Implementing HEVC-SMW 2016

8/15/2019 Implementing HEVC-SMW 2016

1/67

Copyright © 2015 Jan Ozer, All Rights Reserved

HEVC AND OTHER UHD

CODECSJan Ozer

www.streaminglearningcenter.com

@janozer

[email protected]/

276-238-9135

http://www.streaminglearningcenter.com/http://f/final_dv.avihttp://f/final_dv.avihttp://f/final_dv.avihttp://f/final_dv.avihttp://www.streaminglearningcenter.com/


2/67


Why is This Man Wearing Black?


3/67



• Because it’s slimming?


4/67




• Because he’s going to wear the same outfit all three days

of the show?


5/67




• Because he’s going to wear the shirt three days in a row?

• Because he’s here to talk about the impending demise of

HEVC?


6/67


Dave Ronca, Director, EncodingTechnology at Netflix

The Alliance for Open Media is testingthe hypotheses: 1) Royalty free (RF)codec will remove uncertainty, 2) RF

codec can advance the state of the art,3) RF will remove IP/royalty politics and4) Benefits of widely adopted RF codecwill drive collaboration and innovation.

If AOM is a technical success, and thecodec survives legal challenges, thenthe era of royalty-based codecs will end

(as it should).


7/67


Dave Ronca, Director, EncodingTechnology at Netflix

If AOM is a technical success, and

the codec survives legalchallenges, then the era of royalty-

based codecs will end (as it should).


8/67


Dennis Perov, Media Solutions Architect,QuickPlay Media

HEVC might be a first case of avery promising codec going past its

shelf life without any seriousdeployment to its name


9/67


10/67


Agenda

• Point 1: Royalties are pricey and not fully known

• Point 2: Competition available and more coming

• Point 3: Quality a bit in question

• Point 5: Examining the inherent value of thestandard


11/67


Royalties are Pricey

• MPEG-LA

• HEVC Advance

• Technicolor• Third pool (reality or grassy knoll?)


12/67


MPEG LA

• What’s known: MPEG

LA patent group• $0.20/encoder/decoder

• Shipments in excess of100,000

• $25 million annualmaximum (first year only

– will increase)

• No HEVC content royalty(even PPV/subscription)


13/67


HEVC Advance Hardware Royalty


14/67


HEVC Advance Content Royalty


15/67


Other IP Owners

• Technicolor • Withdrew from HEVC Advance, February 2016

• No terms on website

• Third pool? companies with HEVC IP not in eitherpool• Broadcom, Qualcomm, VIXS and Magnum


16/67


Annual Known HEVC RoyaltiesCompany Products MPEG LA HEVC Advance Other?

Apple iDevices, OSX,Safari, iTunes

$25 million $45 million ?

Google Chrome, Android

devices sold byGoogle, OTT

devices

$25 million $40 million

Microsoft Edge, Windows 10,Windows Phone


Samsung Phones, tablets,

Smart TVs


Amazon Content, tablets,players


Netflix, MLB,other content

Content 0 $2.5 million


17/67


Why the Alliance for Open Media?

• Google, MS, Amazon (device)• You can hire a lot of codec engineers for $65 million a

year ($250K/equals 260 engineers)

• Netflix, Amazon (content)• Numbers are small, but you get a seat at the table


18/67


Competition is Firming Up

• VP9 is finally getting traction

• Alliance for Open Media gets hardware support

• V-Nova PERSEUS shows that the joke was on us


19/67


VP9 is Finally Getting Traction

• JW Player to use VP9 in OVP

• Encoding support from Zencoder/Brightcove

• Telestream to support in Vantage

• First live encoder available• Wowza firms up support

• Increasing hardware support on SoC and graphics cards


20/67


Benefits of VP9

• Quality about the same as HEVC (more later)

• Ubiquitous playback in all current browsers not namedSafari

•Android playback

• YouTube will only play UHD video in VP9 format startingsoon• Would you build a SmartTV or retail OTT box that doesn’t play

VP9?


