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 > MPEG-4 AVC / H.264

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 24th January 2012, 15:09   #1  |  Link
Dyomich
Codec Analysis Expert
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Moscow
Posts: 36
MSU MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 2012 Video Codec Comparison - CALL FOR CODECS

Dear video codec developers,

Moscow State University Graphics & Multimedia Laboratory
starts next eighth annual H.264 video codecs comparison.

New this year features:
  • GPU codecs will be analyzed:Nvidia, AMD, and Ivy Bridge based encoders.
    This year we want to make GPU-encoders analysis more
    interesting and complex. For this analysis we plan to use top GPUs,
    e.g. Nvidia and AMD and also to analyze Intel Ivy Bridge (Intel HD
    Graphics 4000) based encoder. Developers can send us
    GPU-accelerated or GPU-based encoder with or without CPU-based
    encoder!
  • We plan to include new codecs that did not participate in previous
    comparison by choosing presets for them ourself.
    For that task we will use option analysis. So we will be glad to
    have a direct contact with codec developers. The main benefit of
    direct participation for developers is that developer could help us
    to choose correct settings for better results and additionally
    developers receive Enterprise version of comparison free of charge.
  • Videoconference encoding analysis will be more complex comparing
    to previous comparison.
  • New video sequences including professional video sequences for video codec analysis

Important Dates
February, 17 - Deadline for receipt of a H.264 codec with presets
February, 28 - Deadline for settling technical problems with codec
April, 24 - Report's draft will be sent to all participants
May, 5 - Deadline for reception of comments to the draft
May, 15 - Comparison report release

The full text of Call for Codecs is available at
http://compression.ru/video/codec_co...codecs_12.html

Variants of Participation
There are two variants for companies to participate in our comparison:
  1. Participation for free. All results of your codec will be
    published, except special cases of measurements
    problems due to codec instability.
  2. Private participation. A special report will be prepared only
    for your company. This report contains:
    • Your codec results and all material from the free version
    • Special additional analysis of your codec

If you are interested in the private participation,
please contact us for details.

Useful Links
-----
Best regards,
Dr. Dmitriy Kulikov,
Moscow State University (MSU)
Graphics&Media Lab
Videocodec Testing Team
videocodec-testing@graphics.cs.msu.ru
Dyomich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th January 2012, 16:49   #2  |  Link
CruNcher
Registered User
 
CruNcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,949
Finaly the GPU (Asic,fixed,dynamic function) compare
I guess you will take Mainconcepts GPU ENcoder and Elemental's also into account, though i guess Arcsoft with their own GPU Encoder (Research they had 3 different Encoder implemented 1 was entirely Cuda based though bad quality most probably Mobile optimized just for pure speed, The other was the Pure NVCuvenc (Nvidia implementation) and then they had another one based on X264 implemented with partly GPU support) isn't on the list yet you should ask them if they want to participate
__________________
all my compares are riddles so please try to decipher them yourselves :)

It is about Time

Join the Revolution NOW before it is to Late !

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=168004

Last edited by CruNcher; 24th January 2012 at 16:54.
CruNcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd June 2012, 06:08   #3  |  Link
IgorC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,318
MSU have published the report
http://compression.ru/video/codec_comparison/h264_2012/
IgorC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd June 2012, 13:45   #4  |  Link
CruNcher
Registered User
 
CruNcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,949
Without reading it i guess Nvidia won on the Quality Encoder Part of the DSP (Kepler) and Intel comes second (Ivy Bridge), both yet not able to reach x264 @ even superfast (on a newer Generation 4 Core Intel CPU (SB 32nm or Ivy 22nm ) with some optimizations (@ least subme 1/2) though most probably both DSP drawing less power overall for the given result (letting Nvidia win the Overall Balance of consumption,speed and quality) (Related from my own testing of their Encoder base throughout Development)

Nvidia didn't participated with their new DSP Encoder Core (in Kepler GPUs) only through Mainconcepts Cuda (Shader) Encoder (on the older 580 GTX) ?

also AMD seems not interested to show any of their Improvements (that's very surprising) ?

So in the end nothing really new from this test I've would have expected some more to be honest though i guess everyone is in full H.265 preperation

But @ least getting results from the newer Nvidia DSP Core (Nvidia could have put you under NDA) instead of Mainconcepts Shader Core would have been nice, you get these results practically already everywhere else on the web now.
__________________
all my compares are riddles so please try to decipher them yourselves :)

It is about Time

Join the Revolution NOW before it is to Late !

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=168004

Last edited by CruNcher; 23rd June 2012 at 14:58.
CruNcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd June 2012, 19:46   #5  |  Link
iwod
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 757
I am actually surprised by the Quality of Intel QuickSync for the speed it offers, but even then it is still far off to x264.
iwod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd June 2012, 20:26   #6  |  Link
CruNcher
Registered User
 
CruNcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,949
The Speed is not the interesting thing the difference in Power Consumption is

i made a small test on that though these are in the wild shots not real scientific but i came to the following though this is also based on Nvidias old Shader Encoder not the new Kepler one and i came to the following result @ comparable quality on a 4 Core Intel SB system.

all Decoding CPU all overall system Power Consumption (out of the wall measurement) all using CABAC High Level 3.1

Quicksync (SB I5-2400 not S) = 110W
x264 (with some preset optimizations) = 130W (though im confident it could be lowered and would stilll look as good with some deeper source changes)
Nvidia 460 GTX (full/partial encoding) = 180W (full and partial encoding differ in the final visual result)

all reaching same Speed of around AVG 180 fps @ 720p 30 fps 3 mbit

though obviously more interesting it becomes the Higher the Bitrate gets and CABAC drives on
__________________
all my compares are riddles so please try to decipher them yourselves :)

It is about Time

Join the Revolution NOW before it is to Late !

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=168004

Last edited by CruNcher; 24th June 2012 at 15:41.
CruNcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
call-for-codecs, codecs comparison, gpu, h.264, msu

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 20:45.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.