theora - Nov 2017 - NHW Project - speed comparison with x265

Hello,

I am very slowly working on the NHW Project.I recently made a speed
comparison with x265 and wanted to share it with you.

On my processor Intel Core i5-6400, in average the NHW encoder (totally
unoptimized) is x10 times faster to encode than x265 (png decoding time
removed), in average 30ms vs 300ms for a 512x512 24bit color image, and in
average the NHW decoder (totally unoptimized) is x3 times faster to decode
than x265 (output to .ppm file), in average 10ms vs 30ms.

As a reminder, x265 is ultra optimized, so with good C optimization, SIMD
optimization and multithreading, the NHW codec will be x40 times faster to
encode and x12 times faster to decode than x265 or even more, so this
confirms that the NHW Project could be a good candidate for the mobile
device market.

At mid-compression, quality-wise I find (visual tests) that the NHW codec
and x265 are on par, sometimes more neatness is better, sometimes more
precision is better, and a lot of improvements remain to be done for the
NHW codec.

If there are engineers from mobile device companies on this forum, could
you consider the NHW Project or is it too late it will be AOM AV1 or HEVC
despite their high power consumption?

Monty, would it be possible that the NHW Project has a Xiph.org page to
encourage and boost its development?

Any answer welcome!

Cheers,
Raphael
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/theora/attachments/20171127/4fafbc17/attachment.html>

Hi Raphael,

since quite a while I'm reading your updates on your NHW project with 
great interest.

I have to admit I'm no video codec developer. My interest in video 
codecs is pretty simple. Several years ago I was working on a 
(non-commercial) video streaming project that I wanted to base on an 
open-source video codec. Those I was constantly scouting for open source 
video codec innovations.

I appreciate your enthusiastic work on such a complex project like 
writing a video codec. As you already realized it's similarly 
challenging to attract other people to join or use a new video codec.

What I unfortunately can say for sure is, that it's almost impossible to 
attract mobile/semiconductor industry to embed such a codec into their 
chipsets. Instead you have to find some other (maybe niche) use-case 
where your codec works well and can blossom. As an example, maybe some 
sort of decentralized/peer-to-peer Internet enthusiasts would enojy 
using your codecto develop some sort of open-source alternative to Skype.

To make a long story short: to gain more publicity you really have to 
create a website with visual presentations of your codecs quality. And 
please, please, please present your results in an appealing way. In the 
base case use a javascript-image-slider effect. Example:

https://codyhouse.co/demo/image-comparison-slider/index.html

And of course it would be great if Xiph could host your demo website.

All the best,
Franz

Am 2017-11-27 um 20:33 schrieb Raphael Canut:
> Hello,
> 
> I am very slowly working on the NHW Project.I recently made a speed 
> comparison with x265 and wanted to share it with you.
> 
> On my processor Intel Core i5-6400, in average the NHW encoder (totally 
> unoptimized) is x10 times faster to encode than x265 (png decoding time 
> removed), in average 30ms vs 300ms for a 512x512 24bit color image, and 
> in average the NHW decoder (totally unoptimized) is x3 times faster to 
> decode than x265 (output to .ppm file), in average 10ms vs 30ms.
> 
> As a reminder, x265 is ultra optimized, so with good C optimization, 
> SIMD optimization and multithreading, the NHW codec will be x40 times 
> faster to encode and x12 times faster to decode than x265 or even more, 
> so this confirms that the NHW Project could be a good candidate for the 
> mobile device market.
> 
> At mid-compression, quality-wise I find (visual tests) that the NHW 
> codec and x265 are on par, sometimes more neatness is better, sometimes 
> more precision is better, and a lot of improvements remain to be done 
> for the NHW codec.
> 
> If there are engineers from mobile device companies on this forum, could 
> you consider the NHW Project or is it too late it will be AOM AV1 or 
> HEVC despite their high power consumption?
> 
> Monty, would it be possible that the NHW Project has a Xiph.org page to 
> encourage and boost its development?
> 
> Any answer welcome!
> 
> Cheers,
> Raphael
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> theora mailing list
> theora at xiph.org
> http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/theora
>

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Raphael Canut <nhwcodec at gmail.com>
Date: 2017-11-30 14:22 GMT+01:00
Subject: Re: [theora] NHW Project - speed comparison with x265
To: fboehm <fboehm at aon.at>


