Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The AV2 Video Standard Has Released (Final v1.0 Specification)

av2.aomedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 190 posts

Re: The AV2 Video Standard Has Released (Final v1.0 Specification)

#101

Post by circuit10 »

Gigachad wrote: post #88
xbmcuser wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way things are going, we can pretty much forget about AV2 hardware encoders in PCs anytime soon. All the newest, best chip capacity is being completely hogged by Apple and AI companies. Unless chipmakers port the AV2 design to older, cheaper nodes, it’s just not happening for average users. We’ll probably see some Chinese TV chip makers throw in an AV2 decoder just to check a box, but as an actual encoder? I woul…

PCs don’t need hardware encoders. There are no realtime jobs on these. You can let it encode in however long it takes. You need hardware encoders for things like cameras because they need to encode in real time since the buffer would quickly overflow otherwise.

Use cases for hardware encoders in PCs:

- Video calls

- Screen/webcam recording

- Live streaming

- Real-time transcoding for media servers (don’t know much about this but I’ve heard it’s a thing)

- Game streaming

- Video editing (making exporting less frustrating)

Re: The AV2 Video Standard Has Released (Final v1.0 Specification)

#102

Post by BoingBoomTschak »

Now the real question: will The Industry™ again need for nerds and digital privateers to actually write and graft all the psy coding tools that makes their encoders usable (and I mean the word, using x264 as benchmark) for the quality-conscious and not just CPU-efficient VoD blurred to death with marketing yelling "PSNR! PSNR! PSNR!" at the top of their lungs? Will FGS be more usable?

Take a look at https://gitlab.com/AOMediaCodec/SVT-AV1/-/work_items/2269 for details (PS: SVT-AV1 claims to be suitable for AVIF yet doesn't support YUV444, lel)

Re: The AV2 Video Standard Has Released (Final v1.0 Specification)

#103

Post by Andrex »

dannyw wrote: post #87
ksec wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you said this for Audio Codec I would have agreed. I do not know a single Smartphone Video Conferencing software that uses CPU encoding rather than hardware encoding. Neither WhatsApp or FaceTime, perhaps the largest of the two real time Video Call uses AV1.

Yeah, no production or large scale VC system is running software AV1 encoders on smartphones. You will drain a full phone battery in 1-2 hours of calls. It just doesn’t make sense and will result in extraordinary power/battery drainage at best, or output that’s worse than hardware encoding. The only way you could get AV1 to software encode in realtime AND low latency on a mid-range Android chip is by disabling or ski…

So, status remains quo, the commons remain tragic, and glory to H.264 forever?

Re: The AV2 Video Standard Has Released (Final v1.0 Specification)

#104

Post by tecleandor »

dannyw wrote: post #87
ksec wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you said this for Audio Codec I would have agreed. I do not know a single Smartphone Video Conferencing software that uses CPU encoding rather than hardware encoding. Neither WhatsApp or FaceTime, perhaps the largest of the two real time Video Call uses AV1.

Yeah, no production or large scale VC system is running software AV1 encoders on smartphones. You will drain a full phone battery in 1-2 hours of calls. It just doesn’t make sense and will result in extraordinary power/battery drainage at best, or output that’s worse than hardware encoding. The only way you could get AV1 to software encode in realtime AND low latency on a mid-range Android chip is by disabling or ski…

> Yeah, no production or large scale VC system is running software AV1 encoders on smartphones. You will drain a full phone battery in 1-2 hours of calls.

Yeah but, half jokingly, Zoom does that (draining the battery in an hour) already :P

Re: The AV2 Video Standard Has Released (Final v1.0 Specification)

#105

Post by kalleboo »

jjcm wrote: post #2

A few things - this is one step in a long, LONG path. AV2 is currently unusable in its current state (the encoder typically runs at around 1fps on good hardware), and likely will remain so til ~2028 when the first av2 hardware accelerated chips start dropping. Even then, I wouldn't expect AV2 streams to be common til 2030. IMO, if it were just the efficiency gains on the table (which are substantial - ~20-30% over AV…

> The biggest thing it does add though is multi-stream support

I would have thought this would be a part of the container format rather than the video codec?

