VP9 vs H.265——下一代视频编码标准的王道之争

目前下一代主流的视频编码标准有 ITU-T VCEG 推出来的 H.265 和 Google 推出 VP9 。

H.265 在 H.264 的基础上保留其中的部分技术,并对相关技术加以改进研发而成。新技术主要通过提升压缩效率、鲁棒性,提高错误恢复能力,减少实时时延、减少信道获取时间等方面,让视频编码达到效率更高。同时 H.265 可以实现利用 1~2Mbps 传输速度传送 720P 普通高清音视频。

VP9 是由 Google 开发的开放式、无版权费的视频编码标准,在开发初期曾经被命名为 Next Gen Open Video,VP9 也被视为是 VP8 的下一代视频编码标准。

H.265、VP9 与上一代视频编码标准相比在编码效率上均提升了 50% 左右。那么它们两者之间孰优孰劣呢?下文对两者的性能做下详细的对比,通过数据,我们来了解哪个才是下一代视频编码标准的王道。

H.265、VP9 性能对比

编码质量

△ 编码质量测试

上图为 H.265 与 VP9 编码质量的对比测试,数值越小,则表示编码质量越好。从对比中我们发现 H.265、VP9 两者的差别并不大,整体平均分只差了 0.001,在实际应用中几乎不存在差异。

编码时间

△ 编码时间测试

在编码时间对比中,VP9 完胜 H.265,无论是 4K 视频还是 1920、1280 分辨率的视频,VP9 的编码耗时都比 H.265 短很多。

CPU 消耗

△ CPU 消耗测试

上图是 H.265 和 VP9 在 Dell Precision 390 工作站上播放 CPU 消耗测试,VP9 在 Firefox 上 CPU 解码效率比 Chrome 更高效。而 H.265 在 DivX 上远远比 VLC Player 高效。将两个编码标准的数据进行对比之后,H.265 的解码效率略高于 VP9 。

未来属于 H.265 还是 VP9

H.265 继承了 H.264 的视频编码标准体系,在商业应用中更加广泛,多使用于安防、军政、企业等场景中,但由于其专利持有者过多,导致其商用费用过高,在推广中面临较大阻力。

VP9 由 Google 研发,可以免费使用。在实际推广中,微软、苹果等公司不愿看到 VP9 一家独大,其他互联网厂商也不希望主流视频编码格式被垄断,因此目前在主要在 Google 自家的产品中得到支持,其他使用 VP9 的大厂并不多。

就目前而言,H.265 在企业、安防中使用较为广泛,而 VP9 因其简易、实用的解决方案以及开发免费的特性在互联网应用场景中使用较多。未来两者究竟谁会是主流的视频编码标准,这点还不好说。当然,随着视频应用场景的多样化,未来也有可能是两者并而行之,相辅相成。

更便捷的多媒体云处理

不论是 H.265 还是 VP9,都有着其优势领域,用户可以根据实际的应用场景选择使用的格式。

目前,又拍云的媒体处理已同时支持 H.265 和 VP9 视频编码标准。客户在进行音视频处理时,只需要把视频编码格式设置成 libx265 或 libvpx-vp9,即可实现视频编码成 H.265 或 VP9。

