Frame Comparison of H.264 and VP8
In connection with the emerging opposition of H.264 and the “free” VP8 codec, it is rather interesting to compare which of these codecs is actually better in real use. One of the first adequate independent tests was conducted by the guys from Streaming Media: they took a standard test file, using Squish squeezed it with the same bit rate by the H.264 and VP8 codecs, and then compared the result by frame.
The final videos can be downloaded here: the H.264 file and the VP8 file . Here are their specifications.
Encoding static scenes (low motion), such as talking heads, is a fairly simple task, and here the difference in the work of the two codecs is almost impossible to find, both cope equally well.
')
However, in another static scene with a terrible background for coding (highly detailed wallpapers), the VP8 managed to save far more details than H.264. This is an interesting result.
In dynamic scenes (fast motion), sometimes VP8 shows quite comparable quality.
But in the most dynamic scenes with a lot of detail, H.264 looks clearly better. In the frames below, the VP8 leaves clearly visible blocks, while H.264 provides good anti-aliasing. The striped shirt on the right side of the frame on H.264 is also clearer than on VP8.
On another fragment with a dynamic H.264 scene again shows the best result, especially in bright areas, while VP8 has slightly noticeable artifacts.
And finally, another scene where VP8 has an advantage.
As a final conclusion, we can say that H.264 still has an advantage and provides better compression quality, but the difference is unlikely to be noticeable in most situations.
PS A more detailed comparison of two codecs, tests on higher resolution samples with different compression profiles can be found here .
The final videos can be downloaded here: the H.264 file and the VP8 file . Here are their specifications.
Encoding static scenes (low motion), such as talking heads, is a fairly simple task, and here the difference in the work of the two codecs is almost impossible to find, both cope equally well.
')
However, in another static scene with a terrible background for coding (highly detailed wallpapers), the VP8 managed to save far more details than H.264. This is an interesting result.
In dynamic scenes (fast motion), sometimes VP8 shows quite comparable quality.
But in the most dynamic scenes with a lot of detail, H.264 looks clearly better. In the frames below, the VP8 leaves clearly visible blocks, while H.264 provides good anti-aliasing. The striped shirt on the right side of the frame on H.264 is also clearer than on VP8.
On another fragment with a dynamic H.264 scene again shows the best result, especially in bright areas, while VP8 has slightly noticeable artifacts.
And finally, another scene where VP8 has an advantage.
As a final conclusion, we can say that H.264 still has an advantage and provides better compression quality, but the difference is unlikely to be noticeable in most situations.
PS A more detailed comparison of two codecs, tests on higher resolution samples with different compression profiles can be found here .
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/94394/
All Articles