X265 vs x264 reddit 2021. After knowing that QuickSync H.

X265 vs x264 reddit 2021 Get the Reddit app Scan this QR code to download the app now NVENC vs x265 vs x264 at slow and medium settings @8 mbps reReddit: Top posts of May 16, 2021 Yeah I plan on testing it at some point to see it for myself. I made the mistake of encoding my whole library with x264 10-bit, so now I need to re-encode all of it. You're saving space and getting higher quality. x265-RARBG (1. Here is my parameters : There are better release groups out there by a long shot. 5gb x264 file. They are occupying a single CCX. Results have been great and Plex plays them without a hitch. They are lost in the 2700kbps rarbg encodes because there isn't enough data to keep it. 5-4GB in x264 you wouldnt notice difference also. Any specific reason why nearly all the x264 uploads on RARBG include the relevant subtitle files already embedded within the MKV itself without any work from the user (Like for example how it would show on Netflix when a Spanish dialogue scene happens, and the subtitles appear in English automatically but don't show when they are speaking English) - but all x265 uploads in MP4 have a separate The CRF is just a level that you can adjust with the SAME profiles and same settings, means if you have x264 preset slow and x264 preset slower with the same CRF you will not have the same result. x265 comparisons and i don't like the subtle blending that x265 is doing. I'm playing back an x265 720p 2CH and the CPU use by that application is in the mid 30%. What you discovered about x265 is true also of x264 but to a much lower extent - that is, an RF value for one configuration is not necessarily equivalent either in visual quality or file size to an RF value for another configuration, as different settings affect what a given RF value means in various ways. I've tested both, and I found that x264 at fast gives way better quality at the same bitrate (6000kbps), with no performance loss/encoding overload. x264 will be quite good tho and may have better consistency, especially if the content is grainy. Also noticed that facecam and overlays look way crisper on x264. For x264 web-rips, I don't bother re-encoding them. Most modern players support x265 just fine. The HVEC media compression 265 uses is so much more more intensive to play and does not seem to have any visual benefit over AVC (that I can see having recently converted a few things to x264 and re watched). The quality of a x264 veryfast CRF 18 is maybe equals to a x264 veryslow CRF20. true. 1 or better audio. for highest quality x264 High 4. x264 and x265 both have a rate control method called Constant Quantization Parameter (CQP). 264 is by far the most common codec in use, and thus it is the most widely supported across different plex clients. Also, once you go x265, typically that file is done. This means a 10-bit image can display up to 1. 1 is still good. x265 doesn't automatically make file size smaller, it makes the bitrate use more efficient. Windows Media Player doesn't play HEVC natively, and the Windows 10 "Movies & TV" video player requires purchase of the HEVC codec. 5) between x265 and NvEnc, you need to go from 4. There's no reason to use x265 anylonger since SVT 0. In terms of encoding, it should hardly use more power than x264 the media codec only influences how hard the internal decoding is and the actual encoding will be handled as usual. 265 (x265)", and all other settings remained the same. In this case the x265 means the person reencoded the remux, lowering the quality, in order to make it h265 and lower the size. Find out Plex direct streams 264 out the box and that 265 is hardware dependent. Remuxes are always categorized as h264 and named with avc or hevc. Atmos. For 1080p24 at 30 Mbps average, most of those codecs will converge for all but the most difficult content. The files do not have HDR. Yes I was assuming x264. 265 or HEVC. No, the problem is that even though the movie itself is cinemascope, Blu Ray puts black bars on the top and bottom to make it closer to 16:9, and when a 16:9 video is played on on a 21:9 monitor you get black bars on the left and right. Ah I messed up to which comment you replied. Only Kodi has this issue playing only HEVC (x265) files. I have a few movies and shows in FHD x265 but I basically never have to transcode them. Background: I experienced encoding using handbrake and x264 few years ago, mainly using crf 18-22 with preset medium - slow. 5 bpp already), while others will only call it visually lossless when it I try to go for x265 but there were a few files that were like 20GB x264 and 10GB x265 with otherwise similar properties - same reso, no HDR, etc etc. 6CH. Nice and fast, files are somewhat compact (better than with my GTX1070) and compatible. 