Blog

  • H.264 Vs H.265

    Posted by Oodles Admin | Last Updated: 06-Feb-17

    H264 Vs H265
     

     

    Image Quality

    And Bandwidth Consumption

    With same video image quality

    With same video image quality


     

    Names

    MPEG 4 Part 10 AVC

    MPEG-H, HEVC, Part 2

    Industry Adoption

    Accept video codec for Terrestrial, Cable, Satellite and IPTV broadcast. Widely used across Blu-Ray, security systems, videoconferencing , mobile video, media players, video chat etc

    Implementation demonstration across NAB, IBC and other events starting 2012 from companies e.g. ATEME, Broadcom, Thomson , Harmonic (Cisco), Ericsson, Qualcomm etc.. Increased R&D across Encoder/Decoder /CE vendors for software and hardware based solutions

    Key Achievement

    About 50% bit rate reduction compared to MPEG-2

    About 50% the bit rate reduction at the same visual quality compared to H.264

    Available to deliver HD sources for Broadcast and Online

    It's likely to implement UHD, 2K, 4K for Broadcast and Online (OTT)

    Successor

    Successor to MPEG-2 Part

    Successor to MPEG 4 AVC, H.264

    Compression Model

    Hybrid spatial-temporal prediction model

    Enhanced Hybrid spatial-temporal prediction model

    - Flexible partition of Macro Block (MB) , sub MB for motion estimation

    - Flexible partitioning, introduces Coding Tree Units (Coding, Prediction and Transform Units -CU, PU, TU)

    - Intra Prediction with 9 directional modes

    - 35 directional modes for intra prediction

    - With multi-view extension

    - Superior parallel processing architecture, enhancements in multi-view coding extension

    -  Entropy coding is CABAC and CAVLC

    - Entropy coding is only CABAC

    In-Depth Support

    Support Up to 4K (4,096×2,304)

    Up to 8K UHDTV (8192×4320)

    Supports up to 59.94 fps

    Supports up to 300 fps

    21 profiles ; 17 levels

    3 approved profiles, draft for additional 5 ; 13 levels

    Drawbacks

    Due to high bit rate requirements, it's tough to deliver UHD content. Also frame rate is restrictive to support 59.94

    Computationally expensive  (~ 300 % + ) due to larger prediction units and expensive Motion Estimation (Intra prediction with more nodes, asymmetric partitions in Inter Prediction).

    Approved Year

    2003

    2013

     

Tags: video