Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
This discussion was created for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

First Look: H.264 and VP8 Compared - StreamingMedi

Comments Filter:
  • He uses jpeg files to show the end results! Also, read []
    • It's fine to use JPEG for video codec comparisons as long as the noise introduced by JPEG coding is far lower than the noise introduced by the video codecs. In some cases, the quantizer setting that GIMP calls "95" is enough.
    • The H.264 video in this demonstration was encoded using Baseline Profile, which is designed for low-power mobile appliances, so this test is terrible at doing a proper comparison.

      Using Main or High Profiles, they would be able to gain an average of 10-20% improvement using the CABAC coder, 20-30% improvement using B-frames, and 5-6% using adaptive 8x8 DCT. So, really, this is the worst case H.264 performance versus the best VP8 can provide—and H.264 still manages to look better most of the time.

  • Anyone else notice that different frames were used for to compare? Sure, it may have been in the same or next second. But, that can dramatically change the blur in the frame. Quite frankly, given the apples to oranges comparison, I'd say that the only conclusion that can be made is that they produce similar quality output, but it is still unclear which is superior. Especially, when frame choice can drastically change the outcome.

The unfacts, did we have them, are too imprecisely few to warrant our certitude.