- Home
- →
- Fakultäten
- →
- Fakultät für Elektrotechnik und Informatik
- →
- View Item
Download statistics - Document (COUNTER):
Laude, T.; Adhisantoso, Y.G.; Voges, J.; Munderloh, M.; Ostermann, J.: A comprehensive video codec comparison. In: APSIPA Transactions on Signal and Information Processing 8 (2019), e30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/ATSIP.2019.23
Repository version
Selected time period:
Sum total of downloads: 1,182
| Abstract: | |
In this paper, we compare the video codecs AV1 (version 1.0.0-2242 from August 2019), HEVC (HM and x265), AVC (x264), the exploration software JEM which is based on HEVC, and the VVC (successor of HEVC) test model VTM (version 4.0 from February 2019) under two fair and balanced configurations: All Intra for the assessment of intra coding and Maximum Coding Efficiency with all codecs being tuned for their best coding efficiency settings. VTM achieves the highest coding efficiency in both configurations, followed by JEM and AV1. The worst coding efficiency is achieved by x264 and x265, even in the placebo preset for highest coding efficiency. AV1 gained a lot in terms of coding efficiency compared to previous versions and now outperforms HM by 24% BD-Rate gains. VTM gains 5% over AV1 in terms of BD-Rates. By reporting separate numbers for JVET and AOM test sequences, it is ensured that no bias in the test sequences exists. When comparing only intra coding tools, it is observed that the complexity increases exponentially for linearly increasing coding efficiency. | |
| License of this version: | CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 Unported |
| Document Type: | Article |
| Publishing status: | publishedVersion |
| Issue Date: | 2019 |
| Appears in Collections: | Fakultät für Elektrotechnik und Informatik |
distribution of downloads over the selected time period:
downloads by country:
| pos. | country | downloads | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| total | perc. | |||
| 1 |  |
Germany | 321 | 27.16% |
| 2 |  |
United States | 233 | 19.71% |
| 3 |  |
France | 160 | 13.54% |
| 4 |  |
United Kingdom | 52 | 4.40% |
| 5 |  |
India | 49 | 4.15% |
| 6 |  |
China | 33 | 2.79% |
| 7 |  |
Netherlands | 22 | 1.86% |
| 8 |  |
Spain | 22 | 1.86% |
| 9 |  |
Taiwan | 21 | 1.78% |
| 10 |  |
No geo information available | 19 | 1.61% |
| other countries | 250 | 21.15% | ||
Further download figures and rankings:
Hinweis
Zur Erhebung der Downloadstatistiken kommen entsprechend dem „COUNTER Code of Practice for e-Resources“ international anerkannte Regeln und Normen zur Anwendung. COUNTER ist eine internationale Non-Profit-Organisation, in der Bibliotheksverbände, Datenbankanbieter und Verlage gemeinsam an Standards zur Erhebung, Speicherung und Verarbeitung von Nutzungsdaten elektronischer Ressourcen arbeiten, welche so Objektivität und Vergleichbarkeit gewährleisten sollen. Es werden hierbei ausschließlich Zugriffe auf die entsprechenden Volltexte ausgewertet, keine Aufrufe der Website an sich.