Difference between h.264 and h.265?

[hug0mac]

From what I have heard the h.265 is HVEC that basically gets the good quality going but for a lower file size? Also what OS or GPU do you need to utilize this fully?

 

Quadro?

 

Bit new on the topic so thanks.

[ALwin]

snip

 

http://www.mediaentertainmentinfo.com/2013/10/4-concept-series-what-is-the-difference-between-hevc-h-265-and-h-264-mpeg-4-avc.html/

 

I think any current modern OS would work, as long as you have the right codec installed.  As for GPU, for playback or rendering?

[hug0mac]

http://www.mediaentertainmentinfo.com/2013/10/4-concept-series-what-is-the-difference-between-hevc-h-265-and-h-264-mpeg-4-avc.html/

 

I think any current modern OS would work, as long as you have the right codec installed.  As for GPU, for playback or rendering?

 

Thanks for the link.

 

Both to rendering and playback. And windows 7 home premium got the codec installed? Or should I download it? If so, how?

[ALwin]

snip

 

For playback, I think as long as the media (e.g. video file) is already a post-edited version and not a high bit rate or raw version straight out of a camera, a decent hardware setup could play it back.

 

I doubt Windows 7 has the codec as part of the native support package, so you may need to install it or the media player that you use (e.g. VLC) might come with it.

 

For editing and rendering, depending on the resolution of the video files you are working with you may need serious hardware.

 

Can't tell you more because I don't have a camera that records h.265.

[techguru]

h265 is basically same quality at a smaller file size at the cost of more horsepower to decode or encode it

[hug0mac]

For playback, I think as long as the media (e.g. video file) is already a post-edited version and not a high bit rate or raw version straight out of a camera, a decent hardware setup could play it back.

 

I doubt Windows 7 has the codec as part of the native support package, so you may need to install it or the media player that you use (e.g. VLC) might come with it.

 

For editing and rendering, depending on the resolution of the video files you are working with you may need serious hardware.

 

Can't tell you more because I don't have a camera that records h.265.

 

 

I see, so for playback VLC Media Player works well. I am more worried of the GPU, as I know there is something called gpu accelerated encoding, uses the cuda cores (not sure but I guess!) and I have heard that the GTX 960 chip had that supproted for HVEC h.265.

 

 

 

h265 is basically same quality at a smaller file size at the cost of more horsepower to decode or encode it

 

i7 4790K and 16GB should be a good start yes? 

[techguru]

I see, so for playback VLC Media Player works well. I am more worried of the GPU, as I know there is something called gpu accelerated encoding, uses the cuda cores (not sure but I guess!) and I have heard that the GTX 960 chip had that supproted for HVEC h.265.

 

 

 

 

i7 4790K and 16GB should be a good start yes? 

any modern dual core or more can do h265 depending on bitrate of course

[ALwin]

snip

 

"gpu accelerated encoding" this most likely will apply to working with H.265 on a NLE like Premiere Pro and not for playback on a media player like VLC.  But don't worry about it because H.265 still has a few years to go before it becomes mainstream.  I don't believe there are that many "video" cameras that use H.265.  Even this camera is still in the R&D stage.

http://www.eoshd.com/2015/02/maestro-4k-cinema-camera-powered-by-nvidia-with-h-265-codec/

 

Additionally for editing and GPU support there's quite a bit of stuff you need to know/read/research.  Even in a H.264 editing workflow, the GPU does not accelerate everything. Some video editing effects run solely on the CPU, some get help from the GPU.

 

By the time H.265 hits mainstream, I am sure there will be much more powerful GPUs.

 

EDIT: Read these links

http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/h-265-hevc-encoding-explained/

https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1340207

[Blebekblebek]

camera had nothing to do with codec choices

 

it was processed after record (or when recording)

 

just like h.264 was, the new h.265 is meant to reduce data bandwith when doing video call and digital streaming distribution

 

many countries struggling with "bandwith cap" when in realities ISP just need to upgrade their network to fix the issue.

[hug0mac]

any modern dual core or more can do h265 depending on bitrate of course

 

Playback I suppose. 

 

"gpu accelerated encoding" this most likely will apply to working with H.265 on a NLE like Premiere Pro and not for playback on a media player like VLC.  But don't worry about it because H.265 still has a few years to go before it becomes mainstream.  I don't believe there are that many "video" cameras that use H.265.  Even this camera is still in the R&D stage.

http://www.eoshd.com/2015/02/maestro-4k-cinema-camera-powered-by-nvidia-with-h-265-codec/

 

Additionally for editing and GPU support there's quite a bit of stuff you need to know/read/research.  Even in a H.264 editing workflow, the GPU does not accelerate everything. Some video editing effects run solely on the CPU, some get help from the GPU.

 

By the time H.265 hits mainstream, I am sure there will be much more powerful GPUs.

 

I understand that it has some growing room to spare the next coming years but even today it's available, and even some amature video converters do HVEC (Though I am not sure how real that is...)

 

Yes Premier Pro is what I was talking about, I don't have it yet but I have heard that it's some sort of GPU thing. 

 

 

camera had nothing to do with codec choices

 

it was processed after record (or when recording)

 

just like h.264 was, the new h.265 is meant to reduce data bandwith when doing video call and digital streaming distribution

 

many countries struggling with "bandwith cap" when in realities ISP just need to upgrade their network to fix the issue.

 

For me though it's not the ISP cap (I don't got any cap at all for that matter) but more of the hard drive space to store it. Could give some less gigabytes for same quality. 

[ALwin]

snip

 

I posted two links in my previous comment, read them.

 

snip

 

I'm saying, as I don't own a camera that is capable of recording H.265 natively I am not able to test how difficult or hardware intensive it would be to work with H.265 in a video editing workflow.  Sure I can take any other video footage and covert it to H.265 but I want to see what kind of files is produced by a camera that natively has H.265, else I am just converting low bit rate already processed video files into H.265 and doing tests that may not mean anything.

 

H.265 sounds like it would make 4K broadcasting easier on the bandwidth, but from a content creator/editor's perspective I want to test if my hardware can handle it if my PXW-FS7 could natively record H.265.  Though I am not sure if it is a good idea for a camera to record into it natively, with the higher compression compared to H.265.  The decoding/encoding process could be tough for my current setup.

[.spider.]

 

Even in a H.264 editing workflow, the GPU does not accelerate everything. Some video editing effects run solely on the CPU, some get help from the GPU.

 

 

These are completely different things. effects <> compression

After all it's a bad idea to do video compression on a gpu, they aren't suitable for that.

 

h.264 and h.265 are just whitepapers who are describing what techniques are allowed and how the final output should be. 

It is completely up to the developers how they are implementing these techniques in their algorithms, thus a encoder which is based on on h265 can be worse than a h264 based encoder. 

http://www.compression.ru/video/codec_comparison/hevc_2015/

 

You don't meed anything special h265 encoding and decoding works without hardware decoder and encoder. 

[LeeWonky]

h265 is basically same quality at a smaller file size at the cost of more horsepower to decode or encode it

Seems like a fair trade-off to me.

[ALwin]

Seems like a fair trade-off to me.

 

The trade off depends, for 1080p I'm not sure if it's worth it because current storage space is cheap and people have more than sufficient computing power for editing and playback of h.264 1080p.

 

But for 4K or higher media, that's an entirely different story.  However it will take a couple of more years before h.265 becomes mainstream.