H.264 Is Magic (2016)
Video engineers and hobbyists reflect on why H.264 became such a durable “sweet spot” of compression efficiency, complexity, and broad hardware support, and note that many of its patents are expiring, likely cementing its long-term role. They compare it with newer codecs like H.265/HEVC, AV1, and VVC/H.266, weighing better compression and HDR support against sharply higher encoding complexity, patchy hardware and browser support, and messy patent licensing—especially for HEVC and VVC. Several comments highlight real-world tradeoffs: film grain preservation, hardware vs software encoding quality, live vs offline use cases, and how major platforms (YouTube, Netflix, Teams, Meta) are gradually shifting toward AV1 despite its computational cost.
H.264’s “sweet spot” and longevity
- Many consider H.264 a great balance of compression efficiency, complexity, and mental comprehensibility compared to newer codecs.
- Extremely mature tooling (e.g., x264 with rich presets and tunings) reinforces its position.
- Widely supported hardware and software, plus impending patent expirations (~2027–2030, with some disagreement), suggest it will remain a baseline codec for a long time.
- Some argue its guaranteed patent-free future could entrench it further, despite slightly worse efficiency than newer codecs.
H.265/HEVC: better compression, messy ecosystem
- H.265 typically yields 20–50% smaller files than H.264 at similar perceived quality, especially at 4K/HDR and low bitrates.
- Complaints: heavy computational cost for encoding, and rough hardware/driver support in some environments.
- Strong criticism of fragmented, opaque patent pools and licensing (multiple pools, some covering content distribution, plus extra licensors).
- Despite this, it’s widespread in cameras, phones, 4K Blu-ray, premium streaming, and much of modern 4K piracy.
- Some report HEVC encoders (including x265 with “tune grain”) still underperform for film grain compared to well-tuned x264.
AV1, VVC, and other new codecs
- AV1 is praised for royalty-free licensing and high efficiency; used increasingly by YouTube, Meta, and some conferencing tools.
- Concerns: very high software encode cost (though faster encoders like SVT-AV1 are cited as competitive with x264/x265 at comparable quality).
- VVC (H.266) is said to be a generational step beyond AV1 in compression, but expected to suffer HEVC-like patent/royalty issues; already deployed in some regions.
- MPEG-5 EVC Baseline is mentioned as “H.264 refined” with similar complexity but better compression, though it has not gained traction.
Encoding practice: speed, quality, and hardware
- Multiple users note GPU hardware encoders trade quality for speed, lacking deep analysis and psychovisual tricks of CPU encoders.
- For archiving and high-quality rips, people often prefer slow software encoding (H.264 or HEVC) with constant-quality settings; for live or low-value content, hardware or faster modes are acceptable.
- AV1 and HEVC are seen as too heavy for some live/low-latency scenarios on typical hardware.
Other technical and side discussions
- Debate over “information entropy” terminology versus “Shannon entropy,” and over whether PNG can be considered “lossy” when preceded by color quantization.
- Several anecdotes describe early MPEG work, failed proprietary “revolutionary” codecs, and the historical shift from “video-on-demand” to “streaming.”
- Some perceive YouTube’s 720p quality as having degraded over time due to more aggressive bitrate constraints, despite better codecs.