Results
This page shows the video encoding results available on this particular site.
No-limit results
This is the result of comparing encodings based on PSNR and file size being below a certain bitrate, with no restrictions on tools applied, and no penalty applied for moving bits around within the bitstream.
The first column gives the baseline codec; the top row gives the codec it is compared to, and the number gives the change in bitrate between the two for the same quality metric.
Positive numbers indicate an increase in filesize (left codec is better); negative numbers indicate a decrease in filesize (top codec is better).
PLACEHOLDER | VP8 | x264 | H263 |
---|---|---|---|
VP8 | -22% | -71% | |
x264 | +30% | -64% | |
H263 | +262% | +203% |
Tuned results listing
This is the same results as above, but this time, we add the ability to tune the parameters at each data point.
This will show how far it’s possible to squeeze the performance of each codec - “you can’t do better than this”.
In the graphs linked below, each codec is represented by a dotted line showing “this is the best we can do at this target bitrate”, and by a solid line showing the result of running with the single “best” configuration for all bitrates.
PLACEHOLDER | VP8 | x264 | H263 |
---|---|---|---|
VP8 | -22% | -71% | |
x264 | +30% | -64% | |
H263 | +262% | +203% |
Interactive Results
This table shows the overall numeric results based on PSNR and bitrate overrun. The score for any clip is reduced by 1 for each second of accumulated delay, divided by the length of the clip.
In addition, to qualify for this ranking, an encode must be performed using less CPU time (single CPU) than the length of the clip, and it must have no forward looking elements - that is, a decoded frame N must be exactly the same no matter what the content of the original frame N+1 and later were.
PLACEHOLDER | VP8-RT | X264-RT | HEVC-HM |
---|---|---|---|
VP8 | +10% | DNQ | |
X264 | -8% | DNQ | |
HEVC | DNQ | DNQ |