MSU Video Codecs Comparison 2022
Part 3: Hardware encoders 4K
Seventeen Annual Video-Codecs Comparison by MSU
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||
| compression.ru |
Lomonosov Moscow State University (MSU) Graphics and Media Lab |
Dubna International
State University |
Institute for Information Transmission Problems, Russian Academy of Science |
||||||
News
- 04.07.2023 Report release
Navigation
Description
In MSU 4K Hardware Video Codecs Comparison 2022, we analyzed 13 hardware codecs. There were 3 different speed usecases: 30 fps, 60 fps, 120 fps. 11 4K video sequences were used for testing.
Results
- The places below are given by quality scores
- Encoders with scores closer than ~1% share one place
| Fast (30 fps) | |||||||
|
Best encoder YUV-SSIM |
|
||||||
|
Best encoder YUV-PSNR |
|
||||||
|
Best encoder Y-VMAF (v0.6.3) |
|
||||||
|
Best encoder YUV-VMAF (v0.6.3) |
|
||||||
|
Best GPU encoder |
|
||||||
|
Best FPGA encoder |
|
||||||
|
Best ASIC encoder |
|
| Very-fast (60 fps) | |||||||
|
Best encoder YUV-SSIM, YUV-PSNR |
|
||||||
|
Best encoder Y-VMAF (v0.6.3), YUV-VMAF (v0.6.3) |
|
||||||
|
Best GPU encoder |
|
||||||
|
Best ASIC encoder |
|
| Super-fast (120 fps) | |||||||
|
Best encoder YUV-SSIM, Y-VMAF (v0.6.3), YUV-PSNR |
|
||||||
|
Best encoder YUV-VMAF (v0.6.3) |
|
||||||
|
Best GPU encoder |
|
||||||
|
Best ASIC encoder |
|
The winners vary for different objective quality metrics. The participants were rated using BSQ-rate (enhanced BD-rate) scores [1].
[1] A. Zvezdakova, D. Kulikov, S. Zvezdakov, D. Vatolin, "BSQ-rate: a new approach for video-codec performance comparison and drawbacks of current solutions," 2020.
Speed/quality trade-off "Fast 30 fps" all sequences, YUV (6:1:1)-SSIM metric
Download
|
FPGA 4K Express Report Objective comparison of ultra-fast and hardware-accelerated 4K video encoders Released on July, 4 Full version for free |
13 hardware-accelerated encoders Streamlake-200 (ASIC), Tencent Canghai 265 (ASIC), BVE1.1 (FPGA), Reference x265 (CPU), NVENC H.265 (GPU), NVENC H.264 (GPU), Intel QSV AV1 (Intel Arc GPU), Intel QSV H265 (Intel Arc GPU), Intel QSV H264 (Intel Arc GPU), Intel QSV H265 (CPU), Intel QSV H264 (CPU), AMD H.265 (GPU), AMD H.264 (GPU), |
|
|
11 4K videos 30, 60 and 120 fps usecases |
||
|
28+ objective metrics (VMAF, SSIM, MS-SSIM, PSNR of different variants) |
||
|
HTML report + links to source videos (ZIP) 5400+ interactive charts |
Participants
| Codec name | Platform | Standard | Usecases | Version | |
| 1 |
Reference x265
MulticoreWare, Inc. |
CPU | H.265/HEVC | Fast, Very-fast, Super-fast (30 fps, 60 fps, 120 fps) | 3.5+1-f0c1022b6, Windows |
| 2 |
Tencent Canghai 265
Tencent |
ASIC | H.265/HEVC | Fast (30 fps) | - |
| 3 |
Streamlake-200
StreamLake-200: Data Center High performance AI-VPU for Cloud, designed for high quality, density, flexibility for cloud and edge. Infrastructure for live streaming, cloud game, broadcasting, embedded Kuaishou leading video technology.
