AV1 Software vs Intel Hardware Acceleration: A Comprehensive Comparison

Table of Contents:

1. Introduction
2. What is Handbrake?
3. Comparison between Intel AV1 and x265
4. Bitrate Comparison: 390 kilobits per Second
5. Bitrate Comparison: 530 kilobits per second
6. Bitrate Comparison: 900 kilobits per second
7. Comparison with SVT AV1 and Intel IV1
8. Comparison between SVT AV1 and x264
9. Comparison between SVT AV1 and x265
10. Conclusion

Introduction

In my search for solid data comparing everyone to x264 and x265, as well as hardware acceleration, I quickly realized that there wasn't much information available. So, instead, I decided to conduct my own comparison using Handbrake and collected all the necessary data in an Excel spreadsheet. Handbrake is a popular video transcoding and re-encoding application that offers a wide range of options. For this comparison, I focused on the encoder preset and constant quality slider. These settings have the most impact on file size and quality. The encoder preset determines the level of compression, with a higher preset resulting in better compression but longer encoding times.

What is Handbrake?

Handbrake is a powerful application used for transcoding and re-encoding videos. While it offers numerous options, we only need to focus on two functions: the encoder preset and constant quality slider. The encoder preset directly affects the level of compression Handbrake can achieve, with higher presets offering better compression but longer encoding times. On the other hand, the constant quality slider is the most important option that significantly impacts the final file size and video quality.

Comparison between Intel AV1 and x265

To compare the performance of Intel AV1 and x265, I created a 20-second test clip and encoded it using Handbrake. The first comparison focused on files with a matching bitrate of roughly 390 kilobits per second. Under these matching bitrates, the Baseline test clip was included to assess the level of detail loss. When comparing the results, it was evident that Intel AV1 outperformed x265 in terms of both image quality and artifacting. The Intel AV1 file showed minimal blockiness artifacts and flushes, making it the clear winner in this comparison.

Bitrate Comparison: 530 kilobits per second

Moving on to a higher bitrate comparison, around 530 kilobits per second, the Intel AV1 and x264 files were assessed. While there was a slight difference in the quality of stairs and the amount of data Present, Intel AV1 once again emerged as the winner. The x264 file exhibited strange artifacting and an overall unpleasant appearance, further solidifying Intel AV1's superiority.

Bitrate Comparison: 900 kilobits per second

In this comparison, the focus was on files with a bitrate of approximately 900 kilobits per second. The Intel AV1 file performed exceptionally well, showing a higher level of detail and slightly higher kilobits. Additionally, the comparison included SVT AV1 encoded in CPU (without hardware acceleration) and Resultingl V1 encoded using Intel Hardware Acceleration in Resolve, omitting Handbrake from the process. When comparing the SVT AV1 files, the observed blockiness and freezing snow were significantly reduced compared to Intel AV1, making SVT AV1 the preferred option.

Comparison with SVT AV1 and Intel IV1

Continuing with the comparison between SVT AV1 and Intel IV1, it was expected that both files would be almost identical since they were generated from the same test clip, with the only difference being the encoding process. While there was a slight shift when comparing the results to Handbrake, it was not significant. However, further comparisons revealed that SVT AV1 consistently outperformed Intel IV1 in terms of artifacting, blockiness, and overall cleanliness.

Comparison between SVT AV1 and x264

Shifting the focus to a comparison between SVT AV1 and x264, it was evident that SVT AV1 produced cleaner and more detailed results. The x264 file exhibited grain, noise, and an unpleasing appearance, while SVT AV1 presented a cleaner output with sufficient details, albeit slightly softer. The winner in this comparison was undoubtedly SVT AV1.

Comparison between SVT AV1 and x265

Expanding the scope to a comparison between SVT AV1 and x265, it was observed that SVT AV1 continued to deliver cleaner and more consistent results. While there was a slight loss of details compared to x265, SVT AV1 compensated for it with its cleaner overall appearance. The blockiness and strange artifacts present in x265 made SVT AV1 the clear winner in this comparison.

Conclusion

After conducting various comparisons between Intel AV1, x264, x265, and SVT AV1, it is evident that SVT AV1 consistently outperforms the other options in terms of both image quality and artifacting. While Intel AV1 showed promising results, its encoding times and file sizes were not practical for everyday use. On the other HAND, SVT AV1 delivered acceptable results with a reasonable compromise between quality and encoding time. Therefore, it is recommended to use SVT AV1 with quality setting 30 and preset 3 for optimal results in video transcoding and re-encoding processes.

Highlights

• Handbrake is a powerful video transcoding and re-encoding application.
• SVT AV1 consistently outperforms Intel AV1, x264, and x265 in terms of image quality and artifacting.
• SVT AV1 with quality setting 30 and preset 3 offers a good balance between quality and encoding time.
• Higher encoder presets in Handbrake result in better compression but longer encoding times.
• SVT AV1 is the clear winner when it comes to maintaining Clarity and reducing artifacts.

FAQ

Q: Which video encoding option is recommended for optimal quality? A: SVT AV1 with quality setting 30 and preset 3 delivers the best balance between quality and encoding time.

Q: Is Handbrake suitable for high-quality video encoding? A: Yes, Handbrake offers numerous options for high-quality video encoding, with the encoder preset and constant quality slider being the most important.

Q: Can SVT AV1 deliver clean and detailed results? A: Yes, SVT AV1 consistently produces cleaner and more detailed outputs compared to other encoding options like x264 and x265.

Q: Are there any significant differences between Intel AV1 and x265? A: Yes, Intel AV1 generally outperforms x265 in terms of image quality and artifacting, making it a preferred option.

Q: What factors should be considered when choosing a video encoding option? A: Factors like encoding time, file size, image quality, and artifacting should be weighed when choosing a video encoding option.