[Spice-devel] Streaming video performance concepts

[Alon Levy]

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 10:50:57AM +0300, Yaniv Kaul wrote:
> We could throw many more into the thread.
> When comparing video encodings, we must take into account:
> - speed of encoding (many of the encoders are not fast enough for
> real time, they may decode fast, but we need fast encoding too)
> - quality (and how to measure it - see
> http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/archives/472 )
> - features, flexibility, license, active development community, ...
> 
> This is really not an easy task and there's probably not a
> one-fit-all solution to it. Here's an example for some comparison -
> http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/archives/102
> 
> Also, just a thought - say we do Flash pass-through (from guest to
> client), have we solved perhaps solved 90% of the problem in
> real-world usage?

How would you propose to do this? write flash plugins for major (ie, ff, chrome)
browsers? (well, chrome can take ff plugins I think, so down to two) and fake
a proxy for the real plugin on the client?

> Y.
> 
> On 06/23/2011 09:13 AM, Attila Sukosd wrote:
> >How about WebM?
> >http://www.webmproject.org/
> >
> >Sounds like it could be useful :)
> >
> >Best Regards,
> >Attila Sukosd
> >
> >-----------------------------------------
> >DTU Computing Center - www.cc.dtu.dk
> >attila at cc.dtu.dk, gbaras at student.dtu.dk, s070600 at student.dtu.dk
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 1:58 AM, John A. Sullivan III
> ><jsullivan at opensourcedevel.com>  wrote:
> >>On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 23:49 +0200, Alon Levy wrote:
> >>>On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 03:44:40PM -0400, John A. Sullivan III wrote:
> >>>>On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 17:01 +0200, Alon Levy wrote:
> >>>>>On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 09:56:28AM -0400, John A. Sullivan III wrote:
> >>>>>>On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 11:27 +0200, Alon Levy wrote:
> >>>>>>><snip>>  Thank you very much for the explanation.  It's pretty much what I
> >>>>>>>>expected - that the codec is different, trading CPU efficiency for
> >>>>>>>>bandwidth inefficiency and I certainly understand the reasons why.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>Is there any thought or plan to make the codec configurable for those
> >>>>>>>>who are willing to sacrifice CPU for bandwidth, e.g., VP8, Theora, or
> >>>>>>>>H.264?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>I haven't done any testing on this but I think the cpu requirements are large.
> >>>>>>>maybe with hardware doing the encoding this would work well enough. Technically
> >>>>>>>just dropping in a different codec and extending the protocol doesn't sound like
> >>>>>>>a lot of work. Patches welcome?
> >>>>>><snip>
> >>>>>>I wish I had the skill set to help in that way! Thanks - John
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>Would you be able to provide some benchmarks (choose some pc you have) for:
> >>>>>  encoding speed of
> >>>>>   VP8, Theora, H.264
> >>>>>  for various bitdepths and resolutions (you choose, maybe just one - take the resolutions
> >>>>>  of a normal youtube window and a fullscreen of your choice).
> >>>>>?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Alon
> >>>>>
> >>>>I would be delighted to do so if it will help.  I don't have a clue how
> >>>>to.  If you have a link or reference you can point me to, that would be
> >>>>appreciated. Otherwise, it will be off to the world of Internet
> >>>>research.  Thanks - John
> >>>It's been pointed to me off list that my suggestion was very inaccurate, and that perhaps
> >>>we have other considerations, like prefering an open (source, no patents) codec like
> >>>Theora even if it is worse then H.264 / VP8. Yaniv gave a link to an already old but
> >>>interesting comparison: http://keyj.emphy.de/video-encoder-comparison/
> >>>
> >>I believe H.264 is heavily patent encumbered even though free but I also
> >>thought that VP8 was now not patent encumbered and as readily usable as
> >>theora. It would seem to be the ideal candidate if using it as a real
> >>time codec is feasible.  Again, I'm way out of my depth and merely
> >>spewing a couple of hours of Internet research.  Thanks - John
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Spice-devel mailing list
> >>Spice-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> >>http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
> >>
> >_______________________________________________
> >Spice-devel mailing list
> >Spice-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> >http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Spice-devel mailing list
> Spice-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel