[x264-devel] MSU Call for codecs - 2016

[Dmitriy Vatolin]

Dear Codec Developers,

Moscow State University Graphics & Multimedia Laboratory starts next
annual video codecs comparison for HEVC/H.264 codecs.

As you maybe know we successfully published 2 comparisons of 14
codecs on 20 Full HD and 11 4K sequences.

HEVC codecs:
1. f265 H.265 Encoder (only Full HD)
2. Intel MSS HEVC GAcc
3. Intel MSS HEVC Software (only Full HD)
4. Ittiam HEVC Hardware Encoder (only Full HD)
5. Ittiam HEVC Software Encoder  (only Full HD)
6. Strongene Lentoid HEVC Encoder (only Full HD)
7. SHBP H.265 Real time encoder
8. x265
9. nj265 (only 4К)
And non-HEVC codecs:
10. InTeleMax TurboEnc (only Full HD)
11. SIF Encoder (only Full HD)
12. VP9 Video Codec (only Full HD)
13. x264
14. nj264 (only 4К)

Results on 2K sequences was not so impressive, just 94% of x264 for
"Fast Transcoding" (6% saving), 91% of x264 for "Universal" (9%
saving), and 82% (18% saving) for "Ripping" - slowest nomination
(best codecs was "Intel MSS HEVC Software", "x265" and again "x265").

Also a lot of people was impressed with VP9 results:
http://compression.ru/video/codec_comparison/hevc_2015/MSU_HEVC_comparison_2015_free.pdf

Of course this is first implementations of HEVC codecs and they will
be improved soon, but even now results on 4K was more impressive.
There was 57% in comparison with x264 (43% bitrate saving - close to 2
times!) for Intel MSS HEVC GAcc. Also this codec was faster than
x264. 57% better and fasted - very good news for HEVC:
http://compression.ru/video/codec_comparison/h265_2015_reports/MSU_HEVC_4K_2016_free.pdf

We are glad to invite you to next comparison:

* Please appease your managers: We understand that only few real
  leaders are interested in results publication. But also partial and
  private participation is possible. So you can show results only in
  those nominations where results of your codec will satisfy you.

* Developers provide us pretty fresh versions sometimes essentially
  better, than publicly available from site for purchase (we
  cross-check this). So you can compare you codec not only with old
  version available from site (and pretty good for complacency :), but
  with pretty fresh versions, that will be available several month
  later.

* Please do not worry about potential bugs in hot builds - in case
  of crashes or another obvious problems you will have time (about
  week, but several times) to provide us updated fixed versions and
  all results will be remeasured. (This option essentially shift "MSU
  HEVC Video Codec Comparison 2015" release date - some new codecs
  have bugs, but we suppose that this is very important).

If even now you are afraid about quality of you codec, that there are
no reason to compare - please let us know. We are interested in bigger
number of good codecs and can measure weak and strong points of your
codec to help you tune it efficiently.

If you think, that all objective measures are obsolete in XXI century
and your codec essentially tuned for visual results - please let us
know. We plan to include visual comparison of codecs with turned on
and off psychovisual options. We currently done such preliminary
comparison for H.264 vs HEVC codecs - looks like some objective
results will be very interesting.

Call for codecs available here:
http://compression.ru/video/codec_comparison/call_for_codecs_16.html

Please contact us videocodec-testing at graphics.cs.msu.ru

-- 
Yours,
 Dmitriy                          mailto:dmitriy at graphics.cs.msu.ru