4. The standards that release sites like btn, hdb, etc use. Assuming space and hardware was not an issue, would the preference for archive be an HDR x265 encode with lower bitrate, or a higher bitrate non-HDR x264 file? I can play both without problems however it seems like the non-HDR x264 versions with the higher bitrate look better however I've always heard that HDR is preferred for color and quality. 1. x264 Medium 'probably' does a little bit better if you have the time to encode. 265 and H. 4K = 22 Encoder tune = Film Encoder Profile = High Preset = Very Slow Simple question is what crf is the equivalent if i want the same quality for each using x265 10bit The x265 is better quality that's why. 44gb with 28. Now there are some shitty x265 encodes out there. 3mb/s bitrate) vs x264 (30. When i use a 1080p mp4 x264 file, it plays smoothly in the browser and apps. The only real thing you can say about rate factors is they are consistent only for a given set of options. 18 votes, 31 comments. I would like to compress it in a quiet lossless solution using x265 mkv. Really I was wondering specifically what difference x265 makes. I would not re-encode from x264 to x265 (or vice versa), that would reduce the file quality too much for little benefit. For this one, we're using the following command: x264 --preset placebo --sar 1920:1080 --fps 24 --frames 500 --psnr -o x264Kimonoq24. Some movies at 4K look very grainy and are even less compressible. was going off the second half and upgrade to x264 to x265. So basically if you are storage poor and just need to save space, use x265. I got x264 for anything 1080p or lower, and x265 for anything higher than 1080p. I don't download remux, so the few hevc isn't a great datapoint. So x264 currently rules the game. Try it yourself, you don't even need Av1an (although I still recommend it due to scene based encoding and resuming) as SVT scales very well around many threads. But if you consider size to quality ratio then x265 movie is good to go. 265 Nvenc/QSV is offers fast encoding Better for Screen recording or Gameplay recording But if you want to compress a video x265 or SVT-HEVC would be better although x265 is bit slow and SVT-HEVC takes more RAM . Also x265 can take advantage od AVX512, the NEON equivalent of that is in the 8. EDIT: After the continued feeling that the x265 encodes were lower quality, i checked them out side by side with x264 as well as source as there is a noticeable degradation when converting to x265. These are 12C 12T processors that have more than headroom to encode x264 fast or medium, depending on the game you're playing with. They are usually encoded optimised for streaming already, and I don't want to loose any more quality doing a second re-encoding on them. Also depends on the encoding format. From what I've read, I felt like VMAF is now the superior metric hence why I didn't bother to run for PSNR. Just as a matter of algorythms, x265 is generally half the size for the same wuality as x264. I am currently encoding two individual instances of x265 on 480p. So for a particular bitrate/quality limit you chose with x264 that yielded results topping out at say 720p for a good image; x265 should be able to give you the same quality results but with the resolution bumped up to 1080p or 1440p. Get the Reddit app Scan this QR code to download the app now 4k remux vs x265 encode bitrate question . x264 plays on my 10yr old imac fine, even at high bitrates. It benchmarks around than x264 slow in VMAF and for basically zero performance cost. Posted by u/Argentinian_Penguin - 1 vote and 1 comment Our under powered Mac Mini streams better using Apple VT H264 vs x264 since it’s using hardware encoding. If there's x265 in hardware then all the better. 1ch @60fps or better without a hitch. 1mb/s bitrate). A file of exact same size and length would have double the “quality” in x265. If XCCZM265 were included in the top 4, together they would represent the efficiency frontier among encoders included in subjective testing. So a 6gb pack with all the featurettes from QxR vs an ~8gb x264 copy from whoever is usually a better way to go. NDI is unreliable and a bad option in my experience. Please help. Might be useful for some sources but I've never found it useful. I’ve since read on a forum that the quality level is not consistent between encoders. Still x265 in 2019 is in its early stage. 7 was released. SVTAV1 should not be used in 2-pass or 3-pass mode, though (it's not necessary or helpful). Nobody should be DLing/encoding x265 files unless you know what you are doing. 