10-bit HEVC
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
Would you download a ~1GB 720p movie rip if it used 10-bit HEVC? Pic related is not 10-bit HEVC btw.
HEVC would make a ~1GB 720p movie look twice as good as a ~1GB 720p movie. 10-bit HEVC would go one step further and reduce color banding and improve quality a little bit for the same bitrate especially in dark scenes.
10-bit x265 encoder: https://builds.x265.eu/x265-64bit-10bit-2016-06-25.exe
I will when I get a GPU that supports 10-bit HEVC. Right now it seriously violates my CPU.
>>55253537
>Right now it seriously violates my CPU.
I'm not talking about 10-bit HEVC video streams with 20+Mbps, just ~1Mbps. Low bit-rate content is easier to decode right?
>>55253512
HEVC isn't really for 720p. It doesn't offer much over h.264 at that resolution, though it will hold together at lower bitrates. And 10bit won't reduce banding unless you're doing something to the source that would introduce it. An 8 bit encode of an 8 bit source doesn't add banding. To reduce banding requires you to deband. 10 bit allows you to retain high bit depth debanding.
You should use 10 bit anyway for the compression gain, it's just not gonna magically deband.
Would I watch YIFY? If there was nothing else.
>>55253691
>Would I watch YIFY? If there was nothing else.
Not saying that, YIFY uses 8-bit H264 so of course it looks like shit. But if 10-bit HEVC were used then it would look twice as good and then some.
Anyway I don't think you understand how bad 8-bit encoders are. At low YIFY bitrates they introduce color banding and extra artifacts. I know 10-bit does not deband but it retains more shades of colors which reduces color banding across all bitrates.
Also what do you mean HEVC isn't really for 720p? It's ~50% more efficient compared to H264 across all resolutions right?
I'd pick HEVC or h264 any day, any time, but it's still not picking up popularity much yet. It's a clearly superior successor to h264 in every way and people's only complaints are inefficient encode/decode, but hardware for that is catching up as well.
I bought an Nvidia GTX 1070 and this thing packs 10-bit (and 12-bit?) 4K HEVC encoders/decoders so this is what more hardware needs.
>>55253818
over, not or*
Whoops, typos.
>>55253776
>Also what do you mean HEVC isn't really for 720p? It's ~50% more efficient compared to H264 across all resolutions right?
No. 4K and up, low bitrate, it achieves its 50% mark. At lower resolutions and higher bitrates, H.264 can even win out, though HEVC is getting better at a pretty good clip. Eventually it will win out at every resolution and CRF, but it's not quite there yet.
>>55253919
Have you even used the encoder I posted?
x265 1.9+217 is pretty fucking dank senpai.
>>55254057
I'll wait for 2.0.
>>55254228
Won't hurt to try it.
>>55254367
Not encoding anything at the moment.
I should really finish up the subs for Nanoha A's and get that out, though.
Best decoder for HEVC? MPV?
>>55255454
Nah, MPC-HC seems to have better multi-core decoding.
>>55253512
the blurriness on the right is not better than the sharpness + artifacts on the left. needs a higher bitrate for a better comparison.
>>55253512
looks like shite m8, maybe set the hevc to 650kbps and it might look decent
>>55253512
she looks ugly in both
also the left looks better than the right in places, but that's pretty fair considering the bitrate is almost doubled
>>55253576
>Low bit-rate content is easier to decode right?
Right
Personally, my CPU (i7 3770) dies at around 60 Mbps of 2160p yuv420p10 HEVC. I imagine a more modern CPU would have a much better time, especially on an oct-core it would be a piece of cake.
>>55255454
>>55255502
mpv and MPC-HC aren't HEVC decoders you mongoloids
>>55255737
We know negro, they have them built in. But fact is the one in MPV seems to use more resources than the one in MPC-HC so therefore it's shit.
>>55255795
>We know negro, they have them built in.
mpv does not have one built in at all. MPC-HC bundles one but to say it's built-in would be an overstatement.
>But fact is the one in MPV seems to use more resources
Which is funny considering it literally doesn't exist. mpv doesn't include a HEVC decoder at all.
>therefore it's shit
Don't talk to me or my xaughter ever again you mongoloid retard.
