Hacker News Reader

matt2000

In case anyone was wondering, like I was how VP9 quality stacks up, here's a comparison: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ctjm1kxw-BM (although it's a bit weird since everything is re-encoded for youtube, so take with a grain of salt).

To my eyes, VP9 looks roughly on par with h264, but not as good as h265.

View on HN

That would be a pretty big grain, Comparisons like that are basically useless. Your YouTube is likely to be using H.264. H.265 and H.264 will be sharing much of their encoding technologies, so they gain fewer encoding artefacts and loose less quality by taking a H.264 and re-encoding it as a H.265 than you would by taking a VP9 and re-encoding is as a H.264.

The only real way is for someone to shoot raw video, and compress them both separately.

See the description for a link to the source and lossless downloads.

Is VP9 the first and h.265 the one under it? Because to me the first one looks the most clear.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com