9 and for 1080p x265 29. x264 and x265 are not codecs, they're libraries used to encode to a codec (h264 or h265). Using x265 means that you can get better quaity at the same file size or smaller size with the same quality. The rule of thumb is that 265 compresses down to half the size of comparable x264. I really only like using VLC because it doesn't complain about codecs. Concerning perfomance, a diagram with vmaf (y) and fps (x) would be interesting, i. Question/Advice I'm in the process of So I get a crash course in x264 vs x265. 1080p. I'm tempted by that 10-bit to remove the color banding I rarely ever see anyway, but meh my perfectionism still tempts me. This is a second Gen core i5 with onboard video. The larger the QP for a given frame, the more information is thrown away. This means a single instance of a 480p encode using x265 uses between 4 and 5 cores. mp3 did. Absolutely hate film grain lol. 1 x265 English-deef) part of a mass protest against Reddit's x265 has a bit smaller filesizes (~30% or so), but require more CPU to decode and is less widely available on media players (smart TVs etc. popular-all-random-usersAskReddit-pics-funny-moviesmovies- Something like 95% of video files are x264 and have much better direct play support. Some ~30%-ish reduction of x265 vs. If you have more than a couple users, you will notice much more transcoding. You probably wouldn't notice a quality difference between that and a good rip to a lossier format, but potentially in the future there will be superior formats that you may wish to use and you will get better results encoding from the original than transcoding from, say, x265. HEVC files play file in any other player. X265 10bit can he played back on capable hardware and in new generation tv's only. Typically I rip my Blu-Rays and encode via Vidcoder (x265 10bit, 2-pass, slow) and compress to about 6-8GB per file with 400kbps+ 5. x265 will surely cut down your storage letting you add more contents, but using with Plex, it may cause a problem if your client has to transcode the x265 to x264. I would not use the GPU to encode x265, it's inferior and will not make the most efficient output files (larger and worse quality). x265 surely is not some magic wand (except on hdr 4k). However, I recently started playing around with Nvenc x265 encoding and the results have been surprisingly good. Anyway, I've seen reference to changing the Plex definition file that tells it the list of formats supported by cc. pgs subtitles. So a 5gb x265 file will always be better than a 1gb x265 file, buat a 5gb x265 file will also be better than a 5gb x264 file. If I already have a show that is all x264 and someone releases it in x265, Sonarr will download/import those files just like I want. Everyone keeps saying "significantly" but when I encode with x264 and x265 i can only get about a 10-20% reduction using x265 over x264 before the x265 quality drops below the x264. Also x265 never really got the presets spread out to offer encoding efficiency vs speed tradeoffs, the only two that make sense are slow or veryfast. Maybe some old version of the firmware didn't support or something. . 89gb, 2229 kbps) The file size is proportional to the bitrate irrespective of encoding. 10bit. After knowing that QuickSync H. REPACK. From a storage perspective, x265 has better compression with the least visible compromise. Pitch perfect mixing with incredible Atmos and sound design. reReddit: Top posts of February 2021. 8Ghz. vs. The sound of the DUNE 4k bluray is where it really shines in my opinion. There is also an individual core on the other CCX which is also running at 3. Example: a 720 x264 will be 900mb, but the x265 will be 200mb. My files keep coming out x264 even with that option selected and I've tried about 30 different ones with zero coming out x265. League. which would mean that just using x265 vs x264 with the same output settings (kbps) will yield better In general, h. Will dropping to 10 bit make a difference on a 1080p(/i) blu ray? x265 is roughly equivalent to a x264 encode at double the bitrate. Understood that now x265 is getting popular but many technologies are yet to implement the support for it. 3Ghz while the rest are hanging out at 1-1. The ranking is somewhat arbitrary. For example, CRF 18 in x264 means something different depending on whether mbtree is on or off, the AQ settings used, and more. I've read a few posts and it seems to be a difference in overall quality and bit/frame rate as to why to stick with x264 instead of x265. the source they used was from the DVD Been using my 16 core 1950x Threadripper for 3 years now. ) but is gaining a lot of traction. ION265 is an alternative to ION10 but in x265 and RARBG releases are just as good quality as RARBG releases are (Not great but not horrible if you need small files). At regular viewing distance on a 75 inch TV, quality x265 and x264 look the same and x265 does this with smaller file size. I run all