Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

H.264 vs HEVC

16,545 views

Published on

HEVC in comparison with H.264

  • Sports Insiders secret ZCode software beats the bookies? ◆◆◆ http://ishbv.com/zcodesys/pdf
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • HEVC
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here

H.264 vs HEVC

  1. 1. AUTHORS: Marcin Walendowski, Jakub Drynkowski, Weronika Woronicz WIDE COMPARISON BETWEEN H.264 AND HEVC UNDER THE ACADEMIC SUPERVISION OF: GUSTAVO MARRERO CALLICÓ SEBASTIÁN LÓPEZ SUÁREZ TERM PROJECT
  2. 2. Index 1. Description and introduction to standards 1. H.264 2. HEVC 2. Comparison in terms of theoretical features 3. Simulation data 1. H.264 and HEVC 2. Comparison between simulations data 4. Conclusions 5. Bibliography Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 2
  3. 3. 3Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica H.264/MPEG-4 AVC 1.1
  4. 4. Introduction Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica  H.264/MPEG-4 AVC (ang. Advanced Video Coding)  block-oriented motion-compensation-based video lossy compression standard  Developed by the ITU-T VCEG and ISO/IEC MPEG  The project partnership effort is known as the Joint Video Team (JVT)  The standardization of the first version was completed in May 2003 4 H.264 | MPEG-4 AVC
  5. 5. General assumptions Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 5  The intent was to create a standard capable of providing good video quality at substantially lower bit rates than previous standards( half or less in comparison with H.263)  Provide enough flexibility to allow the standard to be applied to a wide variety of applications on a wide variety of networks and systems, including low and high bit rates, low and high resolution video H.264 | MPEG-4 AVC
  6. 6. Applications Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 6  Streaming internet sources  Vimeo, YouTube and iTunes Store  Web software  Adobe Flash Player and Microsoft Silverlight  HDTV broadcasts  ATSC, ISDB-T, DVB-T,DVB-T2, DVB-C, DVB-S and DVB-S2  Blu-ray Discs  As a recording format  AVCDC - Advanced Video Coding High Definition developed by Sony and Panasonic  Uses by Canon and Nikon DSLRs  and more ! H.264 | MPEG-4 AVC
  7. 7. Comparison to previous standards Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 7  The H.264 video coding based on hybrid coding very similar to previous blocks standards (H.26x)  New features that allow it to compress video much more effectively than older standards and to provide more flexibility for application to a wide variety of network environments H.264 | MPEG-4 AVC
  8. 8. New transform and quantization design Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 8  Adaptive encoder selection between the 4×4 and 8×8 transform block sizes for the integer transform operation.  Logarithmic step size control of quantization for easier bit rate management and simplified inverse- quantization scaling H.264 | MPEG-4 AVC - new key features
  9. 9. Intra Prediction Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 9  A multidirectional spatial prediction method to reduce spatial redundancy by using neighbouring samples as a prediction for the samples  Each MB can be encoded using blocks of pixels that are already encoded within the current frame H.264 | MPEG-4 AVC - new key features
  10. 10. Multi-picture inter-picture prediction Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 10  Allowing up to 16 reference frames, in comparison with 1/2 for P/B frames in previous standard  Variable block-size motion compensation (VBSMC)  block sizes include 16×16, 16×8, 8×16, 8×8, 8×4, 4×8, and 4×4 H.264 | MPEG-4 AVC - new key features
  11. 11. Multi-picture inter-picture prediction Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 11  Variable block-size H.264 | MPEG-4 AVC - new key features
  12. 12. Multi-picture inter-picture prediction Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 12  The ability to use multiple motion vectors per macroblock. Up to 32 in the case of a B macroblock constructed of 16 4×4 partitions.  Quarter-pixel or even 1/8 pixel precision for motion compensation, enabling precise description of the displacements of moving areas. H.264 | MPEG-4 AVC - new key features
  13. 13. Loop filter Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 13  An in-loop deblocking filter that helps prevent the blocking artifacts common to other DCT-based image compression techniques.  A filter is applied to every decoded macroblock to reduce blocking distortion  It results in better visual appearance and compression efficiency H.264 | MPEG-4 AVC - new key features
