My test procedure is as follows ġ) I have downloaded some YUV test files and convert them to NV12 (YUV 4:2:0 semi-planar format) in order to use them on DM365.Ģ) I have used Digital video test bench (DVTB) in order to compress these YUV files to H.264 format.ģ) I have compressed the same files by using "ffmpeg" in order to make a comparison. So, I want to learn your ideas about how to improve the video quality. In order to verify this observation, I have performed some objective tests and share the results here. When compared to other encoded bitstreams subjectively, I have seen that our encoder has worse quality than the others. The operating system was Ubuntu 18.04 and the FFMpeg version was 3.4.8-0ubuntu0.2.We are trying to develop an H.264 encoder application on DM365. Thanks to exception0x876 at wishosting for the opportunity to use this. The server used for testing had dual Intel Xeon E5-2687W v4 CPU’s set 3.50GHz, meaning 24 cores and 48 threads in total. The testing is using the constant quality option (crf) and the differences with different deadlines along with the cpu used parameter, these effect speed and the outcome quality. To see the encoding options for VP9 WebM with FFmpeg see my post here.
Part 7 was both h264 and h265 (hevc) -deadline good compared to -deadline realtime. Part 6 was h265 with -deadline good compared to -deadline realtime. Part 3 was h264 with -deadline good compared to -deadline realtime. In this part 8 see FFmpeg comparison based on averages for encoding speed, fps, size and bitrate from both h265 (hevc) and h264 MP4 video file to VP9 WebM with grouping for the media type, deadline and cpu used values.
0 kommentar(er)
