DaGeek247

Innovative ideas are rarely smart ideas.

You completely missed the point there, damn. He's saying those things are very likely to be bad investments.

Texas.

If you're really worried about power use, you could switch to an itx motherboard with an soc laptop chip in it.

He probably killed himself because

Using someones suicide to preach about your own personal cause is a dick move.

Visually lossless means I couldn't tell an image difference even when pixel peeping with imgsli. Good enough means I couldn't tell a difference in video, but could occasionally see a compression artifact in imgsli.

The VMAF results are purely objective measurements. You can read more about it here; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_Multimethod_Assessment_Fusion

I consider the 'good enough' level to be, if I didn't pixel peep, I couldn't tell the difference. The visually lossless levels were the first crf levels where I couldn't tell a quality difference even when pixel peeping with imgsli. I also included VAMF results, which say that the quality loss levels are all the same at a pixel level.

I know that av1, x264, and x265 all have different ways of compressing video. Obviously, the whole point of this was to get a better idea of what that actually looked like. Everything on the visually lossless section is completely indistinguishable to my eyes, and everything on the good enough section has very minor bits of compression only noticed when i'm looking for it in a still image. This does not require the same codec to compare and contrast with.

Frankly, for anything other than real-time encoding, I don't actually consider encoding time to be a huge deal. None of my encodes were slower than 3fps on my 5800x3d, which is plenty for running on my media server as overnight job. For real-time encoding, I would just grab a Intel Arc card, and redo the whole thing since the bitrates will be different anyways.

From my blogpost, i'm using the following command to encode the video;

ffmpeg -i source.2160p.mkv
-map 0:v:0
-map -0:a -map -0:s -map_metadata -1
-c:v libsvtav1
-preset 3
-vf scale=w=1920:-2
-crf 23
dest.1080p.av1.mkv

Sure, but that is a choice that couldn't be made without first checking how much space is saved by switching codecs. This helps with making that decision, but i'm well aware it is only part of the information needed.

Stolen. Thank you.

I did try to format the table here better. I used code blocks the first time, and it ended up being even uglier. After about four edit attempts i kinda just gave up. Tables don't seem to exist as far as I can tell either.

Your experience with x264 just about matches up with mine. As long as I don't pixel peep, crf 24 does a pretty great job of conveying the information. It also does a pretty great job of working with just about everything compatibility-wise. I don't expect it to go away any time soon specifically because of that.

AV1 is super neat in that we can buy hardware accelerated encoding for it for really cheap using the Intel Arc video cards, and can be decoded by their latest CPU generation. It makes for a great choice for something like security camera footage where playback compatibility is good enough (you can play it in a modern pc), hardware encoding works with a 200$ card, and you save a lot of money using the video card instead of buying extra storage space.

Don’t bother transcoding 4k

i have a cheap 1650 that can do four 4k transcodes on the fly with no issue. It was a 100$ upgrade. Frankly, this is a bad take. Obviously every situation is different, but unless you have a family of twenty that you're sharing your server with, 4k encoding is incredibly easy to do these days.