comparison DOCS/xml/en/codecs.xml @ 15915:b3924612667a

Update of the x264 encoding guide: - Reorganized things, options are now divided into "speed vs quality" and "other" (more or less). subq is now where it belongs. - subq=6 is documented - explanation of what 2-pass really does, and why you'd better use it - mention 3-pass (and the fact that it usually doesn't help) - documented qcomp - documented keyint (not like it needed any more explanation, though) - deblocking parameter tweaking no longer categorized as options that "affect speed and quality ;) - updated example cpu requirements for decoding, in codecs.xml (720x480 @ 1500kbps 50%->35%, for my CPU)

15914:4a643fe42324

  bitrate.
  Actual results will depend on both the source material and the
  encoder.
  The gains from using H.264 do not come for free: Decoding H.264
  streams seems to have steep CPU and memory requirements.
  For instance, on a 1733 MHz Athlon, a 1500kbps H.264 video uses
  around 50% CPU to decode.
  By comparison, decoding a 1500kbps MPEG-4 ASP stream requires
  around 10% CPU.
  This means that decoding high-definition streams is almost out of
  the question for most users.
  It also means that even a decent DVD rip may sometimes stutter on
  processors slower than 2.0 GHz or so.
</para>

15915:b3924612667a

  bitrate.
  Actual results will depend on both the source material and the
  encoder.
  The gains from using H.264 do not come for free: Decoding H.264
  streams seems to have steep CPU and memory requirements.
  For instance, on a 1733 MHz Athlon, a DVD-resolution 1500kbps H.264
  video requires around 35% CPU to decode.
  By comparison, decoding a DVD-resolution 1500kbps MPEG-4 ASP stream
  requires around 10% CPU.
  This means that decoding high-definition streams is almost out of
  the question for most users.
  It also means that even a decent DVD rip may sometimes stutter on
  processors slower than 2.0 GHz or so.
</para>