  • 0
    点赞
  • 2
    收藏
    觉得还不错? 一键收藏
  • 0
    评论
世界上最快的VP9视频解码器 As before , I was very excited when Google released VP9 – for one, because I was one of the people involved in creating it back when I worked for Google (I no longer do). How good is it, and how much better can it be? To evaluate that question, Clément Bœsch and I set out to write a VP9 decoder from scratch for FFmpeg. The goals never changed from the original ffvp8 situation (community-developed, fast, free from the beginning). We also wanted to answer new questions: how does a well-written decoder compare, speed-wise, with a well-written decoder for other codecs? TLDR (see rest of post for details): as a codec, VP9 is quite impressive – it beats x264 in many cases. However, the encoder is slow, very slow. At higher speed settings, the quality gain melts away. This seems to be similar to what people report about HEVC (using e.g. x265 as an encoder). single-threaded decoding speed of libvpx isn’t great. FFvp9 beats it by 25-50% on a variety of machines. FFvp9 is somewhat slower than ffvp8, and somewhat faster than ffh264 decoding speed (for files encoded to matching SSIM scores). Multi-threading performance in libvpx is deplorable, it gains virtually nothing from its loopfilter-mt algorithm. FFvp9 multi-threading gains nearly as much as ffh264/ffvp8 multithreading, but there’s a cap (material-, settings- and resolution-dependent, we found it to be around 3 threads in one of our clips although it’s typically higher) after which further threads don’t cause any more gain. The codec itself To start, we did some tests on the encoder itself. The direct goal here was to identify bitrates at which encodings would give matching SSIM-scores so we could do same-quality decoder performance measurements. However, as such, it also allows us to compare encoder performance in itself. We used settings very close to recommended settings forVP8,VP9andx264, optimized for SSIM as a metric. As source clips, we chose Sintel (1920×1080 CGI content, source ), a 2-minute clip from Tears of Steel (1920×800 cinematic content, source ), and a 3-minute clip from Enter the Void (1920×818 high-grain/noise content,screenshot). For each, we encoded at various bitrates and plotted effective bitrate versus SSIM . sintel_ssimtos_ssimetv_ssim You’ll notice that in most cases, VP9 can indeed beat x264, but, there’s some big caveats: VP9 encoding (using libvpx) is horrendously slow – like, 50x slower than VP8/x264 encoding. This means that encoding a 3-minute 1080p clip takes several days on a high-end machine. Higher –cpu-used=X parameters make the quality gains melt away. libvpx’ VP9 encodes miss the target bitrates by a long shot (100% off) for the ETV clip, possibly because of our use of –aq-mode=1. libvpx tends to slowly crumble at higher bitrates for hard content – again, look at the ETV clip, where x264 shows some serious mature killer instinct at the high bitrate end of things. Overall, these results are promising, although the lack-of-speed is a serious issue. Decoder performance For decoding performance measurements, we chose (Sintel)500 (VP9), 1200 (VP8) and 700 (x264) kbps (SSIM=19.8); Tears of Steel4.0 (VP9), 7.9 (VP8) and 6.3 (x264) mbps (SSIM=19.2); and Enter the Void 9.7 (VP9), 16.6 (VP8) and 10.7 (x264) mbps (SSIM=16.2). We used FFmpeg to decode each of these files, either using the built-in decoder (to compare between codecs), or using libvpx-vp9 (to compare ffvp9 versus libvpx). Decoding time was measured in seconds using “time ffmpeg -threads 1 [-c:v libvpx-vp9] -i $file -f null -v 0 -nostats – 2>&1 | grep user”, with this FFmpeg and this libvpx revision (downloaded on Feb 20th, 2014). sintel_archs tos_archsetv_archs A few notes on ffvp9 vs. libvpx-vp9 performance: ffvp9 beats libvpx consistently by 25-50%. In practice, this means that typical middle- to high-end hardware will be able to playback 4K content using ffvp9, but not using libvpx. Low-end hardware will struggle to playback even 720p content using libvpx (but do so fine using ffvp9). on Haswell, the difference is significantly smaller than on sandybridge, likely because libvpx has some AVX2 optimizations (e.g. for MC and loop filtering), whereas ffvp9 doesn’t have that yet; this means this difference might grow over time as ffvp9 gets AVX2 optimizations also. on the Atom, the differences are significantly smaller than on other systems; the reason for this is likely that we haven’t done any significant work on Atom-performance yet. Atom has unusually large latencies between GPRs and XMM registers, which means you need to take special care in ordering your instructions to prevent unnecessary halts – we haven’t done anything in that area yet (for ffvp9). Some users may find that ffvp9 is a lot slower than advertised on 32bit; this is correct, most of our SIMD only works on 64bit machines. If you have 32bit software, port it to 64bit. Can’t port it? Ditch it. Nobody owns 32bit x86 hardware anymore these days. So how does VP9 decoding performance compare to that of other codecs? There’s basically two ways to measure this: same-bitrate (e.g. a 500kbps VP8 file vs. a 500kbps VP9 file, where the VP9 file likely looks much better), or same-quality (e.g. a VP8 file with SSIM=19.2 vs. a VP9 file with SSIM=19.2, where the VP9 file likely has a much lower bitrate). We did same-quality measurements, and found: ffvp9 tends to beat ffh264 by a tiny bit (10%), except on Atom (which is likely because ffh264 has received more Atom-specific attention than ffvp9). ffvp9 tends to be quite a bit slower than ffvp8 (15%), although the massive bitrate differences in Enter the Void actually makes it win for that clip (by about 15%, except on Atom). Given that Google promised VP9 would be no more than 40% more complex than VP8, it seems they kept that promise. we did some same-bitrate comparisons, and found that x264 and ffvp9 are essentially identical in that scenario (with x264 having slightly lower SSIM scores); vp8 tends to be about 50% faster, but looks significantly worse. Multithreading One of the killer-features in FFmpeg is frame-level multithreading, which allows multiple cores to decode different video frames in parallel. Libvpx also supports multithreading. So which is better?

“相关推荐”对你有帮助么?

  • 非常没帮助
  • 没帮助
  • 一般
  • 有帮助
  • 非常有帮助
提交
评论
添加红包

请填写红包祝福语或标题

红包个数最小为10个

红包金额最低5元

当前余额3.43前往充值 >
需支付:10.00
成就一亿技术人!
领取后你会自动成为博主和红包主的粉丝 规则
hope_wisdom
发出的红包
实付
使用余额支付
点击重新获取
扫码支付
钱包余额 0

抵扣说明:

1.余额是钱包充值的虚拟货币,按照1:1的比例进行支付金额的抵扣。
2.余额无法直接购买下载,可以购买VIP、付费专栏及课程。

余额充值