21/67


Alliance for Open Media

• Launched 9/1/2015

• Includes:• Technology – Cisco

(Thor), Google (VPX),Intel, Microsoft, Mozilla(Daala)

• Content – Amazon,

Netflix• April 2016 – added

NVIDIA, ARM, and AMD

• Schema• Consolidate open source

development (VP10,

Daala, Thor)• All output royalty free

• First codec – AO Media1 (AV1) scheduled for

release between12/2017 and 3/2016


22/67


Impact of Alliance

• Browser support• VP9 now in Chrome, Firefox, Edge, Safari

• AV1 will quickly be integrated into all

• Content support• Amazon, Netflix, YouTube

• Will necessitate hardware support in mobile, OTT, STB and othermarkets

• Hardware support

• Intel, AMD, NVIDIA, ARM• Will ensure GPU acceleration and hardware playback on SoC and

CPUs

• Altogether – a vast defense fund for any IP claims


23/67


New to the Mix

• V-Nova PERSEUS

• Most significant value proposition• Deliver HEVC/VP9-like performance without hardware upgrades to

encode or STB playback

• Upgrade existing STBs for playback (piggyback on H.264 decode)• Software upgrade to existing encoders (Thompson, Harmonic)

(piggyback on H.264 encode)

• First major customer: Sky in Italy

• Claims 50% reduction in data rate over H.264 at same quality

• Also: Contribution products used by Sky in Italy for over 2years

• Extension to browser? Unclear at this time


24/67


Quality a Bit in Question

• My tests

• Moscow University HEVC comparison


25/67


My Tests

• Expectation: Same quality as H.264 @ 50% data rate

• My tests

• 3 files, animation (Sintel), TOS movie trailer, real world

video• Two HEVC configurations

• 720p@ 2 mbps

• 1080p @ 4 mbps

•Two H.264 configurations• 720p@ 4 mbps (200%) and 3 mbps (150%)• 1080p@ 8 mbps (200%) and 6 mbps (150%)

• Assess quality with Moscow University VQMT• http://bit.ly/MSU_VQMT


26/67


Quality Comparisons

• HEVC deliverssame quality asH.264 at 50% datarate (except

animation)• Most vendors

• Claim samequality at 30 –50%


27/67


Moscow University HEVC Tests

• 20 HD video clips encoded to an exhaustive array ofconfigurations,

• Eight HEVC codecs, including x265 and two codecs eachfrom Intel and Ittiam

• Compared to Google’s VP9 and x264

• I’m sure they are better at x264 encode than me

• Used PSNR and SSIM (not VQM)


28/67


29/67


My Conclusions About VP9

My conclusions about VP9 are very similar


30/67


Impact of MSU Report

• Raises questions about comparative x.264 quality(in particular)

• Most encoder vendors claim 30 – 50% data rate

improvement as same quality as H.264


31/67


Assumptions going Forward

• YouTube only serves UHDcontent with VP9/AV1 (asstated)

• Netflix, Amazon, andYouTube all support AV1as do MS, Google, andMozilla

• Intel, AMD, ARM ensureGPU/ hardwareacceleration for AV1

• By 2018, every SoC,graphics chip, and mobiledevice will accelerate AV1

• Every Smart TV, retail OTTand commercial STB willdecode AV1 (and probablyHEVC as well)

• Android devices willaccelerate AV1


32/67


If All this Comes True

• In what markets does a standardretain significant value?


33/67


Concept

• Inherent value of standard-based technology• Market dependent

• Alternative dependent


34/67


Traditional Analog Broadcast

• Playback environment: Hardware-only, non-upgradeable, long-term usage cycle.

• Disparate vendors on encode/decode side• Value of standard: Standard assures compatibility and is essential


35/67


Backhaul

• Playback environment: Closed

system• Primary concerns: Latency,

bandwidth and quality

• Value of standard:

interoperability a considerationbut it’s a closed system. Many

buy encode/ decode from sameprovider.


