No announcement yet.

Open-Source Software Encode/Decode For H.266/VVC Progressing

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by brucethemoose View Post

    Netflix uses HEVC for high quality streams, and I think AVC as a fallback. Last I heard, they are only using AV1 for low res local downloads (which makes sense, as low res is easy to software decode and those downloads are very bandwidth/space limited). Obviously they would like to use AV1 everywhere (and maybe they already are on supported devices), but there will have to be HEVC/AVC fallbacks for the forseeable future.

    IDK what they encode content with, but svt-av1 does not make sense since they are not limited by time or CPU.

    Yeah, live streaming is largely not going to use vvc. Just getting Discord to embed AV1 or users to send YouTube AV1/VP9 has been like pulling teeth... actually Discord embedding may not even work yet, even though they just enabled beta AV1 streaming in 2023 (and probably only on Windows).
    Well, Netflix does offer AV1 and VP9 on Android phones and they use AV1 for smart TVs and the PS4 PRO for example (maybe even PS5). Of course there's no public information so guesses vary between they only use it for HD SDR and they also use it at least for UHD SDR.

    And of course they will use the software encoder they build themselves. They know how it works and they know that it does support anything they need (eg it does support HDR10+, no idea if the reference encoder does too). And since the reference encoder has long been dead slow, this way they not only save lots of power, they can also go through all the content much faster. So yes, they are limited by time and CPU as they want to keep their customers, that means no raising prices more than absolutely necessary, which means not saving lots of power for transcoding.


    • #32
      ... as x265 and x264 were to H.264 and H.265, respectively​
      That would've been hilarious if they actually had x265 to decode H.264!


      • #33
        Originally posted by avis View Post

        If you aren't why are you leaving a comment in this topic?
        If you believe "AV1 is good enough" why are you leaving a comment in this topic?
        If you know very little about codecs in general and it's well outside your interests why are you leaving a comment in this topic?

        AV1 has been good enough for no one so far. It's extremely computationally expensive, so expensive in fact only Google can afford to encode some of top watched videos using it. Yes, Intel Arc, RDNA3 and Ada Lovelace all contain HW encoders for it but they are so bad they are only OK for streaming. I can imagine x264 --preset veryslow being better than hardware encoded AV1 despite being more than a decade older.
        not true, lots of people are migrating to AV1, from videocom like discord, to most streaming services, I stream using SVT-AV1 daily for internal use. encoding using aomenc is also getting more and more efficient.

        Originally posted by MorrisS. View Post
        What's the necessity of VVC, having been developed AV1?
        bluray support and other formats that want to shove licencing down your throat

        Originally posted by Velocity View Post
        What about AV2? AV1 codec bitstream is locked, but it is less 'good' than VVC i heard. So AV2 might compare to VVC?

        If one wouldn't care about licensing, what would be the ideal codec to use at home for transcoding all your videos to, AV1, upcoming AV2 or VVC?
        AV2 if you really really wanted to, but I would just use AV1 since it actually has decoding support​​


        • #34
          Originally posted by Adventurer_Kun View Post
          then why didn't all the companies rush back with vp9 if it's so free, and didn't switch to it. That is, not everything is so clean here, I think,
          And we just don't know much about the use of these seemingly free codecs by companies​
          they did, many streaming companies like YT, netflix and aprime used VP9, the issue is VP9 support for hardware encoders is kinda really cruddy when compared to HEVC, so HEVC is ideally for situations when you need to rely on HWDEC like DRM. a lot of 1080p content from netflix was served as VP9.

          Originally posted by brucethemoose View Post

          Some of the biggest users will probably be streaming services, where even tiny bandwidth reductions translate to millions of dollars saved. And streaming box/smart tv SOCs appear to be the first hardware decode adopters:

          IDK about the big editing suites. They still default to x264 (with not very optimal settings) or ProRes from what I've seen, so they seemingly arent in a rush to optimize the quality of exports.
          as far as I am aware, there is little to no one wanting this outside of patent holders. the cost you save in bandwidth would be spent in licensing. and since most services are migrating to AV1 anyways due to support. I don't actually see that much use of VVC outside of licenced media like bluray and stuff like appleTV.