  14. 14. Loop filter - example Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 14 H.264 | MPEG-4 AVC - new key features
  15. 15. Loop filter - example Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 15 H.264 | MPEG-4 AVC - new key features
  16. 16. Entropy coding Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 16  Context-adaptive binary arithmeticcoding (CABAC) a method of arithmetic coding in which the probability models are updated based on previous coding statistics.  A common simple and highly structured variable length coding (VLC) technique for many of the syntax elements not coded by CABAC or CAVLC. A symbol is converted into a binary code with a specified length (n bits). H.264 | MPEG-4 AVC - new key features
  17. 17. Block schema Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 17 H.264 | MPEG-4 AVC - new key features Intra frame I(x,y,t) Inter frame I(x,y,t-1) I(x,y,t) Reference frame mv I(x,y,t-1) I(x+u,y+v,t-1) I(x,y,t) e(x,y,t) I(x,y,t) We have a reconstructed frame which could be a reference for a the next one. First frame - intraNext frame - inter
  18. 18. Why it so important? Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 18  Has huge significance to the broadcast, internet, consumer electronics, mobile and security industries, amongst others standards.  It describes and defines a method of coding video that can give better performance than any of the preceding standards(without H.265)  H.264 makes it possible to compress video into a smaller space, which means that a compressed video clip takes up less transmission bandwidth and/or less storage space compared to older codecs H.264 | MPEG-4 AVC
  19. 19. 19Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica HEVC HIGH EFFICIENCY VIDEO CODING 1.2
  20. 20. Introduction Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 20  Video compression format, a successor to H.264/MPEG-4 AVC  Jointly developed by the ISO/IEC Moving Picture Experts Group (MPEG) and ITU-T Video Coding Experts Group (VCEG)  Known as MPEG-H Part 2 and I H.265  February 2012 - complete draft of standard  On November 25 2013 - the HEVC standard was formally published by the ISO/IEC. H.265 | HEVC
  21. 21. Standardization status Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 21  Strong industrial and academic interests H.265 | HEVC http://www.worldbroadcastingunions.org/wbuarea/library/docs/isog/presentations/2012B/2.4%20Vieron%20ATEME.pdf
  22. 22. General assumptions Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 22  “The main goal of the HEVC standardization effort is to enable significantly improved compression performance relative to existing standards—in the range of 50% bit- rate reduction for equal perceptual video quality. “  Moreover HEVC has been designed to address essentially all existing applications of H.264/MPEG-4 AVC and to particularly focus on two key issues:  increased video resolution  Increased use of parallel processing architectures. H.265 | HEVC
  23. 23. Potential applications Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 23 What becomes possible with 50% video rate reduction?  Existing applications and usage scenarios  IPTV over DSL : Large shift in IPTV eligibility  Facilitated deployment of OTT and multi-screen services  More customers on the same infrastructure: most IP traffic is video  More archiving facilities  Future services  1080p60/50 with bitrates comparable to 1080i  Immersive viewing experience: Ultra-HD (4K, 8K)  Premium services (sports, live music, live events,…): home theater, mobile  HD 3DTV Full frame per view at today’s HD delivery rates H.265 | HEVC
  24. 24. How to achieve the assumptions? Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 24  The design of most video coding standards and also of HEVC is primarily aimed at having the highest coding efficiency.  Coding efficiency is the ability to encode video at the lowest possible bit rate while maintaining a certain level of video quality H.265 | HEVC
  25. 25. Coding structure Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 25  HEVC replaces macroblocks, which were used with previous standards, with Coding Tree Units (CTUs) and coding tree block (CTB) structure  CTU increases coding efficiency.  HEVC initially divides the picture into 3 CTB:  1 luma CTB  2 chroma CTB  The size L×L of a luma CTB can be chosen as L = 16, 32, or 64 samples, with the larger sizes typically enabling better compression  Supports partitioning of the CTBs into smaller blocks H.265 | HEVC
  26. 26. Coding structure Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 26 H.265 | HEVC  Quadtree  CUs are the basic unit of prediction in HEVC.  CUs can be 64x64, 32x32, 16x16 or 8x8.
