VideoHelp Forum

Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.
Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker or buy a VSO converter software :)
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2
FirstFirst 1 2
Results 31 to 46 of 46
Thread
  1. DECEASED
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Heaven
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by racer-x View Post
    Ultra-low bitrates are the only real reason to use an HEVC encoder anyway.........
    Hopefully "they" WON'T release Ultra-HD video compressed with ultra-low bitrates
    Quote Quote  
  2. Member racer-x's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    3rd Rock from the Sun
    Search Comp PM
    I hear ya, but you and I know that bandwidth = money. Hence all the interest in HEVC and vp9 lately.............
    Got my retirement plans all set. Looks like I only have to work another 5 years after I die........
    Quote Quote  
  3. Originally Posted by racer-x View Post
    Yes, Divx265 is faster than x265 encoder, but the quality is far less at ultra-low bitrates. Ultra-low bitrates are the only real reason to use an HEVC encoder anyway.........
    This thread was not created to bash x265-encoder or promote divx265 my goal was to help people to find best encoder for hevc . comment like this doesn't help anyone please when you claim something provide evidence for it . divx265 quality in same encoding time is better than x265 in low bitrates and my comparison test between x265 and divx265 show that .
    Quote Quote  
  4. Member racer-x's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    3rd Rock from the Sun
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by david55 View Post
    Originally Posted by racer-x View Post
    Yes, Divx265 is faster than x265 encoder, but the quality is far less at ultra-low bitrates. Ultra-low bitrates are the only real reason to use an HEVC encoder anyway.........
    This thread was not created to bash x265-encoder or promote divx265 my goal was to help people to find best encoder for hevc . comment like this doesn't help anyone please when you claim something provide evidence for it . divx265 quality in same encoding time is better than x265 in low bitrates and my comparison test between x265 and divx265 show that .
    I didn't post to this thread to bash Divx265, I was just making an observation. I used your GUI, but unfortunately it only works in Bitrate Mode and the quality suffered. When I encoded with the CLI, I used -qp 25 -aqo 3. That greatly improved the quality to the point where it was hard to tell them apart.

    Just so you know..........
    Got my retirement plans all set. Looks like I only have to work another 5 years after I die........
    Quote Quote  
  5. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kazakhstan
    Search Comp PM
    Author of the GUI need include DXVA2 for ffmpeg (more performance)
    Quote Quote  
  6. Author of the GUI need include DXVA2 for ffmpeg (more performance)
    should be optional since:
    a. it crashes on some systems
    b. is slower than normal processing on others
    -> not always a wise idea to enable it
    Quote Quote  
  7. Comparison between divx265 and x264

    x264
    resolutions 720p
    profile slow
    bitrate 400kb
    Encoding time 6:20 min
    Size 15.5 MB
    Far less quality compared to " divx265 1.2.0.24 fast and 1.3.74 fast "
    download x264 slow 6.20.mkv


    x264
    resolutions 720p
    profile very slow
    bitrate 400kb
    Encoding time 15:30 min
    Size 15.5 MB
    Far less quality compared to " divx265 1.2.0.24 fast and 1.3.74 fast"
    download x264 very slow 15.30.mkv
    Quote Quote  
  8. Ultra-low bitrates are the only real reason to use an HEVC encoder anyway.........
    And this statement is based on what?
    Quote Quote  
  9. Member racer-x's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    3rd Rock from the Sun
    Search Comp PM
    It's based on my observation that AVC currently outperforms HEVC everywhere quality wise, except very low bitrates. That may change as hevc develops.
    Got my retirement plans all set. Looks like I only have to work another 5 years after I die........
    Quote Quote  
  10. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kazakhstan
    Search Comp PM
    Hi david55,
    Make comparisons DivX_v1.2.0.24 vs DivX_v1.3.74 only this time the balance mode?
    Quote Quote  
  11. Comparison between divx265 1.3.74 balanced and divx265 1.2.0.24 balanced


    divx265 1.3.74
    resolutions 720p
    profile balanced
    bitrate 400kb
    Encoding time 5:30 min
    Size 17.7 MB
    less quality compared to " divx265 1.2.0.24 fast "
    download divx265 1.3.74 balanced 5.30.mkv

    divx265 1.2.0.24
    resolutions 720p
    profile balanced
    bitrate 400kb
    Encoding time 18 min
    Size 17.7 MB
    almost same quality as " divx265 1.2.0.24 fast "
    download divx265 1.2.0.24 balanced 18 .mkv
    Quote Quote  
  12. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kazakhstan
    Search Comp PM
    DivX265 v1.2.0.24 /abr/balanced > download (2.1 mb)
    Finished after 1:36 min
    Long encodes and worse quality.

    DivX265 v1.3.74 /abr/balanced > download (2 mb)
    Finished after 0:26 min
    Quickly encodes and better quality.

    ---

    @david55,
    You have not enabled colorspace properties: -709 (so different textures).
    Quote Quote  
  13. Originally Posted by Gravitator View Post
    DivX265 v1.2.0.24 /abr/balanced > download (2.1 mb)
    Finished after 1:36 min
    Long encodes and worse quality.

    DivX265 v1.3.74 /abr/balanced > download (2 mb)
    Finished after 0:26 min
    Quickly encodes and better quality.

    ---

    @david55,
    You have not enabled colorspace properties: -709 (so different textures).
    You encoded with CLI or with GUI ?
    Quote Quote  
  14. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kazakhstan
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by david55 View Post
    You encoded with CLI or with GUI ?
    Through Hybrid.
    Quote Quote  
  15. I did a small test... For the speed, Divx265 gives good quality...
    So it for fast encodes, and users who like it fast... Even the slowest -aqo 4 is pretty fast!..
    But I like the slower x265... Since even though it is slow, it gives better quality...
    I hope Divx265 will add extra presets with that is slow expanding it's range...
    Quote Quote  
  16. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kazakhstan
    Search Comp PM
    I want to look at more psy improvements with a 2-pass
    Quote Quote