>>55253776
Its not 50% better, its like 25% you retard
>>55255825
>Don't talk to me or my xaughter ever again you mongoloid retard.
>>55255874
The x265 encoder has improved dramatically, efficiency is like 40-50% now compared to H264
Check OP's link and try the encoder for yourself. We are almost at version 2.0. It's even a 10-bit encoder as well.
>>55255946
do you even see the image?
I hope it takes off. Maybe I could redownload most of my anime with the same quality while using less space. I did a reencode of Redline and dropped its filesize 27% while dropping no quality. This was with Debian's ffmpeg a few months ago and I didn't optimize settings at all, the options were quality on slow or slower and some crf. It did take its sweet time to do it however, 3570k only has 4 cores.
>>55256045
post encoder settings from mediainfo
>>55253512
>Would you download a ~1GB 720p movie rip if it used 10-bit HEVC?
No
>>55256096
Why not? Are you still using a dual-core Android phone perhaps?
>>55253512
>.exe
Kill yourself
>>55256115
it looks like crap
maybe a 6-8GB movie.
>>55256134
>not knowing who snowfag is
>>55256153
Nigga we're talking about 10-bit HEVC not YIFY's 8-bit H264. I think you're underestimating how good a 720p movie encoded with that would look even if it stayed ~1GB in file size.
>>55256201
I'm not, I just don't want that crap. I download BluRay remuxes every single time.
>>55256092Stream #0:0(jpn): Video: hevc (Main), yuv420p(tv), 1864x1048 [SAR 1:1 DAR 233:131], 23.98 fps, 23.98 tbr, 1k tbn, 23.98 tbc (default)
Metadata:
title : REDLINE
ENCODER : Lavc57.24.103 libx265
DURATION : 01:42:06.037000000
Stream #0:1(jpn): Audio: flac, 48000 Hz, 5.1(side), s16 (default)
Metadata:
title : 5.1 FLAC
DURATION : 01:42:07.093000000
Stream #0:2(eng): Subtitle: ass (default)
Metadata:
title : Styled Subtitles
ENCODER : Lavc57.24.103 ass
DURATION : 01:37:45.290000000
>>55256236
>I download BluRay remuxes every single time.
this
That said, Blu-rays will use HEVC in the future. I'm really looking forward to UltraHD Blu-ray. Damn thing needs to be cracked faster.
>>55256236
bluray is h264
>>55256201
1gb hevc WILL and DOES Look like fucking shit.
>>55256253
Well, that doesn't tell me anything, but
>HEVC
>27%
I can believe it didn't fuck it up much
You can save a ton more space by ditching the placebo FLAC. Dunno if you can run QAAC on Linux since it requires Apple DLLs, but 640k Opus will do ya'.
>>55256268
Current-gen Bluray is HEVC, it just hasn't been cracked yet
>>55256335
We'll see. #MAKEYIFYGREATAGAIN
>>55253512
>Would you download a ~1GB 720p movie rip if it used 10-bit HEVC?
For a 2-hour movie that's about 1 Mbps, which is pretty rough (below youtube quality). No way in hell would I enjoy watching that.
I would prefer it if you stick to the ITU-R guidelines, which is that you use about 10-15 Mbps HEVC Main 10 for 1080p. 720p isn't much below that.
Also, 720p sucks in general. Give me 2160p, it's fucking 2016.
>>55256446
>Also, 720p sucks in general. Give me 2160p, it's fucking 2016.
We're waiting for Zen. Hopefully their 16-core ultra high performance desktop chip will remain under $1,000.
>>55256396
I'm sorry. I didn't mention it, but by the previous post, it implied I didn't know shit about what I was doing. I watched the movie entirely and didn't see anything that would be considered fucking up. I left the other things intact to see how much it would reduce strictly on the video side.
>>55256500
Nigga those will probably be server CPUs. Zen is probably 8 core 16 threads on the desktop for at least $600.
Daily reminder that video bit-rate means jack shit when encoding stuff. CRF value or go bust.
>>55256505
It probably is close to transparent. It's just I've seen people do a -90% transcode and call it "no visible loss." A lot of people really have NO idea what they're looking at.
>>55256580
A lot of people have 1366x768 TN screens.
Can't wait for the dawn of a new age of mainstream high quality 10-bit video