my encoding through my RTX3060. All quality sites, including BTN, outright ban 720/1080 x265 content because no good encoders use it aside from 4k content. HMAX. It's a modern, high-powered desktop (Ryzen 5900X with an RTX 3080). Just slide all the way to the right for highest quality which employs the most advanced algorithm and also gives smallest file size for given image quali But after checking about media servers like Jellyfin and emby, I was pretty impressed. When you search h264 is always clean untouched content and x264 is reencoded. yuv, again with quantization parameters between 24 and 42. Ok Imma try my best I'm looking at aset of a dvd show remastered and there are two options to pick from x264 and x265 10bit. I'm converting almost of my video from H264 to H265 to gain some free space on my drive. Yeah you are right, my comparison was wrong, I corrected it. e. Using Jackett, along with Deluge both on Synology NAS. 8. If you see a 2160p x265 encode movies that's only like 1GB My situation: I'm trying to decide between using HEVC 10-bit or traditional x264 for video playback on my Galaxy S10 considering storage capacity is not a problem, but battery life is. At least this is my understanding. Oct 5, 2024 · my subreddits. 264 Kimono1_1920x1080_24. 3Ghz. "Grain" is details. I'd rather just buy another HDD. x265 does have similar functionality but I have less experience with it. x265 10 bits is the best actually (2022)! Vastly superior to x264 and x265 8 bits, way more compatible than in the past (Youtube, Facebook, everybody accept those nowadays, most new players too) and the extra color space gives you so much power on night and low light level scenes (where you need thousands variations of dark colors). As i've read on a few forums that basic recommendations that im using for x264 are as fallowed: DVD = 18 720 = 19 1080p=20. Looking at a couple of examples my 720p x264 frame rates are 23. libaom is indeed a lot better than I'd have expected from a royalty-free codec. Also they have an added bonus of not having to be transcoded for my friends that are using browser to watch my Plex. Also find out that I more than likely was transcoding my 4k content down to 1080p because defaults? using x264 for improved encoding efficiency x264 is pretty inefficient when it comes to streaming, but the CPU you have should output a nice looking stream. 265 (x265): 197MB (took 20 min 1 sec to encode) I don't use x265 because it takes more to process than other codecs, but the knowledge that x265 is just fine with a slightly higher quality setting than x264, is helpful to pass onto others. 9 . It should be noted that on older hardware, x265 is going to be much more demanding. I'll chime in with a dissenting experience I mentioned a few months ago--if you are encoding well lit video with a lot of detail (faces), high quality (crf=22 or better on x265 slow) and slow movements, AOM cannot compete with x265 unless you use a very low speed, I think 2 or 3. If you're using CRF rate control on X264 or X265, then sure, X264 is better than NVENC. “Video Preset” (in Video tab) slider seems straightforward. That standard is called H. 40GHz) I wanna know if it is better than x264 now(I am just gonna… Skip to main content Open menu Open navigation Go to Reddit Home There are other options about using hardware encoding, if able, but I don't seem to have any real options to make it use x265 instead of x264. 84gb with 27. Get the Reddit app Scan this QR code to download the app now Download x264 but prefer x265? 2021. Or check it out in the app stores Godzilla. x264-MRCS Which one is the better quality? x265 and NvEnc PSNR versus bitrate x265 and NvEnc SSIM versus bitrate x265 and NvEnc VMAF versus bitrate So first take out, is that SSIM, PSNR and VMAF are not consistent within each-others. 2021. But the only way to tell for sure is to compare the two. I just tried to go back and look so I could find some properties to show here and this example is poor, I'm almost positive the x265 would be the better quality but suppose the files were 20GB RARBG just uploaded a bunch of x265 TV Shows under ION265 and RARBG names. 