H.264 vs H.265 comparison (4K)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 21 окт 2020
- * How to convert between H.264 and H.265: bit.ly/3EXWQG4
* Free download H.264, H.265 converter: bit.ly/3EVGi1D
▬▬▬Timestamps▬▬▬▬▬
00:00 1Mbps
00:30 3Mbps
00:57 4,5Mbps
01:24 5Mbps
01:52 6Mbps
▬▬▬Presets▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
H.264 - VerySlow (High profile)
H.265 - Medium (Main profile)
- 2-pass encoding
▬▬▬Summary▬▬▬▬▬▬
At lower bitrates H.265 is faster - H.264 is slower + lower quality (pixelated edge, detail loss)
At higher bitrates H.264 is faster - H.265 is slower but better quality
Check em out!
~Instagram // nickmans_01
~SoundCloud // / nick-graauwmans 
Наука
![Eminem - Houdini [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/22tVWwmTie8/mqdefault.jpg)
* How to convert between H.264 and H.265: bit.ly/3EXWQG4
* Free download H.264, H.265 converter: bit.ly/3EVGi1D
fyi, I used Handbrake
This is without doubt THE best non-technical explanation of the difference between the two.
Nice editing.
The amount of work gone into this video deserves more views.
best comparison video I've ever seen, thank you so much.
I'm legit surprised how much quality H264 can push out of 1mpbs. The cat at the start looks fuzzy, but realizing its a 4k frame (3840x2160) that quality is damn impressive - even more so for the H265 video. At 1mbps you can even make out quite a lot of details. It proofs that many people, myself included, render videos at a way too high bitrate. I used to render at 50mbps for x264, I might drop back to 30mbps on that and even lower if I can do H265. It looks amazing and at 6mbps at H265 at 60fps you can't even see the difference with the original I guess.
I am impressed, really impressed.
implementation of the codec also matters, gpu hardware accelerated might not look as good a cpu accelerated
Don't forget that the higher you push the bitrate, the potential is there that fewer people would be able to watch because of subpar internet.
If you look at it from a professional standpoint, the standard today is 16 mbps for 4k. Netflix, Discovery and many others use this standard. I promise you, even if you have a 4k 90" screen and stand less than 2' from it, you will not be able to see the difference between 4k 16mbps and 30mbps in an H.265 codec. I doubt you will even be able to see it if you compare 5 and 16 mbps. Reality is that unlike our ears, our eyes aren't that good. What matters is the quality of your camera, your lens, your ND filters etc. Get that stuff right, and remember that the 180 degree rule of shutter speed is not set in stone.
Why are you suprised about H264? When H265 is better, theres no logic there
You also fail to realize that video, yes VIDEO is a moving image, and its limitation will show when the image is moving not stationary, all bitrates look similiar when image isnt moving!
Great video. A simple solution to a problem I didn't realize I had.
great comparison, i remember trying to look for a comparison like this a few monts ago and i didn't come by your video then. glad i found it today though.
H.264 requires around 2 times more bitrate to have the same quality of H.265.
If you have a H.264 video compressed at 100 megabit, in H.265 it requires only around 50 megabit.
I have Realme 7 pro and I use screen recorder for gameplay but after saving when I check I can see cracks and blurness when I zoom little bit and I record at 1080 and 60 fps with H. 264 Do I have to use H. 265 for Better Quality Video
Great video! I'm gonna start encoding my videos on H.265 from now on.
Thanks a lot for this dude!!
you understood the mission good sir, great video!
Thank you so much for this
I've been concerned about block noise so far, but was this the cause? I'll try exporting with H.265 from now on.
Appreciate your video.
But would have been better for me if there were comparisons for higher bitrates.
Thanks a lot for this sample, since i switch from PC to Notebook, i found now a solution for make 4k renderable in aceptable processing time.
Holy Low-Bitrate Clarity, Batman! That 1Mbps looks freakin amazing!!
To be fair the cat is pretty still and bitrate matters most when there's a lot of movement on the screen
@@mortaccio4241
ruclips.net/video/AekAujM6ZcQ/видео.html
Thank you for your comparison video.
thank you so much for this
Professionally done
CONGARTS ON 100K!!!
Thank you so much!!
its a best comparison!!! thanks
so is it better to upload in h265 ? will it be better if i upload at the same bitrate as h264 ? e.g 80mbps
So i just got the gopro today and it says either hevc or h.264 +hevc which one do i select?
