I've just noticed that Doom9 has published his annual codec comparison:
http://www.doom9.org/codecs-final-105-1.htm#intro
The new winner according to Doom9 is x264 (Ateme/Nero AVC encoder was the previous one, and his now second). Additional but interesting info: in the next weeks a new branch of XviD will become public: XviD AVC.
The battle is just beginning!
Full Version: Doom9's codec comparison
The results will be always different since we won't encode the same videos at the same low resolution and with same setings. 
And of course visual perception of each person.
For exaple Ateme has 2 ref while x264 4 ref. All setings for codecs were provided by their devs. But nobody knows what setings going to use for other codecs
It's hard to trade on quality/speed in this case.
Least but not last, the test was designed for balanced quality cause of speed was another factor also.
And of course visual perception of each person.
For exaple Ateme has 2 ref while x264 4 ref. All setings for codecs were provided by their devs. But nobody knows what setings going to use for other codecs
It's hard to trade on quality/speed in this case.
Least but not last, the test was designed for balanced quality cause of speed was another factor also.
kinda interesting that x264 won (thats my new toy for a few weeks now allready, but i still dont know what 95% of switches really do...), and a really nice surprise with xvid avc.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.