Re: The AV2 Video Standard Has Released (Final v1.0 Specification)

#106

Post by throw0101a »

thinkingQueen wrote: post #45

AV1 is being actively claim-charted by a lot of companies right now, and lawsuits are almost certainly coming. The same process is already starting for AV2, but most players are waiting for the AV1 cases to mature first. People keep calling the AV-family codecs “royalty free,” but in practice they increasingly look like a legal and financial gamble.

> People keep calling the AV-family codecs “royalty free,” but in practice they increasingly look like a legal and financial gamble.

And the alternative is… ?

For H.265 there are two HEVC licensing pools you have to sign with plus at least two non-pool companies:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Efficiency_Video_Coding#P...

Going with a non-AVx codec is no less complicated and fraught with lawsuit risk AFAICT.

Re: The AV2 Video Standard Has Released (Final v1.0 Specification)

#107

Post by erwan577 »

ChadNauseam wrote: post #53
Dwedit wrote: post #13

What I'm interested in is seeing how this will improve the AVIF image format. AVIF stomps the competition for low-bitrate still images (where chroma subsampling is used). For lossless images, not so much. Lossless JPEG XL and lossless WEBP make lossless AVIF look like a joke.

AVIF is for sure my favorite image format right now. No other format has the quadfecta of lossless, HDR, transparency, browser support. Plus as you said, for very compressed images it looks amazing. It blows my mind how small AVIF files can be. Also, unlike HEIC and Ultra HDR JPEG, it actually supports HDR natively as part of the file format rather than doing the hacky sidecar gain map trick. I know it doesn't matter…

Do you think advanced users should consider AVIF/AVIF2 along JPEGXL for long term pictures archival ?

Which kind of encode settings do you suggest for conversion from high resolution RAWs or JPEGs ?

Re: The AV2 Video Standard Has Released (Final v1.0 Specification)

#108

Post by [deleted] »

thinkingQueen wrote: post #45

AV1 is being actively claim-charted by a lot of companies right now, and lawsuits are almost certainly coming. The same process is already starting for AV2, but most players are waiting for the AV1 cases to mature first. People keep calling the AV-family codecs “royalty free,” but in practice they increasingly look like a legal and financial gamble.

[deleted]

Re: The AV2 Video Standard Has Released (Final v1.0 Specification)

#109

Post by sylware »

circuit10 wrote: post #101
Gigachad wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PCs don’t need hardware encoders. There are no realtime jobs on these. You can let it encode in however long it takes. You need hardware encoders for things like cameras because they need to encode in real time since the buffer would quickly overflow otherwise.

Use cases for hardware encoders in PCs: - Video calls - Screen/webcam recording - Live streaming - Real-time transcoding for media servers (don’t know much about this but I’ve heard it’s a thing) - Game streaming - Video editing (making exporting less frustrating)

Everything here is really niche, except video calls (and even that...).

In other words, unless on smart phones, don't expect broadly distributed AV2 encoding hardware.

If it does happen on PC, it will be most likely some courtesy of the hardware chip designers.

Re: The AV2 Video Standard Has Released (Final v1.0 Specification)

#110

Post by nubinetwork »

rovr138 wrote: post #93
nubinetwork wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what about old devices? I'm sure someone out there is still using an s5 as a daily driver... Future proofing is great and all, but 240p on modern devices looks like trash, even worse than tube tv.

They can keep using whatever they're currently using. This doesn't take away anything. It's a new standard. Based on your argument, one should add new safety standards to cars like seat belts, because old cars might not have them.

To be fair, some municipalities do actually require old cars to be fitted with seatbelts... air bags, not so much, because apparently changing a steering column is too hard?
Post reply on HN