uvg266 Rolls Out More AVX2 Optimizations For Open-Source VVC/H.266 Encoding

[sophisticles]

The objections regarding open source implementations of patent encumbered standards reminds me of the broader fallacious reasoning that many within the open source community espouse regarding closed source, proprietary technology in general.

They want the OS and drivers to be open source, yet they have no problems with using proprietary hardware with open source software.

The design of all hardware from Intel, ARM, AMD, Nvidia, etc? Proprietary, patented.

The ATM's you use for banking? Proprietary, patented, and the software is closed source.

The cameras and other equipment used to make the movies you watch? Proprietary, patented.

The cars you drive, including the software that controls the engine and transmission? Proprietary, patented, and the software is closed source.

It is impossible to go an entire day without using some patented, proprietary technology that relies in some respect on closed source proprietary software, unless you spend the day in the woods camping, and even then, if you have a GPS with you, you are using patented, proprietary technology.

It absolutely amazes me, there are people that expect someone with the brains and motivation to earn an engineering degree or a computer science degree, to go to school, study, get really good at their job and then work for free; or in the case of companies, to invest large amounts of money on R&D, hiring people, equipment and then turn around and give away the secrets to the technology they created for free.

Yet i guarantee you the same people that demand open standards and open source software would have a fit if they showed up for work on day and their employer demanded that they work for free that week.

It's time for the open source community to grow up.

[geerge]

You're using plenty of fallacious reasoning yourself

[arQon]

[*]AV1 being CPU-intensive is the reason why we should push more for hardware-accelerated support for it.

av1 decode isn't THAT expensive (for 1080, at least, and with most video consumed on 6" screens that's all you need) - roughly 2.5x h265. what that means is that basically every chip coming out of a fab can just handle it in software if it has to (and many will). i think the piece you're missing is that unless you're selling into the "luxury" market you just *do not care* how expensive decode is: you're not the one paying for it.

> That's why I was so livid to learn that the Raspberry Pi 5 only has hardware acceleration for h.265 and not AV1. WHY, EBEN?

"disappointing" for me rather than upsetting, but to be fair it was pretty obvious they were going to keep going with broadcom socs, and, well, that's what you get from broadcom.

[SteamPunker]

av1 decode isn't THAT expensive (for 1080, at least, and with most video consumed on 6" screens that's all you need) - roughly 2.5x h265. what that means is that basically every chip coming out of a fab can just handle it in software if it has to (and many will). i think the piece you're missing is that unless you're selling into the "luxury" market you just *do not care* how expensive decode is: you're not the one paying for it.

> That's why I was so livid to learn that the Raspberry Pi 5 only has hardware acceleration for h.265 and not AV1. WHY, EBEN?

"disappointing" for me rather than upsetting, but to be fair it was pretty obvious they were going to keep going with broadcom socs, and, well, that's what you get from broadcom.

But someone in this forum actually stated that the h.265 hardware IP core in the RP5 was actually developed by Raspberry Pi in-house, which is even more baffling. The license fees unnecessarily inflate the price of the product.