  27. 27. Prediction Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 27 H.265 | HEVC  The decision whether to code a picture area using interpicture or intrapicture prediction is made at the CU level.  CUs can then be further split in size into prediction blocks (PBs).  HEVC supports variable PB sizes from 64×64down to 4×4 samples.
  28. 28. Prediction Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 28  Modes for splitting a CB into PBs, subject to certain size constraints. For intrapicture-predicted CBs, only M × M and M/2×M/2 are supported. H.265 | HEVC
  29. 29. Intra predicting Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 29  Supports 33 directional modes + Planar (surface fitting) + DC (flat) prediction modes  The selected intra picture prediction modes are encoded by deriving most probable modes (e.g., prediction directions) based on those of previously decoded neighboring PBs. H.265 | HEVC
  30. 30. Transform design Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 30  Transform Unit (TU)  • DCT (Discrete Cosine Tranform)  • Various sizes from 4x4 to 32x32  • To adapt the transform to the signal frequency characteristics  • TU can overlap PU  Intra  DCT+ DST (Discrete Sine Transform) on Luma intra 4x4  1% bit rate reduction  Inter  - DCT only H.265 | HEVC
  31. 31. Quantisation design Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 31  Quantisation – as in H.264, but with scaling matrices supported for the various transform block sizes. H.265 | HEVC
  32. 32. Motion Vectors Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 32 H.265 | HEVC  Uses signed 16-bit range for both horizontal and vertical motion vectors (MVs)  2 modes of motion vector prediction :  Advanced motion vector prediction (AMVP) - uses data from the reference picture and can also use data from neighboring prediction blocks  A merge mode - allowing the inheritance of MVs from temporally or spatially neighboring PBs.
  33. 33. Motion compensation Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 33  Multiple reference pictures are used  For each PB, either one or two motion vectors can be transmitted, resulting either in unipredictive or bipredictive coding.  Interpolation of fractional luma sample positions  It uses separable application of one-dimensional half- sample interpolation with an 8-tap filter or quarter- sample interpolation with a 7-tap H.265 | HEVC
  34. 34. Entropy coding Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 34  Context adaptive binary arithmetic coding (CABAC) is used for entropy coding  Improve throughput speed by parallel-processing architectures and compression performance H.265 | HEVC
  35. 35. What’s more Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 35 H.265 | HEVC  Deblocking filter similar to the one used in H.264/MPEG-4 AVC  Sample adaptive offset (SAO):  Its goal is to better reconstruct the original signal amplitudes, to increase picture quality, reduce banding artifacts, and reduce ringing artifacts by using a look- up table.
