Google Releases AOM-AV1 v3.3 Video Encoder Update With Performance Improvements

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Google Releases AOM-AV1 v3.3 Video Encoder Update With Performance Improvements

Google in cooperation with AOMedia this week released the AOM-AV1 v3.3 encoder for this royalty-free video codec...

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=AOM-AV1-3.3-Encoder

[Spacefish]

Who would seriously do AV1 encoding on a CPU which only has SSE2 and no AVX? Is there even a usecase that makes any sense?

[OneTimeShot]

At a guess someone who has a computer which only has SSE2 and no AVX?

[jacob]

At a guess someone who has a computer which only has SSE2 and no AVX?

Realistically someone with such an old and weak computer should use H264, not AV1.

[ALRBP]

Realistically, someone wanting to encode AV1 and caring about performance should use SVT-AV1, not AOM-AV1.

[Barbrady]

Realistically someone with such an old and weak computer should use H264, not AV1.

why? AV1 is an improved codec vs H264 and H265, uses less bit-rate maintaining image quality, or improves image quality using same bit-rate. Is fast on decoding, so old cpu can handle decoding.

[jntesteves]

Realistically, someone wanting to encode AV1 and caring about performance should use SVT-AV1, not AOM-AV1.

Not exactly. Both encoders have been evolving rapidly, so I don't know if the situation has changed, but last I've seen AOM-AV1 was higher quality at the slowest mode, and FASTER than SVT-AV1 for the same quality at the levels they were comparable. Of course SVT-AV1 can go faster if you keep decreasing quality to levels AOM-AV1 doesn't reach, but that's only if you don't care about quality at all. If that's the case, then it's rav1e that should take the speed crown, since it is the one with the fastest modes by quite some margin.

[willmore]

Who would seriously do AV1 encoding on a CPU which only has SSE2 and no AVX? Is there even a usecase that makes any sense?

What context am I missing that triggered this question? What cpu are you talking about?

[Spacefish]

What context am I missing that triggered this question? What cpu are you talking about?

I just speculated, that a CPU only supporting SSE2 but not AVX is probably very old.. Using a mix of AVX/SSE is typically really slow, as changing between the modes ist expensive. At least on Intel / AMD x86.
So there are two groups:
- People with CPU older than ~6-7 years who probably won´t do AV1 encoding as the CPU is too slow to do it / it takes ages / is not ussable for live video encoding in video conferencing.
- People with CPUs that do support AVX and will use the AVX-Codepath and not SSE2..

So there is no realworld usecase for the SSE2 Encoder Codepath IMHO.. Decoding yes, but encoding?

[willmore]

Spacefish, my point is why bring up SSE2? How is this relevant?