Hardware encoding is more pervasive with Intel’s Quick Sync embedding CUDA GPUs inside GPUs plus NVIDIA GPUs have MPEG NVENC encoding support so how does it compare with software encoding? For HEVC, can Xilinx’s FPGA solution be a boost in terms of quality or cost compared to software encoding?
Jan Ozer has stepped up to the plate to put this all to the test analysing how many real-time encodes are possible on various cloud computing instances, the cost implications and the quality of the output. Jan’s analytical and systematic approach brings us data rather than anecdotes giving confidence in the outcomes and the ability to test it for yourself.
Over and above these elements, Jan also looks at the bit rate stability of the encodes which can be important for systems which are sensitive to variations such services running at scale. We see that the hardware AVC solutions perform better than x264.
Jan takes us through the way he set up these tests whilst sharing the relevant ffmpeg commands. Finally he shares BD plots and example images which exemplify the differences between the codecs.
In the ongoing battle to find the minimum bitrate for good looking video, automation is key to achieving this quickly and cheaply. However, metrics like PSNR don’t always give the best answers meaning that eyes are still better the job than silicon.
In this talk from the Demuxed conference, Intel’s Vasavee Vijayaraghavan shows us examples of computer analysis failing to identify lowest bitrate leaving the encoder spending many megabits encoding video so that it looks imperceptibly better. Further more it’s clear that MOS – the Mean Opinion Score – which has a well defined protocol behind it continues to produce the best results, though setting up and co-ordinating takes orders of magnitude more time and money.
Vasavee shows how she’s managed to develop a hybrid workflow which combines metrics and MOS scores to get much of the benefit of computer-generated metrics fed into the manual MOS process. This allows a much more targeted subjective perceptual quality MOS process thereby speeding up the whole process but still getting that human touch where it’s most valuable.
Content distributors and aggregators adding HEVC to their delivery pipeline will have plenty of codec options, but who has the time to evaluate their features, output quality, and performance?
No worries—codec specialist Jan Ozer has done the work for you. He’s evaluated leading contenders like x265, MainConcept, Beamr, Intel, and NTT and he’ll share his results. You’ll walk away from this session with a much clearer picture of the strengths and weaknesses of your HEVC encoding options for VOD streaming. Watch
Subscribe to get daily updates
Views and opinions expressed on this website are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of SMPTE or SMPTE Members.
This website is presented for informational purposes only. Any reference to specific companies, products or services does not represent promotion, recommendation, or endorsement by SMPTE