Comments on: MP4/ HD video codec performance review: CoreAVC vs FFmpeg which is better ?

By: mr p

mr p — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 18:47:39 +0000

dude, stop winning. ffmpeg is slow and consumes a lot of cpu power out of the box compared to coreavc. period. want to do something about it, please be my guest. reality is that and you can’t dispute it because anyone can verify it without any science behind it.

By: Chris

Chris — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 11:05:27 +0000

CoreAVC has been improved even further with CUDA support for Nvdia cards allowing accelerated video decoding

By: mark

mark — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 20:55:28 +0000

well you learn somthing new every day

By: JG

JG — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 04:01:59 +0000

I didn’t even know of CoreAVC until a few days ago when I downloaded a movie in high bitrate 1080P format and found my MediaServer unable to play it. After messing with FF MPEG for a while cursing the halting, stuttering awful picture I found CoreAVC. The slower of the two machines I use is a 3GHZ PentiumD with 1 GB Ram and the faster is a faster dual core Athlon with 2 GB Ram. Both yielded the same playback results with FF MPEG. Once I switch to CoreAVC the playback could not have been any better. SMooth and very well rendered.

For those using CCCP and wanting to disable the standard codec just go into the setting and unclick the H264 checkbox. This will force the system to use the CoreAVC codec. Other other parts of the install will work fine including subtitle rendering.

Now if you’ll excuse me I have some sweet 1080P video to watch

By: Wessel

Wessel — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 18:57:16 +0000

and what coreavc code did you use:P

By: Wessel

Wessel — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 18:55:02 +0000

what ffmpeg code did you use?

By: Absolute-HDTV

Absolute-HDTV — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 08:18:26 +0000

I’m Vote for CoreAVC

By: The Dude

The Dude — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 02:38:46 +0000

Sweet … directvosub worked perfect …. couldn’t find a good solution until yours – thanks again!

By: seiryuu

seiryuu — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 18:35:23 +0000

Ok, thanks.

By: Brad

Brad — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 10:29:01 +0000

seiryuu: Try downloading DirectVobSub and it’ll read the imbedded subtitles in the mkv

By: seiryuu

seiryuu — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 05:09:48 +0000

I’m a newbie at this; I can’t understand half of what you guys are saying. So I’m pretty sure you guys are going to think that my question is really dumb, but anyway…
I’m having problems with subtitles using coreavc on my mkv and blue-ray/hdtv ripped files.

I just installed the coreavc and the haali thing that came with it and everything plays smoothly except for the subtitles that don’t show. I’m used to use CCCP, but I changed to coreavc because my computer is too slow to play blue-ray/hdtv ripped files. Can anyone give some light here? Thank in advance.

By: Abe

Abe — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 01:58:40 +0000

Are you kidding me, Meow? You have no clue what you’re talking about.

CoreAVC blows ffmpeg out of the water with decoding speed in regard to H.264, which is what most scene Blu-Ray and HD rips are. You *will not* be able to decode a 1080p, 9.5mbps bitrate H.264 video on the fly with ffmpeg without one of the top CPUs on the market – ffmpeg uses a single-threaded, poorly implemented decoding algorithm while CoreAVC uses a very efficient decoding algorithm and multi-threaded, multi-processor support. It’s hard to even compare them.

As much as I would love to be able to do everything in Linux, when it comes time to watch my HD rips I have to switch back to Windows. I know there *is* a workaround to get CoreAVC working with Mplayer (using wine and custom patches), but it is a real bitch and pretty buggy. If you’re interested in trying it, it is here: http://code.google.com/p/coreavc-for-linux/

And really, with the crappy graphics card driver support for Linux (I blame the hardware manufacturers), I don’t see myself getting rid of Windows anytime in the future anyway. I know it has gotten better, but seriously… compare benchmarks with 3d rendering sometime. Ugh!

By: Willem Koopman

Willem Koopman — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 10:55:24 +0000

The difference between FFMPEG and coreAVC is due to colour settings. When you compare two players its really important to try and weed out the differences that are due to differences in contrast and brightness.

There are no obvious compression artefacts in either frame, the only difference between them is contrast, If you boost the contrast on FFMPEG, you’ll endup with identical frames.

If you were to use accurate colour profiles for the players you’d struggle to notice the difference.

The thing that CoreAVC does have going for it is multithreading. however unless youre in an MCR

By: MP4 Watch Man

MP4 Watch Man — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 20:16:31 +0000

I would agree with Mayur too, although there are a few good options out there you can play with.

By: Cesar

Cesar — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:53:17 +0000

I’m a big fan of ffmpeg/x264, but I have to agree with Mayur, CoreAVC is a great and fast decoder.

Meow probably has some problems with language and his internal “decoder”.

By: Mayur Rustagi

Mayur Rustagi — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 17:31:28 +0000

btw x264 is for encoding whereas I have compared decoding, so perhaps you misread my blog completely.

By: Mayur Rustagi

Mayur Rustagi — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 17:28:33 +0000

Well i recieved similar kicking and screaming at the forums(offering me the missing parameters perhaps ), I believe you have missed my point completely, I have no doubt that I could have tweaked more performance out of both filters but my agenda in this blog was to compare the standard performance delivered by standard software, used by most people worldwide without any advanced tweaking.
Disclaimer: I have not recieved any payment of any sort from any firm(i’d wish)

By: Meow

Meow — Sat, 21 Jun 2008 18:52:48 +0000

You didn’t even use the same source-frames for your so-called comparisons!
Probably afraid to show us the commands (especially the missing parameters and settings) you used for the ffmpeg testing.

What a scam! Most likely set up by someone paid for by CoreAVC. In our tests it comes out as much worse than x264, making ffmpeg the winner by far. You didn’t even note that ffmpeg isn’t behind the x264 parts of it. Freaking fool.

By: vlc and media

vlc and media — Fri, 30 May 2008 17:15:04 +0000

[...] new features such as extended VRML support for 3D rendering, object-oriented composite files inchttp://techdigger.wordpress.com/2008/05/21/264-mp4-hd-codec-review-coreavc-ffmpeg/Recent Original Stories New Mobile ComputingYesterday, Trolltech released the final version of Qt [...]

By: free codecs

free codecs — Fri, 30 May 2008 15:29:17 +0000

[...] new features such as extended VRML support for 3D rendering, object-oriented composite files inchttp://techdigger.wordpress.com/2008/05/21/264-mp4-hd-codec-review-coreavc-ffmpeg/Recent Original Stories New Mobile ComputingDistroWatch reviews Fedora 7 , and concludes: “While [...]