Streamlake |
ASIC | H.265/HEVC | Fast, Very-fast, Super-fast (30 fps, 60 fps, 120 fps) | - |
| 4 |
BVE
Bytedance |
FPGA | - | Fast (30 fps) | 1.1 |
| 5 |
NVENC H.265 (NVIDIA Titan RTX GPU)
|
GPU | H.265/HEVC | Fast, Very-fast, Super-fast (30 fps, 60 fps, 120 fps) | - |
| 6 |
NVENC H.264 (NVIDIA Titan RTX GPU)
|
GPU | H.265/HEVC | Fast, Very-fast, Super-fast (30 fps, 60 fps, 120 fps) | - |
| 7 |
Intel QSV AV1 (Intel Arc GPU)
Intel Corp. |
GPU | AV1 | Fast, Very-fast, Super-fast (30 fps, 60 fps, 120 fps) | - |
| 8 |
Intel QSV H.265 (Intel Arc GPU)
Intel Corp. |
GPU | H.265/HEVC | Fast, Very-fast, Super-fast (30 fps, 60 fps, 120 fps) | - |
| 9 |
Intel QSV H.264 (Intel Arc GPU)
Intel Corp. |
GPU | H.264/AVC | Fast, Very-fast, Super-fast (30 fps, 60 fps, 120 fps) | - |
| 10 |
Intel QSV H.265 (Intel Core i7 12700K)
Intel Corp. |
CPU (built-in hardware acceleration) | H.265/HEVC | Fast, Very-fast, Super-fast (30 fps, 60 fps, 120 fps) | - |
| 11 |
Intel QSV H.264 (Intel Core i7 12700K)
Intel Corp. |
CPU (built-in hardware acceleration) | H.264/AVC | Fast, Very-fast, Super-fast (30 fps, 60 fps, 120 fps) | - |
| 12 |
AMD H.265 (Radeon RX6800)
AMD |
GPU | H.265/HEVC | Fast, Very-fast, Super-fast (30 fps, 60 fps, 120 fps) | 1.4.29, Windows |
| 13 |
AMD H.264 (Radeon RX6800)
AMD |
GPU | H.264/AVC | Fast, Very-fast, Super-fast (30 fps, 60 fps, 120 fps) | 1.4.29, Windows |
Comparison Rules
Hardware-accelerated and ultra-fast codecs testing objectives
The main goal of this report is the presentation of a comparative evaluation of the quality of new and existing codecs using objective measures of assessment. The comparison was done using settings provided by the developers of each codec. Nevertheless, we required all presets to satisfy minimum speed requirement on the particular use case. The main task of the comparison is to analyze different encoders for the task of transcoding video – e.g., compressing video for personal use.
Test Hardware Characteristics for GPU/ASIC encoders
- CPU: Intel Core i7 12700K (Alder Lake)
- SSD: 1Tb
- RAM: 4x16GB (64GB)
- OS: Windows 11 x64, Ubuntu 22.04 LTS
Test Hardware Characteristics for FPGA encoders
- CPU: Intel Core i7 12700K (Alder Lake)
- SSD: 1Tb
- FPGA: Xilinx Alveo U250 Accelerator
- RAM: 4x16GB (64GB)
- OS: Windows 11 x64, Ubuntu 22.04 LTS
See more on Call For Codecs 2022 page
Videos
Videos for testing set were chosen from MSU video collection via a voting among comparison participants, organizers and an independend expert.
| Year | # FullHD videos | # FullHD samples | # 4K videos | # 4K samples | Total # of videos | Total # of samples |
| 2016 | 3 | 7 | 882 | 2902 | 885 | 2909 |
| 2017 | 1996 | 4638 | 1544 | 4561 | 3540 | 9299 |
| 2018 | 4342 | 10330 | 1946 | 5503 | 6288 | 15833 |
| 2020 | 4945 | 12402 | 2091 | 6016 | 7036 | 18418 |
| 2021 | 4945 | 12402 | 2091 | 6016 | 7036 | 18418 |
| 2022 | 7379 | 19546 | 2091 | 6016 | 9470 | 25562 |
Final video set consists of 53 sequences including new videos from Vimeo and media.xiph.org derf's collection.
Descriptions of all test videos are presented in a separate PDF provided with the report.
Codec Analysis and Tuning for Codec Developers and Codec Users
Computer Graphics and Multimedia Laboratory of Moscow State University:
- 17+ years working in the area of video codec analysis and tuning using objective quality metrics and subjective comparisons.
- 30+ reports of video codec comparisons and analysis (H.265, H.264, AV1, VP9, MPEG-4, MPEG-2, decoders' error recovery).
- Methods and algorithms for codec comparison and analysis development, separate codec's features and codec's options analysis.
Strong and Weak Points of Your Codec
- Deep encoder parts analysis (ME, RC on GOP, mode decision, etc).
- Weak and strong points for your encoder and complete information about encoding quality on different content types.
- Encoding Quality improvement by the pre and post filtering (including technologies licensing).
Independent Codec Estimation Comparing to Other Codecs for Different Use-cases
- Comparative analysis of your encoder and other encoders.
- We have direct contact with many codec developers.
- You will know place of your encoder between other newest well-known encoders (compare encoding quality, speed, bitrate handling, etc.).
Encoder Features Implementation Optimality Analysis
We perform encoder features effectiveness (speed/quality trade-off) analysis that could lead up to 30% increase in the speed/quality characteristics of your codec. We can help you to tune your codec and find best encoding parameters.Thanks
Special thanks to the following contributors of our previous comparisons
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact Information
Subscribe to report updates
Other Materials
Video resources:
Server size: 8069 files, 1215Mb (Server statistics)
Project updated by
Server Team and
MSU Video Group
Project sponsored by YUVsoft Corp.
Project supported by MSU Graphics & Media Lab