264 are encoding standards. Just curious what people think about Blu-ray content compressed by x264 vs the same content compressed by NVENC H265 on an Ampere or Turing card like the RTX 20/30 for example. Reddit Men in Kilts - A Roadtrip with Sam and Graham (2021) from Starz is the only one that still needs it i think, it grabs huge x264 releases pretty quickly, but then a week or so later they get replaced with an x265 copy from somewhere, and then maybe when the season wraps somebody from TaoE probably will drop a better x265 season pack. Now I am trying x265 and experimenting with crf 20 - 24 and preset fast to veryfast. For example, to get a same PSNR (~40. But you need to make sure her Apple TV is new enough and updated to support x265. The ~8gb x264 and the ~5gb x265 will look pretty close. x265 encodes take longer and generally produce worse quality then x264. Godzilla. The file sizes and encoding times of the encoded videos were: using H. There's only so much you can compress before you can notice it, even x264 can outperform hevc or av1 in instances. So if your focus is on 1080P for the majority of your media, you would choose x265 over x264 for future downloads? I'm trying to tweak Sonarr/Radarr qualities and debating on which one I want to go with. The file size is dependant on the bitrate. = ) (It's higher by about 2 points on average. WEB-DL. 86Mb/s (183%). So for these shows, I want to prioritize x265 for the space savings. I have tried streaming Naruto Shippuden and Wonder Woman 1984, both in 1080p x265. I then changed the video encoder to "H. "Visually lossless" is a near-meaningless term if you ask me. They'll almost always fail to notice the minute details, especially related to grain and filmic quality being lost with 265 that only 264 can properly show. WEBRip. For still images, it means much higher quality than for video. RARBG was slightly better than YIFY despite being smaller, because x265 will give same quality as a x264 encode with 40% higher For example, SVTAV1 is significantly faster to encode AND more efficient than x265. Still x264 at best encode setting can beat x265 at best. Im pretty sure if someone, who knows what he is doing, would compress you 2. Posted by u/ImTheRealSpoon - No votes and 7 comments Totally noob question of course, but I want to make I'm not being a total nitwit using wrong settings etc Normally I use x264 codecs for compression. X265 has no problem as such when encoded at 8bit but problem arises when x265 is in 10bit. I have a Ryzen 5900x and I still get roughly 2fps on the x265 10-bit veryslow preset and 3. In my encoding experience, you'll get the same quality at reduced size from x265. 265 AMD-VCE: 679MB (took 2 min 48 sec to encode) using H. Once this is done I could potentially throw this card into the Plex Media Server (UnRaid docker) and use this for hardware transcoding instead of the CPU's Quicksync. I wanted to try the x265 for a change and used similar settings as I would with x264 i want to download a movie that has 2 options: x265 10bit (29. A 5gb x265 file will be comparable to a ~7. I meant hardware encoded 265 (VCE265?) vs x265. STV will look clearer in bright spots and movement but suffer slightly in darker spots and background compared to X265. My entire collection is x265 (except the few rare cases only x264 exists). HEVC-PSA (2. It may depend on your personal setup and preferences to get what you want from the experience. Thanks for the reply. which is living between 2GHZ and 4. H. I set up a Raspi4 with Plex today and threw on a 1080p mkv x265 file. H264-NAISU Or Justice. On your laptop, I strongly encourage you to try the same file/format using either the native Plex app or the HTPC app. 265 will deliver the same quality as h. NVENC is nvidia’s encoder which can only encode h264. Try animation preset but that tends to kill a lot of detail (or energy). I think I recall that plex thinks it needs to transcode hevc (x265) for Chromecast, when maybe it doesn't actually need to. Get the Reddit app Scan this QR code to download the app now. Just depends on your priorities. x265 should compress to a smaller file size for equivalent video quality compared to x264, however x264 is more widely compatible with devices. I play everything either through my TV or Roku Ultra and never have any issues with Direct Streaming unless I have . The slowness of x265 isn't worth it outside those two situations unless you have specific issues with the x264 encodes. My money would be on AOM or x265 still delivering best quality, provided they’re tuned well. 5 spec , the M1 is 8. The x264 encodes were almost completely indistinguishable to the source even when pixel peeping an individual frame flipping between the two. Cut. And the conversion is pretty slow. But yeah I think film grain just kneecaps a lot of the improvements x265 made over x264, so if it’s extremely grainy you might as well encode with x264 because the file size is only going to be a little bigger but the encode time is going to be a fraction compared to x265. The encoding preset should simply enable or disable what the encoder can do for speed vs encoding time. This is my sabnzbd history folder, x264 and x265 are by far the most common. for personal use x265 imho still occupies the "sweet spot" unless your name is Netflix :-) Simply put, the Plex web app is not a good client for anything other than music playback or media management. X264 