Performance comparison of VVC, AV1 and EVC

Topiwala, Pankaj; Krishnan, Madhu; Dai, Wei

doi:10.1117/12.2530559

Cited by 17 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Table 1 highlights the key differences between the existing comparisons and ours. Related works can be classified into three categories: 1) RD comparisons [19], [20]; 2) complexity comparisons [21], [22]; and 3) RDC comparisons [23]- [26].…”

Section: Prior Comparisons Between Vvc and Hevcmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The existing RD comparisons are focused on the older VTM5.0 [19], [20] under the RA condition. In [19], only the PSNR metric and nine sequences were used, but the comparison also included encoders other than VTM and HM. The evaluation in [20] dealt with seven UHD and downsampled HD sequences.…”

Section: A Rate-distortion Comparisonsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Over the past two years, a couple of works have already compared the features of VVC and HEVC, but most of them address VTM8.0 or earlier versions [19]- [25], i.e., before the VVC standard was approved, which makes them outdated. This study is also far more extensive than the most recent one [26], especially in terms of different quality metrics, number of test sequences, and comprehensiveness in complexity analysis and classification of coding tools.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparative Rate-Distortion-Complexity Analysis of VVC and HEVC Video Codecs

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Versatile Video Coding (VVC/H.266) is the next-generation international video coding standard and a successor to the widespread High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC/H.265). This paper analyzes the rate-distortion-complexity characteristics of the VVC reference software (VTM10.0) by using HEVC reference software (HM16.22) as an anchor. In this independent study, the rate-distortion performance of VTM was benchmarked against HM with the objective PSNR, SSIM, and VMAF quality metrics and the associated encoder and decoder complexities were profiled at function level using Intel VTune Profiler on Intel Xeon E5-2699 v4 22-core processors. For a fair comparison, all our experiments were conducted under the VTM common test conditions (CTC) that define 10-bit configurations of the VTM codec for the addressed All Intra (AI), Random Access (RA), and Low Delay B (LB) conditions. The VTM CTC test set was also extended with complementary 4K UHD sequences to elaborate RD characteristics with higher resolutions. According to our evaluations, VTM improves the average coding efficiency over HM, depending on quality metric, by 23.0-23.9% under the AI condition, 33.1-36.6% under the RA condition, and 26.7-29.5% under the LB condition. However, the coding gain of VTM comes with 34.0×, 8.8×, and 7.5× encoding complexity over that of HM under the AI, RA, and LB conditions, respectively. The corresponding overhead of the VTM decoder stays steady at 1.8× across all conditions. This study also pinpoints the most complex parts of the VTM codec and discusses practical implementation aspects of prospective real-time VVC encoders and decoders.INDEX TERMS Common test conditions (CTC), HEVC test model (HM), High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC), objective quality analysis, performance profiling, rate-distortion-complexity (RDC), UVG dataset, Versatile Video Coding (VVC), video codec, VVC test model (VTM). I. INTRODUCTIONUR society is surrounded by a myriad of media applications where digital video is of the essence. According to Cisco, the global IP video traffic will increase fourfold from 2017 and account for 82% of all IP traffic by 2022 [1]. Moreover, Comcast estimates that the prevailing COVID-19 crisis has increased Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) and videoconferencing by 210-285% and other video consumption by 20-40% over that of the prepandemic period [2]. This snowballing growth is mainly driven by the omnipresent connectivity and proliferation of advanced multimedia solutions that support emerging bandwidth-greedy formats like 4K/8K Ultra High Definition (UHD) or 360-degree omnidirectional videos.

show abstract

Section: Prior Comparisons Between Vvc and Hevcmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A Rate-distortion Comparisonsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparative Rate-Distortion-Complexity Analysis of VVC and HEVC Video Codecs

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With rate control encoding mode, AV1 under-performs X.265. [17] 2019 The text in italics font is deduced based on the encoding setting used in the paper and is not explicitly mentioned in the paper.…”

Section: On-demandmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Works in [12], [16] and [17] used informal MOS scores rather than MOS scores obtained from ITU-T recommended subjective test procedure.…”

Section: On-demandmentioning

confidence: 99%

User Generated HDR Gaming Video Streaming: Dataset, Codec Comparison and Challenges

Barman¹,

Martini²

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gaming video streaming services have grown tremendously in the past few years, with higher resolutions, higher frame rates and HDR gaming videos getting increasingly adopted among the gaming community. Since gaming content as such is different from non-gaming content, it is imperative to evaluate the performance of the existing encoders to help understand the bandwidth requirements of such services, as well as further improve the compression efficiency of such encoders. Towards this end, we present in this paper GamingHDRVideoSET 1 , a dataset consisting of eighteen 10-bit UHD-HDR gaming videos and encoded video sequences using four different codecs, together with their objective evaluation results. The dataset is available online at [to be added after paper acceptance]. Additionally, the paper discusses the codec compression efficiency of most widely used practical encoders, i.e., x264 (H.264/AVC), x265 (H.265/HEVC) and libvpx (VP9), as well the recently proposed encoder libaom (AV1), on 10-bit, UHD-HDR content gaming content. Our results show that the latest compression standard AV1 results in the best compression efficiency, followed by HEVC, H.264, and VP9.

show abstract