  36. 36. 36Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica COMPARISON H.264 VS H.265 2
  37. 37. For what it all? Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 37 H.264 | MPEG-4 AVC VS H.265 | HEVC http://www.worldbroadcastingunions.org/wbuarea/library/docs/isog/presentations/2012B/2.4%20Vieron%20ATEME.pdf
  38. 38. Main differences Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 38 H.264 | MPEG-4 AVC VS H.265 | HEVC H.264/AVC HEVC Partition size Macroblock 16x16 (Large) Coding Unit 8x8 to 64x64 Partitioning Sub-block down to 4x4 Prediction Unit Quadtree down to 4x4 Square, symmetric and asymmetric (only square for intra) Transform Integer DCT 8x8, 4x4 Transform Unit square IDCT from 32x32 to 4x4 + DST Luma Intra 4x4 Intra prediction Up to 9 predictors 35 predictors
  39. 39. Main differences Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 39 H.264 | MPEG-4 AVC VS H.265 | HEVC H.264/AVC HEVC Motion prediction Spatial Median (3 blocks) Advanced Motion Neighbor (3 blocks) Vector Prediction AMVP (spatial + temporal) Motion-copy mode Direct mode Merge mode Motion precision ½ Pixel 6-tap, ¼ Pixel bi-linear ¼ Pixel 7or 8 tap 1/8 Pixel 4-tap chroma Entropy coding CABAC, CAVLC CABAC Filters Deblocking Filter Deblocking Filter Sample Adaptive Offset
  40. 40. Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 40 H.264 | MPEG-4 AVC VS H.265 | HEVC http://www.worldbroadcastingunions.org/wbuarea/library/docs/isog/presentations/2012B/2.4%20Vieron%20ATEME.pdf
  41. 41. 41Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica SIMULATION DATA 3
  42. 42. Introduction to sequences Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 42 – SIMULATION DATA Coastguard lots of movement, normal spatial redundancy Foreman high spatial redundancy, low movement Mobile low redundancy, lot of movement News low movement, high redundancy
  43. 43. All sequences – H.264 Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 43 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 PSNR[dB] Bitrate [kbit/s] H.264 PSNR-bitrate Foreman Coastgurd mobile news H.264 | MPEG-4 AVC – SIMULATION DATA  The best compression ratio to quality has sequence news, because of it's low movement and high redundancy. The worse is mobile, because of it's high movement, movement of object and the background.
  44. 44. Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 44 150 200 250 300 350 400 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 Time[s] Bitrate [kbit/s] H.264 time/bit-rate foreman coastgurd mobile news H.264 | MPEG-4 AVC – SIMULATION DATA  For the same reasons as we told before to encode news sequence we don't need a lot of bit rate, because following frames are really similar to each other. All sequences – H.264
  45. 45. Search range gain - foreman Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 45 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 PSNR[dB] Bitrate [kbit/s] Comparison search range foreman- SR 32 foreman-SR 64 H.264 | MPEG-4 AVC – SIMULATION DATA  We checked all sequences for changing Search rage and we didn't see any high gain in quality, it's probably, because in our sequences there is no high speed moving object so search range of 32 it's enough to notice all movement.
  46. 46. Search range gain - coastguard Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 46 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 PSNR[dB] Bitrate [kbit/s] Comparison search range coastguard- SR 32 coastguard-SR 64 H.264 | MPEG-4 AVC – SIMULATION DATA  The same goes for coastguard and all other sequences.
  47. 47. All sequences - HEVC Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 47 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 PSNR[dB] Bitrate [kbit/s] HEVC frame 300 GOP BBBBBBBB foreman coastguard mobile news HEVC– SIMULATION DATA  The same as in h.264 encoder we also get the best compression to quality for sequence with the highest redundancy and lowest movement.
  48. 48. Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 48 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 Time[s] Bitrate [kbit/s] HEVC frame 300 GOP BBBBBBBB Foreman coastguard mobile news HEVC– SIMULATION DATA  Here we can see that differences in times are much bigger than in h.264. HEVC is very complicated encoder and we didn’t notice any correlation between redundancy of the sequences and the times. All sequences – HEVC
  49. 49. Intra period gain - foreman Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 49 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 PSNR[dB] Bitrate [kbit/s] HEVC frame 300 ItraPeriod -1 vs 32 foreman- ItntraPeriod -1 foreman- ItntraPeriod 32 HEVC– SIMULATION DATA  Adding more reference Intra frames is lowering drastically our quality for the same bit rate, because Intra frames provide lower compression than for example B frames and our encoder needs to use higher quantization factors. It's lowering our transmission's resistance for channel errors, but in this simulation were done with use of no error channel.
  50. 50. Intra period gain - coastguard Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 50 24 29 34 39 44 49 54 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 PSNR[dB] Bitrate [kbit/s] HEVC frame 300 IntraPeriod -1 vs 32 coastguard- ItntraPeriod -1 coastguard- ItntraPeriod 32 HEVC– SIMULATION DATA  We can see that this gain is huge it's about 5 dB, and that's is a lot.