VS X265, Software encoding VS Hardware, 8-bit encoding VS 10-bit encoding, single-pass encoding VS two-pass encoding, then we have which software is better, to debate. But I did try to work something out for you: In terms of speed at default settings: NVENC > x264 > x265 In terms of size (if smaller size is better) at default settings: x265 > x264 =~ NVENC I personally don't care about the x265 vs x264 quality argument, as the space savings are well worth it (3GB vs 600MB for a single TV episode). Usually people will argue with me and say that x265/h265 is better and that x264/h264 is inferior. Then again, if you have a 30 series card, I’d personally ditch the 2 PC setup and use NVENC on a single PC. It takes forever to encode and has no advantages over x264 yet at the common resolutions but it does have several disadvantages in that it needs higher processing power and/or newer equipment to run. Or check it out in the app stores     TOPICS 2160 x265 vs 1080p x264 on 1080p TV . It takes roughly 3-6 hours for a good quality encode. x265 is a more efficient and therefor less of a filesize. Aug 14, 2024 · Posted in r/Piracy by u/Mark_Knight • 679 points and 128 comments With that in mind, let’s take a quick peek at how pre-alpha x265 stacks up against the well-optimized x264. Also a lot depends on your laptop and the decisions the manufacturer made. From a playback performance perspective, x264 generally performs better on a wider breadth of streaming clients and video boards. Hey there, about a year ago, a new video compression standard was published. So 30% is a little low. Since both are being encoded twice, if the source is an x265 encoded file that’s transcoded to 4mbps x264, vs the source being an x264 encoded file that’s transcoded to 4mbps x264, is there a noticeable difference between the two? AndroidBox model: T8Pro CPU: RK3318 quad-core GPU: penta-core mali-450 RAM: 4GB Android 10 I am using USB to play 1080p movies, the problem is that when I load x265 videos with Kodi, the video is choppy, but audio in 5. It is the successor of the current most popular standard for video compression, H. level of quality as say x264 but with about 20-40% smaller file size. g. Handbrake documentation "Video Encoding Speed" talks about two things: “Video Preset” slider and Filters. Animation CAN be very compressible, that's a fact, but compression isn't limitless. ) are more quality focused and the slower will increase quality and file size. So I set OBS to use NVENC for recordings and x264 for streaming and have been using this for the last 3 years. 264 uses my CPU(I have a Intel Core i5-6300U CPU @ 2. If it doesn’t then you’ll be transcoding and hitting your server pretty hard. I never saw RARBG upload TV Shows before and they uploaded all in x265. Put differently, you need half the bitrate in an x265 stream to achieve the same visual results as an x264 stream. I am running the most recent Kodi (Aura skin) on Windows 10. x265. My priorities are size and quality, I want no (or minimal) drop in quality from my original file (say a 3GB, 720p, bitrate 3,000, x264 file), but I want the x265 compression, even if it only saves say 10% on that example. IMHO, I have run some x264 vs. But x265 seems to play better on Plex + older SmartTV or mobile devices for me. (2021) (1080p HEVC NF WEB-DL EAC3 5. Furthermore will x264 be outdated in future years and x265 replace it, because all media in my collection is x264. I found that NVENC H265 will do a pretty decent job but is far less efficient (needs much more bitrate to look as good). It also produces the same result no matter how many threads you use, which is not the case for x264 or x265 unless the situation has changed a lot recently. 2021. This is the appeal of x265 and why it is used for UHD content like UHD BluRay discs. FFmpeg is the leading multimedia framework, able to decode, encode, transcode, mux, demux, stream, filter and play pretty much anything that humans and machines have created. i would download the x264 because its size is larger, but i'm confused because of the 10bit/8bit stuff. Preset stuff when it comes to quality and file size with HEVC/x265. x265 is a complete waste of time because of how slow it is, and it is only saving something like 15-25% of the bandwidth that x264 would at similar bitrate. Kong. Also x265 takes longer to encode. 66gb, 3134 kbps) Godzilla. edit subscriptions. "film" goes the opposite way. x264 files are bigger, but don't require as much CPU to decode and is supported on almost every device sold in the past ~10 years. 