VideoHelp Forum

Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Consider supporting us by disable your adblocker or Try ConvertXtoDVD and convert all your movies to DVD. Free trial ! :)
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 28 of 28
Thread
  1. Member LeoKac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Tbilisi
    Search Comp PM
    Hello, please tell me, at the same video quality, which of these has better compression?
    .
    H.264 (AVC) or x264 ???
    .
    .
    .
    and please tell me, at the same video quality, which of these has better compression?
    .
    H.265 (HEVC) or x265 ???
    .
    .
    .
    Thanks...
    .
    .
    Click image for larger version

Name:	265-cod.jpg
Views:	30792
Size:	118.1 KB
ID:	30069
    Quote Quote  
  2. h.264 (aka AVC) is a specification. x264 is a particular h.264 encoder.

    h.265 (aka, HEVC) is a specification. x265 is a particular h.265 encoder.

    Which cake is better -- chocolate cake recipe or chocolate cake bought at the store down the street?
    Quote Quote  
  3. Member racer-x's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    3rd Rock from the Sun
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by jagabo View Post
    Which cake is better -- chocolate cake recipe or chocolate cake bought at the store down the street?
    Neither, I like Cheese Cake best...
    Got my retirement plans all set. Looks like I only have to work another 5 years after I die........
    Quote Quote  
  4. Member LeoKac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Tbilisi
    Search Comp PM
    so, which one is recipe? and which one is actual cake?
    Quote Quote  
  5. h.264 is a recipe. x264 is a cake.
    Quote Quote  
  6. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Central Germany
    Search PM
    You can get the H.264 and H.265 specifications from the ITU-T (International Telecommunication Union - Telecommunication Standardization Sector; formerly known as CCITT).

    Such standards or recommendations describe the "kernels" of the algorithms and bitstream syntax. Video standards managed by the ITU-T usually start with an uppercase H and dot; there are also standards regarding audio formats (e.g. G.723 as early recommendation for ADPCM audio).

    There are several ITU-T video recommendations closely related to milestones of technology and related ISO/IEC specifications and MPEG technology generations:

    H.261: ISO/IEC 11172-2 ~ MPEG-1 Part 2 (early video telephony via ISDN at 64 kbps, VCD)
    H.262: ISO/IEC 13818-2 ~ MPEG-2 Part 2 (SVCD, DVD Video, DVB)
    H.263: ISO/IEC 14496-2 ~ MPEG-4 Part 2 = SP/ASP (DivX / Xvid / Flash Video 1 ~ Sorenson Spark)
    H.264: ISO/IEC 14496-10 ~ MPEG-4 Part 10 = AVC (AVCHD, Blu-ray, DVB-S2)
    H.265: ISO/IEC 23008-2 ~ MPEG-H Part 2 = HEVC

    The higher the number, the more complex these algorithms are, the more computing power is necessary to have an implementation run in sufficient time (in case of a hardware implementation, to possibly encode video in realtime inside a camera). And usually, more modern video compression algorithms will also be able to compress video more efficiently, to lose less subjective quality with the same target bitrate for the same video dimensions and framerate.

    Each of these standards has been implemented in several different kinds of software and even hardware. Just as one example, the encoder x264 is only one (although one of the most popular and elaborate) software implementation of H.264, among many others. HD cameras usually contain AVC hardware encoder chips (which are of course not the same as x264, but create H.264 compliant video streams as well).
    Quote Quote  
  7. GIGO or WYPIWYG - H.264 is better than x264 and H.265 is better than x265 (as both x26x are subset of H.26x)
    Quote Quote  
  8. Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Search Comp PM
    A codec is only as good as it's best implementation...

    And "best" is contingent on the actual goals of those who are judging.
    Quote Quote  
  9. Member hech54's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Yank in Europe
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by ndjamena View Post
    And "best" is contingent on the actual goals of those who are judging.