Nice comparison actually, also first
Thank you haha
@@nickgraauwmans how did you split the video like this with the different bit rates?
Thanks this video helped a lot
Welcome!
Thx a lot for this video! Was this rendered and uploaded to RUclips or is this a demo of H.265 vs H.264 Livestreaming via RUclips?
No problem :) Rendered and uploaded.
Yaar ye Londa bohot age jayega👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻❤️❤️ love you infinity bhi🔥🎉🎉🎉 starting a great support from today 🐱😘🐱
Wow it's amazing. I did hear about h265 being highly efficient but I didn't know it was efficient enough to run 4K/HD at 1mbps. I'm actually used to editing MPEG-2 video so it's a weird perspective for me. I also render videos in h265 but I usually do it over 28mbps/50mbps for high refresh rate video. Guess I can start optimizing
Is windows 11 media player come with h265 codec? Because win10 doesn't support it
Whats of better quality: a 35gb h265 or a 80gb h264 blu ray rip?
Thanks!
This is gold!
thank you
The VP9 codec used by youtube from google is an open source codec that competes with h265. It is more efficient than h264
Й
Lll
@Yute Hube ffcbh3h3 🎂
VP9 is not hardware accelerated like h264, so when we speak about efficiency it is good to point how VP9 is killing old devices rendering them unusable for RUclips, like old laptops, netbooks etc. We are producing more garbage and that is totally INEFFICIENT if you ask me.
@@MrDabadabadu there is an extension for chrome/firefox that's called h264ify. That will force youtube to play in h264 instead of vp9.
Song: Purrple Cat - Lost Paradise
bedankt nick ! ik ga dit proberen beetje moe van blurry parts in mijn video's !
Graag gedaan
Great comparison! Have a question for you. If a camera offer H.264 and H.265 recording formats, both with the same Long GOP, 10 bit 422 and same bitrate, which would give a higher quality footage for post processing? Thanks!
Thanks!. It depends on what resolution it can capture. If it's high res I should record with H.265, it takes larger chunks of a video to process so you wont have that 'blocking' effect. H264 takes smaller chunks so its made for HD. I would use h264 for anything not higher than 1080p.
But if anything supports H.265 use that. It is always more efficient
Will be doing 4k 10 bit 422
Go for H.265
Thanks!
Hi all. I'm confused about codecs. I want to upload video I've used my phone to record at 4k60fps with the H.264 codec. Phone video is variable frame rate which means I have to convert it to a constant frame rate. My editor gives me good, better, best options which are H.264, DNxHR, and UT Video respectively. DNxHR and UT Video are insanely huge but uncompressed. I'm wondering if there would be any difference in quality though going from H.264 to H.264? Then when it is time what should I export to? If I understand correctly RUclips is going to use VP9 but does my export codec have any impact on end product on RUclips? How do I balance this out because a 30 minute video with one of the larger codecs is roughly 500gb which with a 50mbps upload(fastest I can get) it will take almost a day.
So short version is, when converting a 4k60fps H.264 video from VFR to CFR does using H.264 cause more loss or do I need a better codec? Whatever codec I used for conversion, what should I use to determine export codec after editing if my intent is 4k60fps uploading to RUclips that will use VT9?
@@Slushkin If your file was 3 times the size, then it's because you chose it to. H.265 offers the same video quality, as H.264, with half the bitrate, and therefore half the file size.
Your export codec matters, yes. If you want high quality, use DNxHR. You don't have to use DNxHR HQ or higher, the lower bitrate codecs will do just fine.
DNxHR is compressed, but not as much as H.264 or H.265.
I would just use H.265, with a bitrate of more than 10Mbit/s or double up for H.264.
It would be more useful to see the same portion of the image side by side, possibly zoomed in to make the differences apparent despite RUclips’s additional compression.
Can u tell us the setting and best gui for encoding 265
Thx so much 🤩🤩
You're welcome :)
Great Comparison Video, can you that on 43+ inches TV at 10-20mbps bitrates??
H265 actually looks quite better than H264.
Nice work done here.
Your kidding me right!? 😮😍
I’m new to recording and streaming content so I’m learning all that I can about this stuff. Does the quality depend on the capture card you have? The software on your PC? Or what cause I’m not so sure
If you are going to record/stream there is a great video capturing software called OBS. Over there you can set the quality settings. There are many tutorials on youtube.