07 billion colors Q3 - I have an old 1050Ti in another machine that I am planning to use for the X264 to X265 conversion project. This is represented by the quantization parameter (QP). WEB. SIF was twice as fast as x264, which was 4x as fast as QAV1. Is there any difference between both versions I've mentioned above. Also for encoders x264 is less resource intensive and less time consuming than x265. I just tried to find you some answers and it seems there is no major difference in video/audio quality from either source. If the media isn't source quality/remux, then there will be a loss of quality every time. My odroid c2 is able to playback 4k x265 10bit with 5. So yes, I agree that resolution isn't everything. But Turing NVENC has proven to be much more reliable and higher quality than X264 for streaming (CBR/VBR rate control), especially at less than 10 Mbps. E. Personally I could not. They are just the software that creates video in h26x format. Back in 2017 I did a bunch of research into this topic and came to the conclusion that NVENC is better for high bitrate encoding, where as x264 is better at handling low bitrate. 264, which is used for Blu-Ray discs and also streaming websites like YouTube. . x265 doesn't require a beefy CPU. OTOH x264 is about 30% less efficient. which one should look better? thx Get the Reddit app Scan this QR code to download the app now. I can reduce the storage space taken by half per series by going for x265. This video played perfectly on the Plex android app and on the Plex video-player on Windows but when I try to play the same video in the browser it buffers like crazy. The 2200kbps x265 encodes would be roughly the same as a 4400 x264 encode. 9fps on slower. Or check it out in the app stores 1080p x264 vs 720p x265 . x264 vs h264 encoding which to choose? Question Hello there, i ended up having a R9 5900x with a 980ti (yeah weird if not bad combo, but gpu shortage hits everyone), and i was wondering if it were better x264 to benefit from the beefier cpu instead of stealing resources from the gpu, or just full ham h264. 99% of my library is x265 and don’t have any issues using both of those clients on Windows. But a ~2gb x265 Joybell release is gonna look way worse than an ~8gb x264 FGT copy. Finding that x265 has better quality for size when it takes 15 minutes and x264 takes 3 minutes isn't particularly enlightening, since x264 has better quality for size when it takes 15 minutes than when it takes 3 minutes. For me, I have a decent amount of shows where I don't care about quality (I download them for users who couldn't tell 480p from 4k). Now the file size difference is the 265 is a little bigger by like 50mb and I've looked them side by side and the bitrate for the 265 is only higher in certain spotsnow my question is should I download the 264 or 265 version. DDP5. Reddit . That could explain it, the constant and original files showed a wall in the scene looking smooth, the crf showed blotches and artifacts. 500 side-by-side comparison' visually lossless (something you can often get around 0. Both GalaxyRG and Asiimov are fairly low bitrate and are probably not great rips. Being jellyfin free and easy to install, it was my first option. I know this was pretty strait forward with x264 but I've read many times that x265 presets (fast, med, slow, etc. This is just an example, but my question is mostly this: Often times I get two torrent options, X264 or X265, X265 being much lower in size, but is… But then require x265 with 4k content Why would that be? Does x265 mean more loss of quality with lower resolutions ? Why should you not do x265 with say 1080p content ? My understanding was that x265 was just better overall to preserve more quality with less size, and that the only reason to use x264 was for device compatibility. Nothing can be better than the source, but getting close to source quality with fewer bits is what x265 has done for me. TL;DR: Trying to cut file size when encoding TV eps but want file closest to source. Lossy encoders (like x264 and x265) have to decide how much information to throw away in each frame. In my quality testing, I've found a typical 2gb 2hr long 1080p film encoded in x265 will have similar quality to a 8-10gb x264 1080p film. I always look for x265 for more bang for buck. I follow TRaSH's guide and rules: x265 is good for for 4k stuff or 1080p if they used the the remuxes as source. A ~5gb x265 encode from Silence or Afm72 or somebody is going to look way better than a ~2gb x264 RARBG or YTS encode. 