VP9 Encoding
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
> Be me, current year
> Encoding VP9
> Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-4690 CPU @ 3.50GHz
> 4-core multi-threaded encoding
> 3.7fps
WTF is this shit, Google?
>>52208407
>intel
There's your problem.
>>52208428
I'm fairly sure it's the VP9 codec. Adding more cores seems to do fuck all but generate heat.
>>52208407
It's just a poorly optimized encoder. Same with HEVC. My HEVC encodes take like three to six hours for one movie.
>>52208407
>VP9
I seriously hope you guys don't do this.
>>52208485
It's for YouTube. If I encode as anything else, they'll just encode it again and the quality would go to shit.
>>52208559
Why are you doing google's job for free? Find an encoding that doesn't take 3 days to process a 5 minute video and isn't butchered too badly by google's VP9 encoder.
>>52208407
> Be me
Off you go ---> >>>/b/
>>52208559
Youtube doesn't re-encode your videos as long as it's in VP9 format?
>>52208463
Are you sure anon?
I transcode my h264 movies to h265 on a mobile i3-4600 and it transcodes faster than runtime, I'm taking of 1080p h265 too
On the other hand VP9 transcodes at like 0.8 fps or something
>>52208839
What the fuck are you using to encode h265? I get like 22fps on a 4770k depending on my settings (2 pass -> 3 hours an encode).
>>52208863
Ffmpeg
I get like 48 fps on an average, that is when using almost the threads and cores
so
only 7h to encode 1h video
not that bad
>>52208907
Good goy.
>>52208407
And this is why I tell everyone to user H265 but nooooo, you fags just HAVE to be such special snowflakes
>>52208559
They're going to re-encode your VP9 video anyway. They have specific encoder settings and video formats they'd want to use to deliver to certain devices, there's no way they'd leave it up to you to decide.
>>52208839
You must be using really shitty settings.
>>52208874
Can you use ffmpeg? Would I get faster encodes? I've been using x265 with staxrip as a gui
>>52208983
Why would you want to transcode to HEVC? You're losing quality by doing so.
>>52208956
Oh...
>>52209002
I know I'm losing quality but it is so negligible for how much storage space I save. Also, I have access to the source material so I could just rerip if I needed to.
>not uploading raw to youtube
wtf
>>52208407
What settings did you give the encoder on the command line? Some of them can seriously affect scaling for parallel encoding (and even decoding).
The Duck/On2 guys Google bought to make those codecs could never write encoders worth shit desu.
>>52208407
As already said, the VP9 encoder is terrible slow and inefficient.
The VP8 encoder is also slow compared to x264.
>>52208407
x264 master race
