Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded
"Mo Zanaty (mzanaty)" <mzanaty@cisco.com> Thu, 04 April 2013 23:48 UTC
Return-Path: <mzanaty@cisco.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 2013221F8551 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Apr 2013 16:48:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 SmVBI5Xw1RDQ for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Apr 2013 16:48:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-7.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.86.78]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8872421F84D9 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Apr 2013 16:48:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=18784; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1365119308; x=1366328908; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=QrC4FC2Dcz9oFrmbhh02SK5GPtAAI13tCXfgPZy2CPo=; b=JelmNRmsADSLvI4oLR1KAQOsx5oOiANGsF0xKiLDoyUWW3iKWHHpiKlw CSubd3aI45ux9xpMuAxOc3kt9cud95Kie96LInnTYxsEHad6mqwCNLR5D RVmmm8L2ngb0/lVH/cdOHswGnEgq8mb8ua61tSw+qAYq3MoyiJ4xOGsLB 4=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: An0GABoQXlGtJV2c/2dsb2JhbABDgkJENq8liTEBiDKBBhZ0gh8BAQEDAQEBASpBCwULAgEIEQQBAQsdBycLFAkIAgQBDQUIiAYGDME0iQeFYy0EBgGCX2EDiESPSo9tgwuCKA
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.87,412,1363132800"; d="scan'208,217"; a="195221988"
Received: from rcdn-core-5.cisco.com ([173.37.93.156]) by rcdn-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP; 04 Apr 2013 23:48:28 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x11.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x11.cisco.com [173.37.183.85]) by rcdn-core-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r34NmRi1018577 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 4 Apr 2013 23:48:27 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x14.cisco.com ([169.254.4.51]) by xhc-rcd-x11.cisco.com ([173.37.183.85]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Thu, 4 Apr 2013 18:48:27 -0500
From: "Mo Zanaty (mzanaty)" <mzanaty@cisco.com>
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, Sergio Garcia Murillo <sergio.garcia.murillo@gmail.com>, "Adrian Grange (agrange@google.com)" <agrange@google.com>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded
Thread-Index: AQHOMRH2Yc5K5lTgGEy3dSkUaz32P5jGYuiAgABUC8A=
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2013 23:48:27 +0000
Message-ID: <3879D71E758A7E4AA99A35DD8D41D3D90F69B280@xmb-rcd-x14.cisco.com>
References: <CAPVCLWbajJNS-DbXS-AJjakwovBKhhpXAmBaR_LYKjCyk7UnYg@mail.gmail.com> <515D3FA1.6050305@gmail.com> <515D8087.6080409@alvestrand.no>
In-Reply-To: <515D8087.6080409@alvestrand.no>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.150.30.39]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_3879D71E758A7E4AA99A35DD8D41D3D90F69B280xmbrcdx14ciscoc_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded
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: Thu, 04 Apr 2013 23:48:34 -0000
> Was there any specific parameter or parameter set you were wondering about? --nal-hrd cbr and --bitrate, who suggested those? They were not part of the suggested<http://mailman.videolan.org/pipermail/x264-devel/2013-March/009920.html> settings from x264-devel. Mo From: rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Harald Alvestrand Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2013 9:31 AM To: rtcweb@ietf.org Subject: Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded On 04/04/2013 10:53 AM, Sergio Garcia Murillo wrote: Hi Adrian, Could you explain how the encoding parametrization is comparable? x264 --nal-hrd cbr --vbv-maxrate ${rate} --vbv-bufsize ${rate} \ --vbv-init 0.8 --bitrate ${rate} --fps ${frame_rate} \ --profile baseline --no-scenecut --keyint infinite --preset veryslow \ --input-res ${width}x${height} \ --tune psnr \ -o ./encoded_clips/h264/${clip_stem}_${rate}kbps.mkv ${filename} \ 2> ./logs/h264/${clip_stem}_${rate}kbps.txt vs: ./bin/vpxenc --lag-in-frames=0 --target-bitrate=${rate} --kf-min-dist=3000 \ --kf-max-dist=3000 --cpu-used=0 --fps=${frame_rate}/1 --static-thresh=0 \ --token-parts=1 --drop-frame=0 --end-usage=cbr --min-q=2 --max-q=56 \ --undershoot-pct=100 --overshoot-pct=15 --buf-sz=1000 \ --buf-initial-sz=800 --buf-optimal-sz=1000 --max-intra-rate=1200 \ --resize-allowed=0 --drop-frame=0 --passes=1 --good --noise-sensitivity=0 \ -w ${width} -h ${height} ${filename} --codec=vp8 \ -o ./encoded_clips/vp8/${clip_stem}_${rate}kbps.webm \ &>./logs/vp8/${clip_stem}_${rate}kbps.txt Both have the same target bitrate and the same resolution, and neither generates periodic keyframes. Apart from that, I think they are comparable by virtue of being the parameters that were recommended for this test by people who like this particular codec implementation. Was there any specific parameter or parameter set you were wondering about? Best regards Sergio El 03/04/2013 18:20, Adrian Grange escribió: We have uploaded a new set of test results comparing VP8 to H.264. This latest set contains fixes for some of the problems in the previous set. We would like to extend our thanks to those who made suggestions as to how we could improve our methodology and encourage suggestions as to how we can make further improvements. In these tests we run x264 with the "veryslow" preset and VP8 with the "good, speed 0" setting in an attempt to produce comparable results. An overview of our results is available as follows: - A Quality comparison (psnr): http://downloads.webmproject.org/ietf_tests/vp8_vs_h264_quality.html - An Encode Speed comparison: http://downloads.webmproject.org/ietf_tests/vp8_vs_h264_speed.html - A comparison of the aggregate time required to decode all of the clips in the test: http://downloads.webmproject.org/ietf_tests/vp8vsh264-decodetime.txt All of our test scripts can either be downloaded from: http://downloads.webmproject.org/ietf_tests/vp8_vs_h264.tar.xz or checked out of our git/gerrit repository: git clone http://git.chromium.org/webm/vpx_codec_comparison.git The file README.txt, contained within, presents details of how to build and run the tests. The compressed video files--the output from the quality tests--can also be downloaded: VP8: http://downloads.webmproject.org/ietf_tests/vp8_videos<http://downloads.webmproject.org/ietf_tests/vp8_videos/>/index.html H.264: http://downloads.webmproject.org/ietf_tests/h264_videos/index.html Adrian Grange _______________________________________________ rtcweb mailing list rtcweb@ietf.org<mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb _______________________________________________ rtcweb mailing list rtcweb@ietf.org<mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
- [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded Adrian Grange
- Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded Sergio Garcia Murillo
- Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded Luca De Cicco
- Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded Luca De Cicco
- Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded Thomas Davies
- Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded Matthew Kaufman
- Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded Adam Roach
- [rtcweb] Fundamental asymmetry [was Re: New VP8 v… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded Leon Geyser
- Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded (UNC… Roy, Radhika R CIV USARMY (US)
- Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded (UNC… Thomas Davies (thdavies)
- Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded (UNC… Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded Mo Zanaty (mzanaty)
- Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded Mo Zanaty (mzanaty)
- Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded Sergio Garcia Murillo
- Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded (UNC… Roy, Radhika R CIV USARMY (US)
- Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded Kieran Kunhya
- Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded Mo Zanaty (mzanaty)
- Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded Kieran Kunhya
- Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded Randell Jesup
- Re: [rtcweb] New VP8 vs H.264 tests uploaded Leon Geyser