![X265 codec for windows 10 X265 codec for windows 10](/uploads/1/2/6/3/126399635/248765440.jpg)
Since I already have full speed/tune settings in the x264 vs x265 vs VP8 vs VP9 comparison page, I didn't feel too bad about removing them here. Previously, SSIM and PSNR were listed as alternate tune options, but since I didn't have the ratios saved/displayed (which was the original plan) I didn't bother re-uploading them. Little comparison of x264 and x265 for anime source We compare a small SD-part from anime (14 MB) encoded with CRF mode using x264 and x265. CRF was chosen in such a way that the size of both encodes had similar size. As a result, we stopped at these settings. And indeed, if you pick a bitrate where x264 (H.264) already shows strong blocking, then x265 (HEVC) will probably deliver a much more decent result at that bitrate. But if you start with some bitrate where x264 (H.264) already gives a good result, then there obviously isn't much that could be gained by using x265 (HEVC). X265: 1080p ultra low bitrate comparison by The GAT at XIN.at is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Posted by thrawn at 12:55 Tagged with: 1080p, comparison, FHD, H.264/AVC, H.265/HEVC, quality, ultra low bitrate, x264, x265.
Doing a little ugly fast and loose codec comparison. I took a pirate scene MKV file in 720p with 5.1 audio, an hour long video file that was (no doubt) lovingly encoded in H.264 with one audio track and several subtitle tracks. I then transcoded it to H.265 and H.264 using ffmpeg with default settings. This also transcoded the audio from 640kbps AAC to 276kbps Vorbis. Anyway here’s what I got for file sizes:
Original file
![X264 and h264 X264 and h264](/uploads/1/2/6/3/126399635/371784033.png)
- 1800MB, 720p, 51 minutes
- 1580MB video, 240MB audio
- h264 (High)
x265
- 170MB, or roughly 10% the size
- 80MB video, 90 MB audio
- hevc (Main), encoded with “ffmpeg -c:v libx265”, default settings.
- Encoded at about 1.3x playback speed (software)
x264
X264 Vs X265 Vs H264
- 400MB, or roughly 22% the size
- 290 MB video, 90 MB audio
- h264 (High), encoded with “ffmpeg -c:v libx264”, default settings.
- Encoded at about 3x playback speed (software)
The x265 encoding is remarkable. The video is literally smaller than the audio! And the resulting file is 10% of the source. The video segment is 5% of the size of the source and the audio is 38%.
X264 Vs X265 Quality
The x264 re-encoding is also notable, in that I’ve squished it to 22% of the source with nominally the same codec. That’s a pretty good savings and indicative that the source of the file was probably encoded with very high quality / high bitrate to make paying customers happy.
The resulting x265 file looks fine on my TV. You can see some posterization on subtle dark areas and maybe the sound isn’t as clear. But I’m blessed with a tin ear so those degradations don’t bug me much. No doubt there’s a sliding bar here between bandwidth and quality that a proper codec testing setup can do. Me, I’m just a dumb bear using ffmpeg default settings and pretty happy with the result
This post was all motivated by this post and discussion about comparing AV1 to x264 and VP9. AV1 is the new hotness in codecs, although as with all these things there’s years of controversy and patents and hardware support to settle before adoption.