Hi Franz,

Many thanks for your answer!!!
> I appreciate your enthusiastic work on such a complex project like
writing a video codec

Yes, for now the NHW codec is more an image codec actually, would need to
add inter frame mecanism (motion estimation, motion compensation) to the
codec to become a real video codec.The NHW Project is more a
proof-of-concept in its currents state to validate for example the wavelet
transform, the multistage residual coding, the compression schemes, and
other processings, that are new and royalty-free.Do you think I can have a
freelance contract with minimum salary to do this, because completing and
finishing the codec will require me full-time work.
> Instead you have to find some other (maybe niche) use-case where your
codec works well and can blossom. As an example, maybe some sort of
decentralized/peer-to-peer Internet enthusiasts > would enojy using your
codecto develop some sort of open-source alternative to Skype.

Would be just great to find a use-case for the NHW codec! If you and/or
other Xiph community members would know such potential use-case,
niche-case, do not hesitate to let me know!
> To make a long story short: to gain more publicity you really have to
create a website with visual presentations of your codecs quality. And
please, please, please present your results in an
> appealing way. In the base case use a javascript-image-slider effect.
Yes the NHW Project lacks a good website with good visuals.But I won't be
able to do this website alone...

As you suggest, maybe Xiph.org wants to host and help with the NHW Project
website? -Would be just great!-

Again thank you very much for your kind help, it is much appreciated.

Kind regards,
Raphael

2017-11-30 11:58 GMT+01:00 fboehm <fboehm at aon.at>:
> Hi Raphael,
>
> since quite a while I'm reading your updates on your NHW project with
> great interest.
>
> I have to admit I'm no video codec developer. My interest in video
codecs
> is pretty simple. Several years ago I was working on a (non-commercial)
> video streaming project that I wanted to base on an open-source video
> codec. Those I was constantly scouting for open source video codec
> innovations.
>
> I appreciate your enthusiastic work on such a complex project like writing
> a video codec. As you already realized it's similarly challenging to
> attract other people to join or use a new video codec.
>
> What I unfortunately can say for sure is, that it's almost impossible
to
> attract mobile/semiconductor industry to embed such a codec into their
> chipsets. Instead you have to find some other (maybe niche) use-case where
> your codec works well and can blossom. As an example, maybe some sort of
> decentralized/peer-to-peer Internet enthusiasts would enojy using your
> codecto develop some sort of open-source alternative to Skype.
>
> To make a long story short: to gain more publicity you really have to
> create a website with visual presentations of your codecs quality. And
> please, please, please present your results in an appealing way. In the
> base case use a javascript-image-slider effect. Example:
>
> https://codyhouse.co/demo/image-comparison-slider/index.html
>
> And of course it would be great if Xiph could host your demo website.
>
> All the best,
> Franz
>
>
> Am 2017-11-27 um 20:33 schrieb Raphael Canut:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am very slowly working on the NHW Project.I recently made a speed
>> comparison with x265 and wanted to share it with you.
>>
>> On my processor Intel Core i5-6400, in average the NHW encoder (totally
>> unoptimized) is x10 times faster to encode than x265 (png decoding time
>> removed), in average 30ms vs 300ms for a 512x512 24bit color image, and
in
>> average the NHW decoder (totally unoptimized) is x3 times faster to
decode
>> than x265 (output to .ppm file), in average 10ms vs 30ms.
>>
>> As a reminder, x265 is ultra optimized, so with good C optimization,
SIMD
>> optimization and multithreading, the NHW codec will be x40 times faster
to
>> encode and x12 times faster to decode than x265 or even more, so this
>> confirms that the NHW Project could be a good candidate for the mobile
>> device market.
>>
>> At mid-compression, quality-wise I find (visual tests) that the NHW
codec
>> and x265 are on par, sometimes more neatness is better, sometimes more
>> precision is better, and a lot of improvements remain to be done for
the
>> NHW codec.
>>
>> If there are engineers from mobile device companies on this forum,
could
>> you consider the NHW Project or is it too late it will be AOM AV1 or
HEVC
>> despite their high power consumption?
>>
>> Monty, would it be possible that the NHW Project has a Xiph.org page to
>> encourage and boost its development?
>>
>> Any answer welcome!
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Raphael
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theora mailing list
>> theora at xiph.org
>> http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/theora
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> theora mailing list
> theora at xiph.org
> http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/theora
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/theora/attachments/20171130/eac6091b/attachment.html>