits vs VP9 10 bits.
Why not compare AV1 10-bit vs. VP9 10-bit?

The barriers to using 10-bit seem pretty similar in both cases, namely longer encoding time, lack of 10-bit sources or processing chains (getting much better), reliance on good dithering in display system, somewhat slower SW decode, and rarer HW decode support.

AFAIK, no one is planning any 8-bit only AV1 decoders, so 10-bit might be able to be used by default more often with AV1 if HW decoders become dominant. SW decoders need more optimization for 10-bit to make it competitive for higher resolutions.

I expect 10-bit to become generally mainstream as it is required for HDR, and we're near or past the tipping point where the majority of new video consumption devices support at least HDR-10.
__________________
Ben Waggoner
Principal Video Specialist, Amazon Prime Video

My Compression Book
benwaggoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th June 2019, 23:43   #1740  |  Link
IgorC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,315
Of course You can compare AV1 and VP9 both 10bits.

My main point was not very disruptive move from VP9 8 bits to VP9 10 bits as a short term strategy (2-3 years).

Let’s put some numbers. My i7 notebook uses 20-25% of CPU during Youtube 1080p@60fps (VP9 8 bits). If it was VP9 10 bits that would be 5-7% additional CPU usage. Still pretty acceptable.
Now AV1 8 bits consumes whooping 60% at that resolution and framerate (and that with the last version of dav1d). While my notebook still can play it but a fan noise and overall slowness are quite annoying.
Let alone AV1 10 bits. Dav1d hasn’t any 10 bits code yet and it will take some time to get fast 10 bits decoding and/or hardware acceleration. My notebook gets very hot and drops a few frames here and there with near 100% CPU load with AV1 10 bits on 1080p@60. Also my another notebook with Kaby Lake i7 already has VP9 8-/ 10- bits hardware acceleration. So why not?

VP9 8 bits suffers from strong blocking and banding in dark areas and tones in my experience with Youtube and mobile Netflix videos. While VP9 10 bits can handle it very well with a little extra CPU overhead.
IgorC 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 13:23.


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