  51. 51. Group of pictures - foreman Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 51 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 PSNR[dB] Bitrate [kbit/s] GOP 8xB vs PBBB foreman-PBBB Foreman-8xB HEVC– SIMULATION DATA  Use of GOP structure of only B frames give us some gain in quality. It's thanks to that because B frames gives us better compression options, but it's lowering resistance for channel errors. In real transmission it would be better to use GOP structure with PBBB, because it will give us more resistance for channel errors, for not so much cost in bit rate.
  52. 52. Group of pictures - mobile Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 52 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 PSNR[dB] Bitrate [kbit/s] GOP 8xB vs PBBB mobile-PBBB mobile-8xB HEVC– SIMULATION DATA
  53. 53. Group of pictures - news Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 53 33 38 43 48 53 58 63 68 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 PSNR[dB] Bitrate [kbit/s] GOP 8xB vs PBBB news-PBBB news-8xB HEVC– SIMULATION DATA
  54. 54. Group of pictures - coastguard Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 54 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 PSNR[dB] Bitrate [kbit/s] GOP 8xB vs PBBB coastguard-8xB coastguard-PBBB HEVC– SIMULATION DATA
  55. 55. Search range gain - mobile Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 55 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 PSNR[dB] Bitrate [kbit/s] GOP 8xB Search Range Comparison mobile SR 32 mobile-SR 64 mobile SR full HEVC– SIMULATION DATA  We checked all sequences for changing Search range and we didn't see any high gain in quality, it's probably, because in our sequences there is no high speed moving object so search range of 32 it's enough to notice all movement.
  56. 56. Search range gain - mobile Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 56 20 120 220 320 420 520 620 720 820 920 1020 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 Time[s] Bitrate [kbit/s] GOP 8xB Search Range Comparison mobile SR 32 mobile-SR 64 mobile SR full HEVC– SIMULATION DATA  We get no noticeable gain in quality by changing Search range, but the times get dramatically higher, up to even 400 seconds ! It's only good idea to use it for some sequences in which we have we big movements of object between following frames.
  57. 57. SR full, FDM, FEN and FS – mobile Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 57 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 PSNR[dB] Bitrate [kbit/s] PSNR - GOP 8xB SR full FDM, FEN and FS Comparison mobile SR full all on mobile SR full all things off HEVC– SIMULATION DATA  From our practical tests, we concluded that fast search, fast encoder decision and Fast decision for Merge RD cost modules are very well implemented and it's not worth to turn them off.
  58. 58. SR full, FDM, FEN and FS Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 58 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 Time[s] Bitrate [kbps/s] TIME - GOP 8xB SR full FDM, FEN and FS Comparison mobile SR full all on mobile SR full all things off HEVC– SIMULATION DATA  Turning them off makes encoding times highly increase.
  59. 59. Decoding Refresh Type - mobile Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 59 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 PSNR[dB] Bitrate [kbit/s] PSNR - GOP 8xB Random Access Comparison mobile RA 0 mobile RA 1 CDR mobile RA 2 IDR HEVC– SIMULATION DATA  We didn't notice any significant gain, by changing Decoding Refresh Type.
  60. 60. Decoding Refresh Type - mobile Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 60 20 220 420 620 820 1020 1220 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 Time[dB] Bitrate [kbit/s] TIME - GOP 8xB Random Access Comparison mobile RA 0 mobile RA 1 CDR mobile RA 2 IDR HEVC– SIMULATION DATA  The times also didn't show that there was any major change. We can only see that no random access needs slightly more time
  61. 61. Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 61 29 34 39 44 49 54 59 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 PSNR[dB] Bitrate [kbit/s] Comparison 300 frames 8xB IDR H264-Foreman HEVC-foreman 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 Time[s] Bitrate [kbit/s] Comparison 300 frames 8xB IDR HEVC-Foreman H264-Foreman H.264 vs HEVC – SIMULATION DATA COMPARISON  We can see that HEVC encoder is a lot more better than h.264 standard. There is about 2 dB difference. This means that it provide allmost 50% better quality than h.264. However the encoding times for HEVC are terrible in comparison to h.264. Sometimes h.264 is about two times quicker.
