Scythe Mugen 5 Rev.C CPU Cooler review
be quiet Pure Loop 2 FX 280mm LCS review
HP FX900 1 TB NVMe Review
Scythe FUMA2 Rev.B CPU Cooler review
SK Hynix Platinum P41 2TB M.2 NVMe SSD Review
Corsair K70 RGB PRO Mini Wireless review
MSI MPG A1000G - 1000W PSU Review
Goodram IRDM PRO M.2 SSD 2 TB NVMe SSD Review
Samsung T7 Shield Portable 1TB USB SSD review
DeepCool LS720 (LCS) review
Intel Releases AV1 Video Codec for CPUs Designed for Ultra High Definition Resolutions
In 2020, Intel amonh the first to deliver AV1 hardware decoding with their Xe-LP GPUs. Version 1.0 of its fast open source scalable video technology AV1 encoder and decoder for CPUs was launched this week.
Intel has done a lot to promote the AV1 codec and make it more available to manufacturers/content producers and end users as a founding member of the Alliance for Open Media. The open source AV1 video codec is intended for ultra high definition resolutions, broad color gamut upgrades, and high dynamic range advancements. In 2018, AOMedia claimed that its AV1 video codec was 30% more efficient than existing codecs such as H.265/HEVC.
However, the issue with very efficient codecs is that they are quite expensive in terms of hardware resources and frequently require hardware acceleration to function correctly. Meanwhile, newer CPUs offer a plethora of additional capabilities and instructions that may be used to decode and encode, which is exactly what SVT-AV1 accomplishes.
SVT-AV1 is a scalable, standards-independent encoder/decoder library that can take use of contemporary CPU multi-core architectures and AVX2 instructions. SVT-AV1 additionally improves the AVX2 instructions for improved speed, image quality, faster decoding at more preset levels, and S-frame compatibility.
SVT-AV1 libraries from Intel are supported on current x86 PCs (5th generation Intel Core "Broadwell" or above) running MacOS, Linux, and Windows. The SVT-AV1 project was first launched by Intel and Netflix to create a high-quality AV1 encoder with performance levels suitable for a wide range of applications, including video-on-demand and live stream encoding/transcoding.
Intel released a teaser for its next ARC desktop graphics card - 03/31/2022 08:43 AM
Following the mobile Arc GPU unveiling, Intel revealed its first desktop Arc graphics card in a YouTube video. The card just states "Intel ARC Limited Edition," but shows the looks of the ...
Intel Releases Xeon D Processor Built for the Network and Edge - 02/25/2022 09:56 AM
Intel launched new Intel Xeon D processors: the D-2700 and the D-1700. They are Intel's newest system-on-chip (SoC) built for the software-defined network and edge, with integrated AI and crypto acce...
Intel recruits a Radeon Lead Architect to work on Arc GPUs. - 02/22/2022 10:19 AM
Rohit Verma has moved from AMD's Radeon Discrete GPU Lead Architect team to Raja Koduri's Intel team....
Intel releases XMP 3.0 DDR5 QVL compatibility list for Alder Lake CPUs - 11/02/2021 10:27 AM
For Intel's upcoming processors and motherboards based on DDR5 memory you'll probably want seom compatible products. Good news, Intel has posted a QVL (qualified vendor list)....
Intel Reports Third-Quarter 2021 Financial Results - 10/22/2021 08:54 AM
Intel Corporation today reported third-quarter 2021 financial results. "Q3 shone an even greater spotlight on the global demand for semiconductors, where Intel has the unique breadth and scale t...
Astyanax
Senior Member
Posts: 13661
Joined: 2018-03-21
Senior Member
Posts: 13661
Joined: 2018-03-21
#6012047 Posted on: 04/25/2022 02:08 PM
Microsoft released AV1 codecs ages ago.
Microsoft released AV1 codecs ages ago.
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 6668
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 6668
Joined: 2012-11-10
#6012094 Posted on: 04/25/2022 04:16 PM
We're at a point where CPU-only codecs are delivering extremely good performance. What really needs this the most are ARM-based devices, which Intel isn't going to support.
This get's me so excited, how do people not get excited about this? Saving so much data! I'm waiting for AV1 so much.
We're at a point where CPU-only codecs are delivering extremely good performance. What really needs this the most are ARM-based devices, which Intel isn't going to support.
IceVip
Senior Member
Posts: 859
Joined: 2013-04-08
Senior Member
Posts: 859
Joined: 2013-04-08
#6012163 Posted on: 04/25/2022 07:58 PM
As someone who creates content for Youtube since 2010 I can't say I'm excited.
Why? Because everything we create, no matter how you encode it, gets re-encoded the moment its uploaded to youtube to VP9.
I've been an editor for nearly 14 years now, and the codecs rabbit hole is deeper than the ocean. The more you look into it, the more retarded it gets.
If Youtube is the main platform to dominate it all, and youtube influences editing programs like premiere/avid/vegas/resolve, and all those programs have encoding presets
based on "youtube 1080p" or "youtube 2160p", why do we never see VP9 or AV1 in them? Why is it all H.264 or H.265?
When exactly are we going to match it all? If you upload H.265 or H.264 in SDR, youtube re-encodes it to VP9.
If you upload H.265 in HDR youtube re-encodes it to VP9.2..