    In other words....Beauty Is In The Eye Of The Beholder....so the original question is impossible to answer and dumb to ask.
    Quote Quote  
  10. Originally Posted by pandy View Post
    GIGO or WYPIWYG - H.264 is better than x264 and H.265 is better than x265 (as both x26x are subset of H.26x)
    Except that most people can't do anything with a specification.
    Quote Quote  
  11. Originally Posted by jagabo View Post
    Originally Posted by pandy View Post
    GIGO or WYPIWYG - H.264 is better than x264 and H.265 is better than x265 (as both x26x are subset of H.26x)
    Except that most people can't do anything with a specification.
    Most of people can't do anything with x264/x265 without GUI either...
    However my main point was WYPIWYG.
    Quote Quote  
  12. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kazakhstan
    Search Comp PM
    Hi!
    Still there > q265 (The Next Generation Internet Video (NGIV) Codec project )

    ----


    I recently very slow opening / access to the forum videohelp Does anyone experiencing slowdown?
    Quote Quote  
  13. If it is so dumb and one is just a recipe and one a cake, why can I choose between H.264 and X.264 as outcome codec.
    Obviously I can choose if my video file will be H.264 and X.264.

    If thats dumb, then the programs and codecs are programmed in a dumb way and its no surprise if beginners get confused about it.

    Wont get better if you ****in "experts" insult everybody who cant deal with it.

    Thx for no help whatsoever.
    Quote Quote  
  14. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Freedonia
    Search Comp PM
    Yatsura - WTH, man? This isn't even your thread. It last had a post about 6 weeks ago and you only get your panties in a wad over it TODAY? And again, not YOUR thread.

    One guy, hech54, used the word "dumb" other than you. If that gets you to lose your crap, you might as well leave forever now. That was pretty mild coming from him. I'd hate for you to see it when he really lets it fly! And you're really lucky that this hasn't had a response yet from one of our members for whom H.264 vs X.264 is almost a religious issue. I doubt you'd have enjoyed his diatribes on that subject much. Chill out.
    Quote Quote  
  15. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Northern California
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by jman98 View Post
    And you're really lucky that this hasn't had a response yet from one of our members for whom H.264 vs X.264 is almost a religious issue.
    What is X.264?

    Quote Quote  
  16. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Central Germany
    Search PM
    Completely unimportant remark: A FourCC (four character code) is a flag to identify either which specific codec or which general format is related to a video stream embedded in a container like AVI or MOV which use FourCCs as identifiers. A FourCC is not "the codec", though (a codec is a piece of software, not just 4 bytes). There are even codecs where you can select which FourCC shall be embedded to make a specific player recognize the content better.

    So, well, there may be videos compliant to the H.264 standard, encoded with the x264 codec, and identified by FourCCs like "H264" or "X264" or even "AVC1". And as long as there are people which can't tell apart the diagrams, the product, and the brand name, there will be confusion about it.
    Quote Quote  
  17. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Northern California
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by LigH.de View Post
    Completely unimportant remark: A FourCC (four character code) is a flag to identify either which specific codec or which general format is related to a video stream embedded in a container like AVI or MOV which use FourCCs as identifiers. A FourCC is not "the codec", though (a codec is a piece of software, not just 4 bytes). There are even codecs where you can select which FourCC shall be embedded to make a specific player recognize the content better.

    So, well, there may be videos compliant to the H.264 standard, encoded with the x264 codec, and identified by FourCCs like "H264" or "X264" or even "AVC1". And as long as there are people which can't tell apart the diagrams, the product, and the brand name, there will be confusion about it.
    Very nice but H264 is not a fourcc code however X264 is.

    Quote Quote  
  18. As usual, newpball has no idea what he's talking about. h264 is a valid fourcc code. Many h.264 encoders use it. Registered by Intel: http://www.fourcc.org/h260-through-h269/
    Last edited by jagabo; 26th Mar 2015 at 08:26.
    Quote Quote  
  19. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Central Germany
    Search PM
    Well, I can't eliminate completely the chance that there may be any software (or user) using an "uncommon" FourCC; neither the possibility that an enraged forum user didn't understand his own expression of smattering, so how shall we?
    Quote Quote  
  20. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Northern California
    Search PM
    Here is a list of fourcc codes:

    http://www.fourcc.org/codecs.php

    As you can see H264 is not on that list.