264, but with a file size saving of 30-40%. The problem is after I have a show in x265, if I run a manual search OR a new x265 release gets released, Sonarr will download this too, like it hadn't already been upgraded. So i want to download justice league 2021 from rarbg but i don't know what version to download should i download Justice. x265 is better optimsed for x86, ARM is an after thought in encoding space, thats why its I refer to it as Apple's patch, it didn't come from the x265 devs. Understanding of CRF (x264 and x265) My understanding of RF was that, given a CRF, it will maintain that quality regardless of bitrate. Taking into account I have like 100 movies to encode that equals… a long time. So there is no way of comparing as X264 and X265 are cpu encoding NVENC and AMD-VCE gpu encoding. In addition, an 8-bit file works with RGB using 256 levels per channel, while 10-bit jumps up to 1,024 levels per channel. I’ve been experimenting exporting using software x264 x265 encodes constant fr at quality 18-22 and the same with hardware (videotoolbox) encodes for 264 & 265. They do produce smaller file sizes but not all devices support playback of x265, i think x265 also tends to use more battery on mobile devices that do support them. X264 and x265 are the cpu encoders for h264 and h265 respectively. I think the bluray looks good but without the IMAX shots I don't think it's incredible. I think there is some sort of noise reduction going on with x265 which makes it throw away a hair of detail like . 84 to 8. But the crf bitrate still was higher, which made me scratch my head. x264 Medium imo is still king, Slow is not better. x264-MRCS (2021 So for a better streaming compatibility streaming services use x264 codec and hence the source of web-dl is x264 (there are other sources too). x265's compression algorithm allows for file sizes a lot smaller than traditional x264 while maintaining near the same quality. Reddit x265 achieves, on average, 2x the compression of x264. So its not so much about x264 vs x265 but how good is our eyes and screen we use. H265 is the actual codec, and x265 is the software encoding library which ffmpeg and other programs use. Within still images, some will call 'overlapping with the confidence interval of the hidden reference in a BT. 4K, HDR10+ and Dolby Vision - Probably the best 4K version out right now if you have a device that can support Dolby Vision and HDR. Is there a way to have sonarr go out and grab x265 files, instead of x264 files ? Seems my shows are downloading x264, however I prefer the x265. There is also nvenc encoders for h264 or h265 that uses Nvidia gpus. This is due to either too many files or the size of the files. And in terms of H. This makes it extremely difficult to choose compression settings to maximise quality vs file size. But h264 and h265 aren't as rare as I thought. If her Apple TV supports x265 without transcoding then x265 would use less network bandwidth and wouldn’t use a lot of server resources. x265 makes it choke. There are good x265 releases but again mot much gain over x264. I'm having trouble wrapping my head around the RF vs. If disk space isn't an issue, then an archival copy would be a bit-for-bit exact clone of the original disc. I have a 4k OLED and I spent a lot of time trying to see if I could tell a difference between a high-quality x265 encode and the Remux. x265 and x264 is software that encodes video to those standards. So between 2 different encoders it's worse. Question Hello guys, x264 vs NVENC for my setup upvote Unless you use a finely tuned encoder (like the streamfx encoder) in obs, and use the exact same settings (x265 in both) the comparison is senseless. AV1-AOM is superior in every way but much, much slower. 4, For middle of the road X265, For best compression AV1-AOM SVT-AV1 on preset 8 is nearly as fast as x265 medium and preset 7 is faster than x265 slow while being more efficient. Snyders. I do personally prefer GPU encoding (NVENC, certainly not AMF) but that's just down to the games I play as most of the ones I play prefer the CPU over a GPU. -x264 was around 18-20 -x265 was like 20-22 for near perfect quality. x264 produced ~37% lower bitrates than SIF and QAV1 produced 54% lower bitrates than x264. However I do feel that what x265 excels at is with compression at higher resolutions (naturally) than x264. Looking at hardware alternatives (either an eGPU or possibly a PC with a graphics card and not Intel integrated graphics) It seems like almost everything is most commonly now in x265. And is x265 playable on all systems and devices, i find it doesn't play in vlc media player but on windows movies and tv, and MX player in Android. The primary problem is running out of hard disk space on the NAS. I'd recommend sticking with x264 as it is most common and supported. Same quality (unless it's a re-encode, but that's another debate), smaller size. But with that said we almost never get 30fps at 720p. But using it on Android devices and Android TV with HEVC x265 rips, its a hit or miss all the time. 10-20% smaller files dont come close to making up for the significantly higher encoding time and much less supported playback. ezbqc rgpx whtoz wxxvv hcztkl xmzz tgdlc jza ejdziz nbzdxoa