ExtraTorrent.cc - The Largest Bittorent SystemLogin   |   Register
Latest Articles
Most searched
Hot torrents
First Cams
View Torrent Info: The.Fate.of.the.Furious.2017.HDTS.H264.AC3.HQ.Hive-CM8
View Torrent Info: The Boss Baby 2017 720p HD-TS x264 AC3-CPG
View Torrent Info: Before I Fall 2017 HDCAM 700MB x264-DiRG
View Torrent Info: The Belko Experiment 2017 HDCAM 700MB x264-DiRG
Hot torrents
XVID DIVX
View Torrent Info: Mythica.The.Iron.Crown.2016.BRRip.XviD.AC3-EVO
View Torrent Info: The.Void.2016.BRRip.XviD.AC3-EVO
View Torrent Info: Joes.War.2017.HDRip.XviD.AC3-EVO
View Torrent Info: The.Levelling.2016.HDRip.XviD.AC3-EVO
Hot torrents
H264 X264
View Torrent Info: The.Void.2016.720p.BluRay.X264-AMIABLE[EtHD]
View Torrent Info: Mythica.The.Iron.Crown.2016.720p.BluRay.x264-PFa[EtHD]
View Torrent Info: Fifty.Shades.Darker.2017.UNRATED.720p.WEB-DL.H264.AC3-EVO[EtHD]
View Torrent Info: Jurassic World (2015) 720p BluRay x264 DTS Soup
Hot torrents
BluRay, 4k UHD
View Torrent Info: The Void 2016 Bluray 1080P x264 DTSHD 5.1 -DDR
View Torrent Info: The Legend of Ben Hall 2016 Bluray 1080p x264 DTSHD5.1 -DDR
View Torrent Info: Hacker.2016.BluRay.1080p.AVC.DTS-HD.MA5.1-DDR
View Torrent Info: Carmen.1984.1080p.Blu-ray.x264.DTSHD.5.1-DDR
Hot torrents
Television
View Torrent Info: Arrow.S05E19.WEB-DL.x264-FUM[ettv]
View Torrent Info: Blindspot.S02E19.WEB-DL.x264-FUM[ettv]
View Torrent Info: The.100.S04E09.WEB-DL.x264-FUM[ettv]
View Torrent Info: Survivor.S34E08.HDTV.x264-CROOKS[ettv]
View Torrent Info: Bhadram (2014) Bluray 1080p x264 DTSHD 5.1 -DDR
View Torrent Info: Ho Mann Jahaan (2016) 1080p Untouched WEBHD AVC AAC [DDR]
View Torrent Info: Karachi Se Lahore (2015) 720p Untouched WEBHD AVC AAC [DDR]
View Torrent Info: Shah (2015) 1080p Untouched WEBHD AVC AAC [DDR]
30s
Chat
To add new messages please Login or Register for FREE
Warning! Stop Government from Tracking Your Torrenting!
Your IP Address is 54.224.143.233.   Location is United States
Your Internet Provider and Government can track your internet activity! Hide your IP and LOCATION with a VPN
ExtraTorrent strongly recommends using Trust.Zone VPN to anonymize your torrenting. It's FREE!
HIDE ME NOW


x264 Or x265 ?


Post a Reply    Subscribe to Topic    
[Prev]  1, 2
Page 2 of 2   [ 30 posts ]
AuthorMessage
No avatar
Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2016 21:52
Author: Trusted Uploader
Guess I'd better stop my HEVC multipass 10 bit encoding; it seems h265 is 'shit'. And, it seems, that 200kbps will produce the same quality as 1000kbps. Yeah, right.

ozi wrote:
x265 is shit its not universally compatible like x264
you can get the same results in x264 by increasing crf levels by just 1 or 2
eg..
if using crf 19.0 increase it to 20.0 or 21.0 with preset slow you will get the same outcome as x265 in compression and faster encoding
if you want even higher compression move your Preset level to slower or very slow but this will slow down encoding

and x264/x265 dont work on bit rates you can have something as low as 200kps to 1000kps both in the same outcome in quality
only difference will be files size quality wont differ if the files size is big
it all depends on what you set crf level to

ozi avatar
Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2016 02:41
Author: SuperAdmin
danielmorgan wrote:
Guess I'd better stop my HEVC multipass 10 bit encoding; it seems h265 is 'shit'. And, it seems, that 200kbps will produce the same quality as 1000kbps. Yeah, right.