@@nickgraauwmans thank you that is what I use. I capture PS2 games currently but the quality isn’t exactly the nicest. You can see for yourself. I try to run it at highest quality but my Mac can’t seem to handle it
I just watched one of your video for a little bit and what are your settings that you use? I can help if you want.
@@nickgraauwmans Having any type of help would be great so thank you. I do use an AV2HDMI converter and a USB video capture card. My video settings on OBS are 1920x1080 base canvas resolution and 1152x684 Scaled Output resolution
@@april620 No problem :). I saw that you had some black bars around your video. Try setting the base canvas and scaled output to 1920x1080. The ps2 doesnt output a 16:9 widescreen image, so that is also why your game seems stretched in the video. I guess if you want to remove those black bars you must record in a 4:3 ratio, 480p.
That is 640x480 in obs. You have to test if the video quality gets better or worse.
Goede video, Nick. Ik kan het verschil heel goed zien op m’n 4K monitor. Nu weet ik welke codec ik voortaan ga gebruiken.
En trouwens, wat voor camera gebruik je voor deze video?
Perfect compare
Wow I love you man
2 is Good, We can see differences with zoom only.
Nope, In some videos without zoom you can see grain within them, For example, 3.5
I've been using .264 since I began making videos. But I'm trying to get to 7680 by 4320 at 60FPS using MidJourney images I've blown up to 10752 by 6144 so I can experiment with some effects. But my editor program would not let me edit that high without a 'supported Codex'. I've tried 264 and 265 to no avail. I guess I'm stuck at 4k for now. But I do like the look of 265 and may use that in my 4k videos from now on. Thanks for the video buddy!
Just get that bitrate down. That's the error most people make.
Also, why 8k? It has been proven time and time again, that we cannot see it unless you stand less than a feet from a huge 90" screen.
Get DaVinci Resolve Studio. It supports up to 120 fps at a massive 32K resolution, as well as support for multiple GPUs for real time playback of professional 10‑bit formats, and accelerated H.264 and H.265 hardware decoding and encoding. It's only 299,-.
Unfortunately, the free Resolve only supports 4K 60 fps.
Bitrate has nothing to do with anything, unless your software or hardware limits the playback. Even the free DaVinci Resolve supports DNxHR, ProRes and many other formats, with bitrates over 1000Mbit/s. In fact, if you're struggling with playback in Resolve on a modest computer, you can enable cache, which generates either DNxHR or ProRes (depending on your OS) in bitrates from 60Mbit/s to 3-500Mbit/s, for smooth playback. H.264 and H.265 are very compressed formats, and therefore harder to playback in a video editor.
Could it be said that a video in H265 with 10mbps is equivalent to one of H264 with 20mbps?
Depends on the encoding preset of H.265, but yes and it could be even less
I recommend h264 to those who have a low spec pc. If you have a high spec pc then go for h265
And I recommend people who don't know what they are talking about to shut up
@@TheAlmightyCornholioo He's not wrong. CPU encoding for hevc is way more intensive than h264. If you have a weak CPU is more like you have no choice but to encode in h264 because hevc encoding is just too long. You don't have to be a dick about it
AV1 moment
Bro h265 has less gpu usage 🥲
@@ichiwhyyuwu last time I checked H265 was very heavy to run
thanks
how did you upload a split screen video and claim one side is h264 and the other is h265?
With a NLE...
I can't wait for h.266 😁
AV1...
recording video footage in h265 but rendering in h264, what will happen on video quality?
I think the h264 part of this video is exactly the result. Or, it may be the other way around. I'm not sure.
impressive
I just wanna know the music name. Lol
Cant wait for the H.266 encoding aka VVC!
beautiful kitty with glowing green eyes and a chocolate nose
Easily H.265 is better all around. People do not understand when they record say your desktop, or gameplay, your using H.264 which encodes using the AVC1 codec, the same codec all RUclips videos are turned into unless they are on a 1.) popular channel or 2.) more then 1440p in resolution. Simply editing the videos, touching them up, and exporting out as say H.265, still yields low quality results of a AVC1 because H.265 uses the HEVC codec in recording, while H.264 records using the AVC1. You want to start Big, then work your way down, not the other way around. Record in H.265, Import into a project using H.265, Export from a project using H.265. Best possible quality will occur if you stick closest to original recording quality's bitrate, fps, and codec type.