          Originally posted by Velocity View Post
          AV1 is slightly better than H265 and VVC is a bit better than AV1, AV2 might compare to VVC. Is that an accurate conclusion of todays insights?
          VVC is marginally better then AV1, and AV1 is marginally better then HEVC at medium fidelity, and massively better at low fidelity. AV2 at least during testing from my friend who I relatively trust is somewhat beating VVC using AVM in terms across the board. it's also looking pretty darn impressive for still images too.​​​


          • #35
            Let’s just say it would be surprising to see H.266/VCC being adopted outside of TV streaming perhaps.

            Not only because the patent situation has become untenable and has already held back H.265/HEVC.

            Also because there is some dramatic progress being made in generative AI. Video diffusion models (VDMs) are effectively a way to compress video by orders of magnitude better than the best codecs today. It may take a couple more years to make VDMs sing and dance for everyday use. But that’s nothing compared to the average lifespan of standard codecs: H.264/AVC was published in 2004 and is still the most relevant codec today!

            More recent technologies hardly fare better. Nobody other than Apple touches HEVC. AV1 adoption is also slow. Not to mention that there are already patent claims being made against AV1.


            • #36
              Originally posted by rhadlee View Post
              Not to mention that there are already patent claims being made against AV1.
              Everyone sort of expected patent claims. The consortium worked hard to avoid clearly infringing technology, but there are just too many patents that might apply and your lawyer's opinions will vary. I have no doubt the consortiums lawyers will evaluate the claims to decide next steps.

              It was reported (but never confirmed, confidentiality clauses can do that) that Google basically paid off the VP8/9 patent claims to make it free (they do have somewhat deep pockets). Depending on the claims against AV1, and whether the consortiums lawyers think the claim has potential merit, and what the claimant thinks those patents are worth, they might consider doing something like that again (should it have happened with VP8/9, of course) to avoid further implementation delays due to litigation uncertainty.


              • #37
                Fraunhofer are very pro-patent oriented. No one should be using anything they make.


                • #38
                  Originally posted by nazar-pc View Post

                  Licensing is an important factor, and it is not just cost, it is also to simply figure out whom to pay in the first place.
                  It was a big challenge with HEVC.
                  Adoption of HEVC wasn't amazing to say the least.
                  And you have to turn off that encoding on Apple products if you want your media files easily editable in other environments. While that's ok in situational cases, the defaults for taking photos and videos on iOS are more designed to keep people on Apple products than publishing anything others can easily view.


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by CommunityMember View Post

                    ATSC 3.0 (the US nextgen TV broadcast standard) uses H.265 as its expected default codec. While ATSC 3.0 is not available everywhere at this time, the OTA broadcast industry does see it was their eventual future.
                    In the UK they're already planning to phase out OTA. Might not happen for a decade or two, but I'm pretty sure they see streaming-based solutions as the future. Perhaps we will look back and think "hey, it sure was weird when everyone paid for codecs".


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Quackdoc View Post
                      bluray support and other formats that want to shove licencing down your throat
                      Maybe we will see 300 GB 8K UHD Blu-ray discs with VVC support. But I think new optical disc formats are dead outside of fever dreams. Which is a shame.

                      OTOH VVC will get some use whether we like it or not:

                      The Brazilian SBTVD Forum selected VVC for Brazil's upcoming TV 3.0. The Brazilian SBTVD Forum will adopt the MPEG-I VVC codec in its forthcoming broadcast television system, TV 3.0, expected to launch in 2024. It will be used alongside MPEG-5 LC EVC as a video base layer encoder for broadcast and broadband delivery.

                      The European organization DVB Project, which governs digital television broadcasting standards, announced 24 February 2022 that VVC was now part of its tools for broadcasting. The DVB tuner specification used throughout Europe, Australia, and many other regions has been revised to support the VVC (H.266) video codec, the successor to HEVC.

                      Phoronix reported that AV2 R&D "has begun in earnest" back in 2020, so hopefully it isn't too far behind.