ozi wrote:
x265 is shit its not universally compatible like x264
you can get the same results in x264 by increasing crf levels by just 1 or 2
eg..
if using crf 19.0 increase it to 20.0 or 21.0 with preset slow you will get the same outcome as x265 in compression and faster encoding
if you want even higher compression move your Preset level to slower or very slow but this will slow down encoding

and x264/x265 dont work on bit rates you can have something as low as 200kps to 1000kps both in the same outcome in quality
only difference will be files size quality wont differ if the files size is big
it all depends on what you set crf level to

no ones asking you to stop everyones welcome to an opinion

multi passing to wow so thats x3 times of memory cpu use clocking up an even higher power bill to save 2/300mb of data
not sure how thats high efficiency

Yeah, right is the typical response from pre school drop outs that depend on one click apps maybe you should google to have a better understanding of x264 and its purpose you might then understand what i mean by 200kps to 1000kps

here are some apps but be warned if your a one click ripper then you will never figure out how to use them
VDUB no it's not just for xvids it encodes x264 mkv,mp4 as well and has excellent filters all you have to do is Google
MeGUI again if you a one click ripper then you might have seizure trying to figure out its basic use


ill stick to x264 it only cost around $30 for 1tb external hard drives and almost all around the world provide unlimited isp data plans
if you need a pat on the back sure x265 is great
brookeful avatar
Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2016 05:50
Author: Vip MemberTrusted UploaderBitcoin MasterET junkieET loverSun
Ozi I agree and to me x265 is not not my future. An encode that has to render for half a day with the computer fans screaming trying to keep it cool just to save a few hundred MBs shouldn't be anyone's future. Not to mention the incompatibility atm.Presently, my future for an encode would be an innovation to render an equivalent to a x264 with a profile of say subme=11, me=umh, me_range=42, bitrate=10,000, audio akin to DTS with a 1080p res. and duration of 2 1/2 hrs. in 1 hour with file size of 1GB. Btw the filters would be auto intuitive based on the quality of the source detected. Don't kid yourself with x265, time cost money and heat cost money. However, if that is your future more power to you! Yes pun intended.
PalJoey avatar
Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2016 06:40
Author: Blocked
Here's the thing though. After a while I got tired of downloading movies only to find that my television didnt have the technology built into it (2 years old mind you) to play the movies i was downloading... I spent some time converting the films to the proper format and whiole they played and looked as good I saw no noticeable improvement in the quality.

So after dicking around, experimenting with different players, that allowed me to play and watch the films, the improvement in quality was still lacking and what I was after. The answer of course was...

Buying a new Television with all the bells and whistles - though i did not purchase a curved screen I did decide to try the soundbar and subwoofer they threw in. I had also decided to buy a more powerful amplifier and added two Bose Interaudio 4000XL's.

In the end i realized you can encode in any format you like, x265, x264, HEVC, 4K whatever it really wont materialize or be visibly apparent or obvious until you have the TV to view it on and after all thats what I was after...I wanted the movies I was watching to be an excellent experience again.

Now you would be astounded to see how much difference there is, though not widely used or accepted yet, technology is headed that way, and the results blew me away. So keep uploading in that X265 format, the improved resolution works for me.
sam_code4u avatar
Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2016 07:17
Author: Trusted UploaderSite FriendET loverSuperman
I really love encoding in MeGUI with x264. Gives me a good result and it is compatible with all my devices. So, why bother, unless we have more universally compatible devices? It takes a hell of a CPU power and time.

I remember when Xvid/DivX was a thing, all devices were only compatible with those codecs. Later on, x264 took over. It is only a matter of time when x265 will be universally accepted. Maybe in 5 years. lol
ozi avatar
Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2016 07:26
Author: SuperAdmin
PalJoey wrote:
Here's the thing though. After a while I got tired of downloading movies only to find that my television didnt have the technology built into it (2 years old mind you) to play the movies i was downloading... I spent some time converting the films to the proper format and whiole they played and looked as good I saw no noticeable improvement in the quality.

So after dicking around, experimenting with different players, that allowed me to play and watch the films, the improvement in quality was still lacking and what I was after. The answer of course was...

Buying a new Television with all the bells and whistles - though i did not purchase a curved screen I did decide to try the soundbar and subwoofer they threw in. I had also decided to buy a more powerful amplifier and added two Bose Interaudio 4000XL's.