    So if someone codec uses 'H264' drop the author of that list a line!

    Quote Quote  
  21. Originally Posted by newpball View Post
    Here is a list of fourcc codes:

    http://www.fourcc.org/codecs.php

    As you can see H264 is not on that list.
    H264 is on the list under "H260 through H269".
    Quote Quote  
  22. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Northern California
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by jagabo View Post
    Originally Posted by newpball View Post
    Here is a list of fourcc codes:

    http://www.fourcc.org/codecs.php

    As you can see H264 is not on that list.
    H264 is on the list under "H260 through H269".
    Ok you are right.
    Quote Quote  
  23. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Central Germany
    Search PM
    Maybe slightly more interesting question: Is this FourCC actually used (by an encoder) or recognized (by a decoder), in other words: "in the wild"? Or is it just a noncommittal recommendation?
    Quote Quote  
  24. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Northern California
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by LigH.de View Post
    Maybe slightly more interesting question: Is this FourCC actually used (by an encoder) or recognized (by a decoder), in other words: "in the wild"? Or is it just a noncommittal recommendation?
    Good point!

    I thought a fourcc referred to a codec not a standard.

    If it is mixed we have yet another zoo in the video world.
    Quote Quote  
  25. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Central Germany
    Search PM
    It really depends ... there are FourCCs for plain video formats too (which do not even need a "codec", but are rather directly used as DIBs or 2D/3D API textures, without elaborate conversions). And there are, on the other hand, video formats which are practically identical, just the codec prefers an unusual FourCC, and changing the FourCC is all it requires to allow decoding by any other similar codec (e.g. among SD DV codecs).
    Quote Quote  
  26. Encoders don't need a fourcc -- they know what they're doing. The fourcc exists so other programs (OS, application, decoder) can recognize what encoding scheme was used. Even if a video contains uncomrpessed RGB24, RGB32, YUY2, YV12, etc. other programs need some way of knowing what's in the file.

    In my opinion encoders that implement an internationally agreed upon stanadard, like h.264, should not use their own fourcc code. If the encoder unintentionally outputs data that is not compliant with the standard the encoder should be fixed. If it intentionally outputs non compliant data it should use its own fourcc.
    Quote Quote  
  27. Originally Posted by LeoKac View Post
    Hello, please tell me, at the same video quality, which of these has better compression?
    .
    H.264 (AVC) or x264 ???
    .
    .
    .
    and please tell me, at the same video quality, which of these has better compression?
    .
    H.265 (HEVC) or x265 ???
    .
    .
    .
    Thanks...
    .
    .
    Image
    [Attachment 30069 - Click to enlarge]
    H.264 and H.265 are standards, x264 and x265 are the actual software.
    x265 has better compression at the same video quality but it's still too early to guarantee this for all scenes and situations. On some samples it's better quality on some it's worse and on some you can't really tell. Wait a bit longer.
    Quote Quote  
  28. Originally Posted by -Habanero- View Post
    Originally Posted by LeoKac View Post
    Hello, please tell me, at the same video quality, which of these has better compression?
    .
    H.264 (AVC) or x264 ???
    .
    .
    .
    and please tell me, at the same video quality, which of these has better compression?
    .
    H.265 (HEVC) or x265 ???
    .
    .
    .
    Thanks...
    .
    .
    Image
    [Attachment 30069 - Click to enlarge]
    H.264 and H.265 are standards, x264 and x265 are the actual software.
    x265 has better compression at the same video quality but it's still too early to guarantee this for all scenes and situations. On some samples it's better quality on some it's worse and on some you can't really tell. Wait a bit longer.
    Thanks for the only sensible reply that a layman can understand!
    Quote Quote