81–90 of 212 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm not sure what these two lines mean or if we can compare them, any help? AV2 saves 25% bandwidth at the cost of 5x more decoding complexity.
What does "complexity" mean here? Computation required?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because it's 5 times more complex, you need to get the maximum performance available. Therefore more ASM than ever. Rust does not bring more performance. Just more safety.
The safety can be worth it in certain cases. Like when handling untrusted input. And it's not just Rust: look at WUFFS for example. WUFFS can actually rival handwritten implementations in certain cases.
Forgive the ignorance, I have worked entirely in the abstracted layers of the stack, and mostly web.
When AV1 was first announced, I got the impression the name was chosen partly as a pun/reference/homage to AVI, the classic but outdated format with used to be popular. Then when I saw Dav1d, OK, good way to continue the pun. But now with AV2 and Dav2d, that completely breaks. Are we eventually going to get AV3/Dav3d and AV4/Dav4d, which will read like Ave/Daved and Ava/Davad? Seems a bit awkward. Was the idea from t…
Tangent but I cannot wait for h269 (or h267 for the younger gen)
'AV2 decoding is roughly five times more complex than AV1 decoding. In practice, that means software running on today’s hardware will struggle to decode AV2 in real time without careful, architecture-specific optimization' AV1 software decoding is already very intensive so AV2 decoding benchmarks are the next thing that would be really interesting (or mortifying) to see.
Intel's Arc dGPUs were really compelling for dedicated AV1 encode and decode, especially the small form factor of some cards. You could even fit it as a secondary card in a PC dedicated to recording and encode workflows for OBS. Hope we get a similar option with future lineups that support AV2, especially given how popular video creation and streaming are now.
The point of encoding is to reduce downstream bandwidth for the viewer, and upstream bandwidth for the distribution network.
The content creator only needs to upload it once.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Intel's Arc dGPUs were really compelling for dedicated AV1 encode and decode, especially the small form factor of some cards. You could even fit it as a secondary card in a PC dedicated to recording and encode workflows for OBS. Hope we get a similar option with future lineups that support AV2, especially given how popular video creation and streaming are now.
Is there a compelling reason encoding needs to be done locally? The point of encoding is to reduce downstream bandwidth for the viewer, and upstream bandwidth for the distribution network. The content creator only needs to upload it once.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That isn’t particularly helpful to someone asking a question in good faith. What others are using doesn’t clarify why they are using it. Plus, FFmpeg is itself a decade older than Rust. The OP is asking about starting a new project today.
> What others are using doesn’t clarify why they are using it. It does if you ask them, or at least research the topic at hand.
Reading the MPEG1 specs back in the 90s as a child opened my eyes to how to define complex systems. For a media coding standard, they spent most of their time saying how to interpret encoded bytes, which I realized is genius. Be descriptive about decoding and you don't have to be prescriptive about encoding. Encoding is where you can apply all the creativity, but you need to provide a way to have a shared understanding of the encoded bytes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Too much traffic from HN? ``` Too Many Requests The page you have tried to access is not available because the owner of the file you are trying to access has exceeded our short term bandwidth limits. Please try again shortly. Details: Actioning this file would cause "jbkempf.com//blog/2026/dav2d/" to exceed the per-day file actions limit of 160000 actions, try again later ```
I don't know if I'm underestimating HN's reach but I doubt we did that, probably traffic from a much bigger aggregator/forum
When AV1 was first announced, I got the impression the name was chosen partly as a pun/reference/homage to AVI, the classic but outdated format with used to be popular. Then when I saw Dav1d, OK, good way to continue the pun. But now with AV2 and Dav2d, that completely breaks. Are we eventually going to get AV3/Dav3d and AV4/Dav4d, which will read like Ave/Daved and Ava/Davad? Seems a bit awkward. Was the idea from t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Intel's Arc dGPUs were really compelling for dedicated AV1 encode and decode, especially the small form factor of some cards. You could even fit it as a secondary card in a PC dedicated to recording and encode workflows for OBS. Hope we get a similar option with future lineups that support AV2, especially given how popular video creation and streaming are now.
Is there a compelling reason encoding needs to be done locally? The point of encoding is to reduce downstream bandwidth for the viewer, and upstream bandwidth for the distribution network. The content creator only needs to upload it once.