In the end i realized you can encode in any format you like, x265, x264, HEVC, 4K whatever it really wont materialize or be visibly apparent or obvious until you have the TV to view it on and after all thats what I was after...I wanted the movies I was watching to be an excellent experience again.

Now you would be astounded to see how much difference there is, though not widely used or accepted yet, technology is headed that way, and the results blew me away. So keep uploading in that X265 format, the improved resolution works for me.

most x265 rencoders encode from x264 scene releases as a source files so improvement of quality your mentioning isn't possible the only thing happening here is your eyes playing tricks on you because some rencoders use filters like sharpening the picture which by the way decade old tv sets by are auto set to sharpen %30 and up to %50 by default
ever notice on some rips were there eyes are sparkling that much that all you is see white lights instead of actual eyes?

to see the actual quality a container can offer is by using the original source file for encoding
not the one thats been encode to be rencoded again
basically all your getting is a x264 rencode to x265 all your doing is saving megabytes to watch x264 quality in a different container

until people start using actually source files/bluray disc etc.. that are originally encoded in x265 or higher and not x264 a quality of comparison of x265 is pointless
not sure if your aware of this but x264 and x265 are roughly around the same age yet its taken almost a little over a decade for some manufactures to implement x265 support to tv/devices
i dont think this is because of compatibly issue but for the simple reason that manufactures goal for the last 20/30 years has been to release products that are power efficient anything that eats up a lot of memory also burns a lot of power
Admiral_Smith avatar
Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2016 14:58
Author: Trial UploaderTurtle
x265 is great for HD videos. It is awfully slow to encode though. x265 can be used to encode smaller videos too. The SD video size files are usually faster to encode, but it does leave the infamous MPEG artifacts on it. It is not noticeable on HD sized video files. x265 video files are not widely supported on video sites such as youtube. x265 files also take more computer resources to play.
No avatar
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 10:39
Author:
I usually stick to x264 downloads for movies mostly because I share movies with friends and family who don't have an HTPC.

But I download x265 for the TV shows I archive. I use an HTPC running on an i3 so it plays any format.

The thing that bothers me is that the x265 HDTV release groups are re-encoding from the 720p scene release and downmixing the audio from 5.1 to 2.0 to save space. Usually I end up grabbing both the x264 source and the x265 release and I mux the 5.1 audio from the source with the x265 video and make a hybrid using MKVToolnix. I could download the 1080p x265 releases which are in 5.1 but that's not available for all shows.


Regarding long encoding times.
Encoding times can be greatly reduced for x264/x265 if you have multiple PCs around, using RipBot and it's distributed encoding settings.

With distributed encoding it chunks the work up among multiple computers on your network, then assembles the pieces and remuxes them.. with 3 PCs (i3, i5 and an i7) running I can re-encode a 44 minute 720p TV show in about 20 minutes with CRF set to 24.

There is a basic video tutorial on how to setup RipBot distributed encoding on YouTube.
ozi avatar
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 12:51
Author: SuperAdmin
activoice wrote:
I usually stick to x264 downloads for movies mostly because I share movies with friends and family who don't have an HTPC.

But I download x265 for the TV shows I archive. I use an HTPC running on an i3 so it plays any format.

The thing that bothers me is that the x265 HDTV release groups are re-encoding from the 720p scene release and downmixing the audio from 5.1 to 2.0 to save space. Usually I end up grabbing both the x264 source and the x265 release and I mux the 5.1 audio from the source with the x265 video and make a hybrid using MKVToolnix. I could download the 1080p x265 releases which are in 5.1 but that's not available for all shows.


Regarding long encoding times.
Encoding times can be greatly reduced for x264/x265 if you have multiple PCs around, using RipBot and it's distributed encoding settings.

With distributed encoding it chunks the work up among multiple computers on your network, then assembles the pieces and remuxes them.. with 3 PCs (i3, i5 and an i7) running I can re-encode a 44 minute 720p TV show in about 20 minutes with CRF set to 24.

There is a basic video tutorial on how to setup RipBot distributed encoding on YouTube.

yes well there pointless anyways as you said they are rencoding from scene sources which are x264 to begin with
all your getting is and x264 rencoded to x265 there is no quality improvement

it's like rencoding a vhs to x265 its not going to make it better when the source file is lower quality then the rencode output container

for all the troble your going to just to change the audio track back to ac3 your better off just downloading the scene releases and rencoding them yourself
Admiral_Smith avatar
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 23:59
Author: Trial UploaderTurtle
Anybody try encoding in VP9 instead of HEVC in WEBM format. I do not like it because it seems to have this motion blur issue. If there is a scene with fast motion then it tends to blur it to some low resolution area.