Youtube's own recommendation is H.264 with bitrates respecting resolution/framerate. Why is there no actual handshake?
There's some rare, and i mean rare youtube uploads from LG or samsung in HDR that utilize AV1 - god knows how exactly did those people encode the videos in order to trick Youtube into using AV1.
I'll get excited when youtube actually creates proper uploading rules. Be that VP9 or AV1 or whatever in god's name. As long as when you encode your stuff in that codec and upload it - it doesn't get re-encoded.
Because the re-encode takes the already trashed color-banding from h.265 and trashes it further. All these codecs getting released mean absolutely nothing for the mass - hence why nobody gives a dime.
//Edit
Just to add some salt to the already huge wound - "data saving" - what?
What data saving? If you encode the video and view it on your own device
the data saving is around 25% versus H.265. But how exactly does it matter
when the only way for people to view whatever it is that you made is through
youtube?
Hypotetically if you upload 4k at 1k bitrate(which is absolute madness), no matter
how you encode it, youtube takes it and re-encodes it to VP9 in a FIXED bitrate - a bitrate
they calculated well enough to make sure it runs smooth across all devices.
If you upload the same 4k video in 1000k bitrate, 1 million kbps, youtube will take that
pure-ass quality and trash it down to the same calculated VP9 bitrate the 1k upload was upscaled to.
Oh and of course - encoding in AV1 and then uploading to youtube results in youtube
re-encoding your precious AV1 into VP9.
H.264 and H.265 are licensed.
AV1 and VP9 are open source.
There's no proper way to encode in those formats without going out of your way for special encoders - the open source ones.
But its easy to encode into the paid ones - which get converted into the open source VP9 in the end of the day.
Maybe I'm just out of my mind and loosing a grip on reality.
This get's me so excited, how do people not get excited about this? Saving so much data! I'm waiting for AV1 so much.
As someone who creates content for Youtube since 2010 I can't say I'm excited.
Why? Because everything we create, no matter how you encode it, gets re-encoded the moment its uploaded to youtube to VP9.
I've been an editor for nearly 14 years now, and the codecs rabbit hole is deeper than the ocean. The more you look into it, the more retarded it gets.
If Youtube is the main platform to dominate it all, and youtube influences editing programs like premiere/avid/vegas/resolve, and all those programs have encoding presets
based on "youtube 1080p" or "youtube 2160p", why do we never see VP9 or AV1 in them? Why is it all H.264 or H.265?
When exactly are we going to match it all? If you upload H.265 or H.264 in SDR, youtube re-encodes it to VP9.
If you upload H.265 in HDR youtube re-encodes it to VP9.2..
Youtube's own recommendation is H.264 with bitrates respecting resolution/framerate. Why is there no actual handshake?
There's some rare, and i mean rare youtube uploads from LG or samsung in HDR that utilize AV1 - god knows how exactly did those people encode the videos in order to trick Youtube into using AV1.
I'll get excited when youtube actually creates proper uploading rules. Be that VP9 or AV1 or whatever in god's name. As long as when you encode your stuff in that codec and upload it - it doesn't get re-encoded.
Because the re-encode takes the already trashed color-banding from h.265 and trashes it further. All these codecs getting released mean absolutely nothing for the mass - hence why nobody gives a dime.
//Edit
Just to add some salt to the already huge wound - "data saving" - what?
What data saving? If you encode the video and view it on your own device
the data saving is around 25% versus H.265. But how exactly does it matter
when the only way for people to view whatever it is that you made is through
youtube?
Hypotetically if you upload 4k at 1k bitrate(which is absolute madness), no matter
how you encode it, youtube takes it and re-encodes it to VP9 in a FIXED bitrate - a bitrate
they calculated well enough to make sure it runs smooth across all devices.
If you upload the same 4k video in 1000k bitrate, 1 million kbps, youtube will take that
pure-ass quality and trash it down to the same calculated VP9 bitrate the 1k upload was upscaled to.
Oh and of course - encoding in AV1 and then uploading to youtube results in youtube
re-encoding your precious AV1 into VP9.
H.264 and H.265 are licensed.
AV1 and VP9 are open source.
There's no proper way to encode in those formats without going out of your way for special encoders - the open source ones.
But its easy to encode into the paid ones - which get converted into the open source VP9 in the end of the day.
Maybe I'm just out of my mind and loosing a grip on reality.
heffeque
Senior Member
Posts: 4203
Joined: 2003-03-03
Senior Member
Posts: 4203
Joined: 2003-03-03
#6012325 Posted on: 04/26/2022 01:31 PM
You have clearly not tried decoding high movement (fast paced), high bitrate, high color depth (10/12-bit), 60 fps, 4K/8K AV1 videos using a CPU.
Most CPUs struggle A LOT.
We're at a point where CPU-only codecs are delivering extremely good performance. What really needs this the most are ARM-based devices, which Intel isn't going to support.
You have clearly not tried decoding high movement (fast paced), high bitrate, high color depth (10/12-bit), 60 fps, 4K/8K AV1 videos using a CPU.
Most CPUs struggle A LOT.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Junior Member
Posts: 4
Joined: 2006-08-28
This get's me so excited, how do people not get excited about this? Saving so much data! I'm waiting for AV1 so much.