  62. 62. Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 62 24 29 34 39 44 49 54 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 PSNR[dB] Bitrate [kbit/s] Comparison 300 frames IBBBBBBB IDR H264-coastguard HEVC-coastguard 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 Time Bitrate [kbit/s] Comparison 300 frames IBBBBBBB IDR HEVC-coastguard H264-coastguard H.264 vs HEVC – SIMULATION DATA COMPARISON  Here we notice a bit lower gain, but the times difference gets really huge. We can see that sequences with lot of movement needs a lot computation from HEVC. It's probably, because of it's complexity and a lot calculation needs to be made, it has a lot more option to consider than h.264.
  63. 63. Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 63 24 29 34 39 44 49 54 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 PSNR[dB] Bitrate [kbit/s] Comparison 300 frames IBBBBBBB IDR HEVC-mobile H264-mobile 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 Time[s] Bitrate [kbit/s] Comparison 300 frames IBBBBBBB IDR H264-mobile HEVC-mobile H.264 vs HEVC – SIMULATION DATA COMPARISON  In this sequences we can see that for low very bit rates HEVC and h.264 provides almost the same quality, but HEVC now is much quicker. Since 400kbit/s HEVC gains about 1,5-2dB of PSNR in comparison with H.264
  64. 64. Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 64 24 29 34 39 44 49 54 59 64 69 0 2000 4000 6000 PSNR[dB] Bitrate [kbit/s] Comparison 300 frames IBBBBBBB IDR HEVC-news H264-news 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 0 2000 4000 6000 Time[s] Bitrate[kbit/s] Comparison 300 frames IBBBBBBB IDR H264-NEWS HEVC-news H.264 vs HEVC – SIMULATION DATA COMPARISON  For this sequence HEVC has a lot more higher times than h.264, but it still provides better quality at least 1 dB better. For higher bitrates gain of PSNR is rising.
  65. 65. Bit-rate saving rate - foreman Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 65 [db] H.264 vs HEVC – SIMULATION DATA COMPARISON  He we can see that HEVC for the same quality gives us much lower bit rates than h.264, even up to 56% lower !.
  66. 66. Bit-rate saving rate - mobile Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 66 [db] H.264 vs HEVC – SIMULATION DATA COMPARISON
  67. 67. Bit-rate saving rate - news Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 67 [db] H.264 vs HEVC – SIMULATION DATA COMPARISON
  68. 68. Bit-rate saving rate - costguard Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 68 [db] H.264 vs HEVC – SIMULATION DATA COMPARISON  Almost all sequences HEVC gives us the highest gain. Here even 62 %.
  69. 69. 69Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica BIBLIOGRAPHY 4
  70. 70. Bibliography Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 70  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC  Lecture slides of subject Equipos Multimedia  Tema 11: Estándar d e compresión de vídeo H.264  ITU-T Recommendations: H.264 : Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-H.264-201201-S/en  “THE H.264 ADVANCED VIDEO COMPRESSION STANDARD” Iain Richardson [6.5.0-6.5.4];[7.4]  http://www.worldbroadcastingunions.org/wbuarea/libra ry/docs/isog/presentations/2012B/2.4%20Vieron%20A TEME.pdf
  71. 71. Bibliography Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica 71  “Overview of the High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC) Standard” Gary J. Sullivan, Fellow, IEEE, Jens- Rainer Ohm, Member, IEEE, Woo-Jin Han, Member, IEEE, and Thomas Wiegand, Fellow, IEEE
  72. 72. 72Equipos Multimedia - H.264 vs HEVC - Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación y Electrónica THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION

×