Objective comparison of Ripbot264 vs Badaboom

[digital_afterthought]

I used two Objective quality comparison metrics (VQM and SSIM) to compare the conversion quality of Badaboom and Ripbot264.

http://digitalafterthought.blogspot.com/2010/04/badaboom-vs-ripbot264-objective.html

In the end, I was surprised to find that Badaboom beat Ripbot264. Let me know what you think...

DA

[hech54]

The shamelessness of people never ceases to amaze me.

[creamyhorror]

That's an interesting comparison, and I find it hard to believe that Badaboom actually produced better results than the x264-using RipBot264. Previous comparisons have indicated Badaboom produces much inferior quality than x264 does (and x264 is probably the best commonly-available H.264 encoder).

Why not post on Doom9's AVC forum and let them know that x264 is inferior? That's where all the serious H.264 codec discussion takes place.

edit: Here's the link to the forum

[Atak_Snajpera]

Did somebody tell you that those SNR and PSNR are USELESS!!! x264 is optimized for human eyes not for some stupid alogrithms!!! Upload both clips to www.mediafire.com and we will judge which encoder is better. Also you used the easiest source i have ever seen. A lot of static scenes...

source
http://www.mediafire.com/?z2zzmyzyyxt

1280x692 (1.85:1) x264 2-pass 1024kbps
http://www.mediafire.com/file/y2ze3rzjzwz/old-dog_avc-new.mp4
25s clip encoded in 53s on Q6600@3ghz

[ulapines]

Yes, subjective comparision is always better than objective.
It's all in the eyes of the beholder.

[hech54]

It's best not to feed the trolls who start threads just to get the name of their own product out there.

[chrchr]

I used two Objective quality comparison metrics (VQM and SSIM) to compare the conversion quality of Badaboom and Ripbot264.

http://digitalafterthought.blogspot.com/2010/04/badaboom-vs-ripbot264-objective.html

In the end, I was surprised to find that Badaboom beat Ripbot264. Let me know what you think...

DA

Sorry if I "feed", but I’m curious and I love to see many choices...
I'm happy with what I know with ribot and the time it takes.
With better "results" ,do you mean the same quality with a lower bitrate? (this is something that I can understand) or it's just the encodings time?
But ribot has never asked me for anything before!
I can answer in the law:
"You get what you pay for" with the note:
"And i'm VERY happy !!!"
Make me understand that it deserves to give a try and my time to “your” law .