So record in H.265 whenever possible, be it using CPU or GPU hardware to record or encode. Then, if you have to web optimize, use H.264, but I would recommend sticking with the same quality, H.265 all the way through from recording, to editing, to export. This way, when Google/RUclips converts the file, as long as you stick within the right Mbps size for the FPS used in the video as well as resolution, the compression will barely touch your lossless video. You will easily see the difference when you upload a 4K video, and drop its playback resolution to say 1440p or 1080p, or watch quick movement in games, say on grass, or dirty roads, ground, etc. Compared to H.265, no reason to use H.264 anymore unless its only for bandwidth issues or playback issues.
is the 4,5 mbps and sort is bitrate?
Yes
watched this video on my galaxy note 9 at best quality again and came to the conclusion that x265 can handle contrast better. When it comes to very dark or bright colors then x264 gets "pixeled"
which cpu would be a good choice for 1080p 60 streaming when using h.265? i guess a 8 core would be to weak
@Ashish Sharma using the 3700x for 1080p is already on the limit and that's with h.264
@Ashish Sharma you don't even understand what i'm talking about
@Ashish Sharma stfu
@Ashish Sharma Trying to get someone's private information is a petty way to seem smarter on the internet.
@@mhh3 The CPU doesn't matter that much if you use a hardware encoder, since that will use a dedicated chip on your graphics card that's made specifically for encoding live video. What you're talking about is using a software encoder which is basically your CPU, which is not even a recommended way regardless of how powerful it is.
Sir Thank You so much for this video. One quick question , I want to buy Ryzen 6800XT GPU . and it supports H.265. So sir during gameplay if i stream the quality will be top notch right? Please help.
Thanks! Yes if you stream in H.265 the quality will be very good. Only if the cpu is fast enough becausd H.265 takes more processing power
sir i will buy Ryzen 7 5800x for the 6800xt
That cpu will perform great
@@abhiksamanta9714 out of stock, lol
Amf sucks, h264 nvenc > hevc amf
Thanks, now i know about this mean
Which is best for colour or video quality?
They are equal in quality of color. H265 just compresses the stream better. 1Mbit H.265 is the same quality, as 2Mbit H.264. But it depends on the bitrate. The lower bitrate, the bigger difference.
What is name of software you used to get this codec
Handbrake, Staxrip is also good
@@nickgraauwmans I use staxrip also
cool
👍👍👍👍
so - H265 is better than H264 with less size..
i instead of going through size, i have to go for H265 codec - so that in less size i can see more details ?????
replay fast.
Yes... (that was not fast!).
So it appears to me that 265 looks better on RUclips. Correct?
Me and my 3rd world boys watching this in 720p: "Interesting"
The driving part at 5mbps difference its huge
Moving objects require more bitrate.
What is the codec of this comparison video?
In the end its VP9 from google. But I rendered the video in H.265
@@nickgraauwmans Thanks for the info.
I have some doubts. I used to upload orginal video files from my Nikon Camera [.MOV with .264 codec] on one of my RUclips channels. So, even if I don't needed any edits, should I convert it to .265-MP4 for better quality? File Size is not matter for me. I'm feared of losing quality by passing through a editing software, just for changing format.
2) Also while editing needed cases- I've seen a VP9-webm redering option. Instead of 3 stage conversion (.264-MOV to .265-MP4 then VP9 during uploading), will I get better quality if I render directly from .264-MOV to .VP9-webm, then uploading?
My Video Editing Software is KdenLive
👌
Nice comparison but a fairer comparison would be above 30mbps. RUclips actually recommends that you upload 4k videos that are 35-45 mbps (which youtube will then produce a lower streamable version off of). At this bitrate rate, H264 should be a lot closer to H265 in quality. 35-45 mbps are common 4K bitrates in terms of what phone cameras record at for H264. Also for reference, Netflix uses about 16mbps for 4k video. For this codec, anything below 10mbps is not sufficient for 4k.
I think he wants to show that you don't need 35-45 mbps, if you render your video with H.265 codec. With 35-45 mbps you won't see much difference, that's true. But you never need 35-45 mbps, if you render in H.265.
@@Gongodler Yes, i think you're right. This comparison serves to exaggerate the efficiency of H265 vs H264 by setting a low bitrate bar so that anyone can visually tell the difference between the two. But this low bitrate is not typical for H264 4K content.