There is a reason to use x265. It helps with people that have limited upload bandwidth. The file size is smaller than x264 usually so it is better for uploading through a small bottleneck. It also helps with people with seedboxes because the file size is smaller so it generally costs less money to seed and leech it this way.
ETstuffa2z avatar
Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2016 01:21
Author: Blocked
Admiral_Smith wrote:
Anybody try encoding in VP9 instead of HEVC in WEBM format. I do not like it because it seems to have this motion blur issue. If there is a scene with fast motion then it tends to blur it to some low resolution area.

There is a reason to use x265. It helps with people that have limited upload bandwidth. The file size is smaller than x264 usually so it is better for uploading through a small bottleneck. It also helps with people with seedboxes because the file size is smaller so it generally costs less money to seed and leech it this way.

sometimes video is not watchable (result of vp9 or x265)..so better to use x264 encoding )x
Admiral_Smith avatar
Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2016 01:06
Author: Trial UploaderTurtle


ETstuffa2z wrote:


Admiral_Smith wrote:
Anybody try encoding in VP9 instead of HEVC in WEBM format. I do not like it because it seems to have this motion blur issue. If there is a scene with fast motion then it tends to blur it to some low resolution area.

There is a reason to use x265. It helps with people that have limited upload bandwidth. The file size is smaller than x264 usually so it is better for uploading through a small bottleneck. It also helps with people with seedboxes because the file size is smaller so it generally costs less money to seed and leech it this way.


sometimes video is not watchable (result of vp9 or x265)..so better to use x264 encoding )x


I know why. I just stumbled on it. I was using Peppermint 6 with the most updated ffmpeg that it had. I do not remember how I installed ffmpeg from peppermint 6. Peppermint 7 does not have this problem. THAT version has an issue with HEVC files or maybe it was audio because I ripped WAV files from the MP4s and all the WAV files were silent. The desktop with peppermint 6 is offline so I have to take the drive out and install it into another machine that is online to update it. I just said forget that and I am using wine 1.9x with ffmpeg 3.0 for Windows instead. I just have to use wine to get it to work but the files play just fine now in the patched VLC 2.2.1 with HEVC plugins. The silent files actually play on my windows machine with VLC 2.2.4. It is something with the encoding and it is an annoying almost superficial thing.
I know that x265 will not run on a lot of cellphones either. I will still work on x265 stuff. Oh and VP9 works from google drive shares too. (stupid google not supporting HEVC)
You see I can take a media file that is about 1.5GB and reduce it down to around 300M or 600M->700M with using default settings. The quality degrades BUT if there is a HD media file that is around 1080p or so then the decay of quality really does not bother me because the original file was around 8GB or even up to 12GB and it goes down to about 1GB->4GB in size.
There is also another reason to reduce down the size. Some people still run from fat32 for some reason even on updated hardware so it helps with that 2GB file size limit.
JPSartre avatar
Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2016 21:51
Author: Trusted Uploader


Quote:
Admiral_Smith wrote:
Some people still run from fat32 for some reason even on updated hardware so it helps with that 2GB file size limit.



The limit is 4GB for fat32, 2GB for fat16.
No avatar
Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2016 09:23
Author:
Pseudoseed x265 encodes are great and better than many 400mbs encodes in 100mb near size
Admiral_Smith avatar
Posted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 18:18
Author: Trial UploaderTurtle
Yeah. That is probably why it is variable not a constant stream. Constant streams seem to be more popular. Variable streams put more pressure on the hardware. To me, people just don't like variable streams because it works the hardware and when it glitches it glitches unlike constant streams that just stutter and stop for more data.
[Prev]  1, 2
Page 2 of 2   [ 30 posts ]

Post a Reply    

Forum Search


  search in post message
  search in topic subject
Forum


Home - Browse Torrents - Upload Torrent - Stat - Forum - FAQ - Login
ExtraTorrent.cc is in compliance with copyrights
Can't load ExtraTorrent? Try our official mirrors: etmirror.com - etproxy.com - extratorrentonline.com - extratorrentlive.com
2006-2017 ExtraTorrent.cc5