[rtcweb] Detailed test results for our VP8 to H.264 comparisions
Harald Alvestrand <hta@google.com> Tue, 12 March 2013 18:21 UTC
Return-Path: <hta@google.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C52221F8976 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 11:21:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.976
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ObBIr0Ep3Zzw for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 11:21:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qe0-f45.google.com (mail-qe0-f45.google.com [209.85.128.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4E2C21F8940 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 11:21:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qe0-f45.google.com with SMTP id b4so93236qen.32 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 11:21:37 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=GXH1EETaLBDv8YpWbKBKd/XqykB3dD86seTBBFOpUA0=; b=VoWOTMlC1buh1occ3FrT1oYYIz8roaJPNA/Ovm8VFhNEFM6frhxjN7Ya1qjVp6j7YV cFu2YHeLfr1JB9P/3XYKPCwPhknf6McrtoWV3QS4sDwztKmeKcAbToqFHt4UlcLhtOcZ W1FkloL/jyv1FiNT3SxB1UwROlfqV69rDjZjIW9hFQwm4FCQowEoRVKQoOIGlVpUTEKH erz0xMtZcmsV83twTZoKKDHHb6HNy1cVGut47C1F22JEdVqTAU/uevSDhyYSbqoyqs7/ yD3fp0615GmeORwZSU0Jk5mpISVaTd0reS6AYmzTI6Gam8IhbKDvZQH4iVjHIFf0Kq/H pRhQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=GXH1EETaLBDv8YpWbKBKd/XqykB3dD86seTBBFOpUA0=; b=j/iVGQsyJXNd7aY0hserfD7RuwoEU+VT/JaHPvLcuv12teBS0eFe7sYVPx491/ubj5 FxObRTqrpZ5xNaANUb66XXKkJrCfApj2vV0dMCrl257ryAfFgdwz1wgiLlozg7cQd8MZ fDZgsfQTpIOZYI7WF8qi4K58eZC3OabVqjWt17E2Osl+zmWALrOqV976d6S7rWdrM0zI d3GzlFhBsNzm7hTKasLZym3MxZk3Pvz9PUeC0YQCsuTxF07Yi1uFDGHKVJwlGEF9vky2 kRjCes/BAjqaINU6nP27mUvJmK0sYA9cscdIYHJCLvVGkwiMaL3u0FSThfNMiSMeaTQy bugw==
X-Received: by 10.224.71.16 with SMTP id f16mr3542712qaj.31.1363112497294; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 11:21:37 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.128.17 with HTTP; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 11:21:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: Harald Alvestrand <hta@google.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 19:21:17 +0100
Message-ID: <CAOqqYVGbc8-fMBJ34eLhW4YP4BNpcP0z5xArjDTFgBU8hK1-6A@mail.gmail.com>
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="bcaec51b1b9730e95c04d7be5cbd"
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlRLQxaJ11MIYTWKOXuS2gPuhg4hoCS6KIshgLEvc3/9vrEmisTnP0OuFMUIm0ge9RTBLNnwU3njlS/fPAhsJ1exIcBJSEamNX403XSdnjT8X6910UwIivKD5HRi1PLzGDBuTyQL0ssMzXSQuJzwf8U3coMrAgxYhyE34OpQPB4ItcJFD8eysgeQDE5Lxg1q+JW1k9x
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 11:34:49 -0700
Subject: [rtcweb] Detailed test results for our VP8 to H.264 comparisions
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 18:21:39 -0000
As part of the effort to make sure people have the maximum amount of information wrt the choice of MTI codec for RTCWEB, we've made the scripts, source files and results for our quality measurements available on the WEBM project website. The 4 documents of interest are: - The PSNR quality measurements: http://downloads.webmproject.org/ietf_tests/vp8_vs_h264_quality.html - The CPU usage for encode/decode: http://downloads.webmproject.org/ietf_tests/vp8_vs_h264_speed.html - The scripts used for generating the graphs: http://downloads.webmproject.org/ietf_tests/vp8_vs_h264.tar.xz - A text presentation of the CPU results: http://downloads.webmproject.org/ietf_tests/vp8vsh264-decodetime.txt The source videos in YUV format are also available from the same site. The scripts file contains a README file; if you want to verify the results, or understand how the results were arrived at, please follow the instructions in this file. Harald, for the WEBM team
- [rtcweb] Detailed test results for our VP8 to H.2… Harald Alvestrand