Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FFmpeg Now Supports HEVC/H.265 Decoding

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Serge View Post
    Ok, well, to be fair, a given video will take the same amount of time to download regardless of what you do with it after you download it. I guess if you are writing it to persistent storage, then that will take longer than just leaving it in a buffer, but since writing to storage occurs at the same time as the download is still in progress, and since your bottleneck is the download, chances are you aren't going to see any actual difference in time between writing it to storage or not. On the other hand, if you compare the same video optimized for download and optimized for streaming, assuming equal quality the download version should be a little bit smaller and hence actually take less time downloading.
    When buffering, you get to buffer and watch in parallel. When downloading, you download first, and watch after that, so it takes longer. And if I want to watch a video, I typically want to watch it right at that moment, not after half an hour.

    Granted, some videos can be watched while download is in progress. But that basically means buffering, because that way you need to make sure you're downloading everything sequentially. And then you also can't seek.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
      When buffering, you get to buffer and watch in parallel. When downloading, you download first, and watch after that, so it takes longer. And if I want to watch a video, I typically want to watch it right at that moment, not after half an hour.

      Granted, some videos can be watched while download is in progress. But that basically means buffering, because that way you need to make sure you're downloading everything sequentially. And then you also can't seek.
      Sorry, looks like I misunderstood you. I interpreted your "downloading takes even longer" assertion too litteraly.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
        That is only true if you have poor ventilation or poor fans.
        PC with CPU with high TDP or many cores can sound like vacuum cleaner or CPU can overheat.
        Last edited by JS987; 10-17-2013, 05:02 PM.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Luke View Post
          That means real trouble for netbooks and older tablets without hardware H265 support if the format becomes popular for web video.
          People with 386 CPUs cannot play mp3.

          Comment


          • #20
            I'm waiting for the encoder support.
            I want to see how much disk space can be saved with this for archival purposes.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Soul_keeper View Post
              I'm waiting for the encoder support.
              I want to see how much disk space can be saved with this for archival purposes.
              Well there are encoders out there, both x265 and VP9 are open source, however it will likely take a looong while yet until they have been improved to reach the actual potential of their respective specifications. Currently they are also very slow, much slower than they need to be due to lack of optimization. However if you want to try them out now (like I'm doing) you can simply build them from source:

              x265:

              hg clone https://bitbucket.org/multicoreware/x265
              cd x265/build/linux
              ./make-Makefiles.bash
              make

              VP9:

              git clone http://git.chromium.org/webm/libvpx.git
              cd libvpx/build
              ../configure
              make

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Soul_keeper View Post
                I'm waiting for the encoder support.
                I want to see how much disk space can be saved with this for archival purposes.
                Is the saved disk space worth the cost of the electrical Power needed for the transcode ?

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by dibal View Post
                  Is the saved disk space worth the cost of the electrical Power needed for the transcode ?
                  My estimates:
                  4 Go (optimal x2 compression, for a 8Go initial file): 0.30
                  1h of 100W extra consumption: 0.01

                  It looks worth it, even more so if you raid or backup your data, or if you don't want to upgrade existing disks almost full, etc..

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X