10mbps can look great on h.265, especially if you use h.265 10bit which barely adds any extra encoding time while getting rid of blocking.
It really depends on what quality you want and what type of content you are watching.
But yes, if your plan is to upload it to RUclips go with a high bitrate. If it is for personal local archiving projects, you can go much lower than 30mbps.
Basically, you have to test it for yourself if you like the quality on different bitrates.
@@Rocky712_ Right, but the point I was trying to make is that H264 needs more than 10mbps to be sufficient at 4K. This comparison video is specifically designed to show how much better H265 is at low bitrates (1-6mbps). It would've been interesting to see how this comparison would play out if done at 10, 20, 30, 40mbps, etc. in order to see at what point H264 will overtake H265 in quality.
@@mkygod From my experience H.265 is simply better in general and the encoding time on modern devices is quick.
If you encode something to H.264 and H.265, you can more or less half the bitrate of the H.264 to achieve the same results with H.265.
There are also plenty of videos that go into detail about higher bitrate videos by using the VMAF score (a score to determine how much visual fidelity is kept after the encoding compared to it´s source footage).
Using H.264 nowadays is basically a no-go these days unless the encoding time is too long for you or huge file sizes aren´t an issue for you.
This means you can either cut your bitrate (and file size) in half or you can keep the same file size while maintaining much better video quality.
VP9 and especially AV1 are even better, but their encoding time is quite long and not feasible, even if you have a strong system for encoding.
wow,even with 1 Mbps it's pure hd
If anything, this shows h264 as a very obsolete format unless you have a slow computer.
Lmao no it's not obsolete at all
Ok so where I can find a h265 codec for Premie pro cs6 ?
It's in their 2022 update
@@ashishkaur1290 You can't update a pirated version
@@darknemessis6880 so why don't u install the new version all together. Should i google that for you too?🤣
@@ashishkaur1290 Because the version I'm using is far more stable than the new garbage versions full of bugs
So they pretty much both look the same on a phone screen... is that the message?
Its the message you watched them on 360p
I tried encoding a 6 minute video to HEVC with a resolution of 720p and bitrate of 4 mbps, but it's much blurrier than what is looks like here. I encoded the video with Intel Graphics (Quicksync Encoding) and set the Encoding preset to "Highest" on Premiere Pro to ensure the best compression quality, but the video quality looks awful. What should I do to improve/solve this?
I have the same problem
the Intel encoder is not enought effency. use CPU only and a the resoult is much better.
@@knoskamatee_ got it
not gonna lie... I clicked for the cat :v
I watch this in VP9
I want to see please. / H.265 vs VP9
AV1 Master Race.
1 MB/s look like flagship smartphone recording.
Sir how can I play h.264 or h.265 file in laptop
A videoplayer like mpv or vlc will play it.
So what's better than H.265?
H.266. Designed for even larger data transmission. Supports even 16K video.
@@nickgraauwmans I don't see the option on Premiere Pro tho
@@faisalambiya6459 yes it is not fully released yet
I not see huge divrence in qualitie, I do lnow to store a video in H.265 takes a lot more itme to do , compare to H.264 go much quicker
I can't differentiate it 😂😂
I use for 1080 H264 Vbitrate 4000 to max 10000m
h265 is high quality, but compatibility isnt diverse
I guess it matters if you plan on watching your videos from 1 inch away.
Great vid. Just your 1 Mbps vid look like my 50 Mbps vid ~.~.
No!
U mean to say
H.265 with higher bitrate is good im i right 🥰🥰
No!
The bitrates used are way too low.
Was that gta at 1:24?
yes
@@christophercastro2462 game still looks fire in 2021
Hello bro I want talk to you. Please reply
Sorry for the late reply, what do you want to talk about?
@@nickgraauwmans Bro I want to upload videos on your channel
That's nice and all, but for whatever reasons H.264 encodes about 6 (CPU) to 18 (GPU) times faster for me at a given quality setting. 😓
But does it look 6 to 18 times better at a given quality setting? Because I can always just crank up the quality of H.264. Basically, I target a certain visual quality fidelity and accuracy and go from there. How I get there as efficiently as possible when encoding is what's important.
Maybe this is just for cameras that have to encode on the fly and don't store raw data or something.
Давайте сравним с XviD