36/67


Contribution

• Playback environment: Closed system

• Primary concerns: latency, bandwidthand quality

• Value of standard: minimal someinteroperability but many buyencode/decode from same provider.

• Sky in Italy has used Perseus-based contribution systems from V-

Nova for several years.• Saved significant bandwidth costs


37/67


Desktops and Notebooks in the Browser

• Playback environment: Opensystem but software upgradeable

• Primary concern: availability of

playback (none for HEVC)• Value of standard: Minimal

• Why was H.264 the playbackstandard? Because Adobe chose it• It was VP6 before then for the same

reason

• Key question: What value doesHEVC bring that VP9/AV1 can’t

deliver?

• HEVC encoded content?YouTube is VP9 and Netflix,Amazon and YouTube all movingto AV1


38/67


IPTV (Vendor Supplied STB)

• Playback environment: Closedsystem; compatibility not an issue

• Primary concern: cost, quality,bandwidth?

• Value of standard: Minimal: Sky inItaly is upgrading their existing STBswith V-Nova Perseus

• Key question: What value doesHEVC bring that VP9/AV1/Perseuscan’t deliver?


39/67


Retail OTT

• Playback environment: Open system:

• Primary concern: compatibility thenquality

• Value of standard: Significant.

Multiple content publisher have to playon device, but that swings both ways

• Need HEVC for short term legacy

• Need VP9/AV1 in the longer term

• Key questions:

• Why wouldn’t Roku support AV1?

They support VP9 already (Roku4)

• Necessary for 4K YouTube

playback• Necessary for Netflix and

Amazon AV1 content

• Google/Amazon will almostcertainly support AV1 in theirdevices


40/67


Mobile

• Playback environment: Open system:• Primary concern: Battery

consumption, compatibility, quality

• Value of standard: Significant. Needcheap hardware decode.

• Apple-HEVC on iPhone 5 –FaceTime only

• Android – HEVC on Android 5 insoftware, hoods to hardware

• But:• Google only pays royalties on

devices it ships, and seemscommitted to AV1

• Microsoft is committed to AV1

• Apple• Stands to pay far more in HEVCroyalties that it will ever earn

• IMHO-their loyalty to HEVC isoverstated


41/67


Other Closed Systems

• Playback environment: Closedsystem

• Primary concerns: Cost, latency,bandwidth and quality

• Value of standard: Can drive downcosts, and interoperability aconsideration but it’s a closed

system. Many buy encode/decode

from same provider.


42/67


Potential HEVC Licensee

• You can pay up to $65 million/per year for HEVC

• Or, Let Google, Microsoft, Cisco, Mozilla do thedevelopment for free

• Many will have to do both (for awhile)• Smart TVs, retail and commercial STBs

• Mobi


43/67


Bottom Line

• The inherent value of the standard has droppedsignificantly since the analog days• Software upgrades

• Viable, well supported alternatives• Inexpensive hardware

• Shorter product life cycles

• Closed systems

• VP9/AV1 offer streaming producers access thatHEVC can’t match today, and probably never will


44/67


Encoding HEVC

• Most traditional vendors now encode HEVC

• Hardware – VOD and Live

• Software – VOD primarily, some live

• New hardware architectures from Intel with softwaresupport


45/67


First Wave of Smaller Encoders

• Video Inputs – 1 3G/HD-SDI,HDMI, DVI-D Video

• Output - HEVC

• Bit Rate: 100 Kbps - 30Mbps ·

• Frame Rate: 10-60 fps• Output Resolutions:

Configurable from CIF up to1920x1080

• Encoding Latency: 75

Milliseconds

$10,000


46/67


Overview

46

i265 + Intel® VCA

HARDWARE

Intel® VCA

SOFTWARE

i265 for Intel® VCA

State of the art hardware + programmable software solution for H.265

Significantly lower TCO for 4K60 real time encoding, dense HD transcoding

Latest addition to the i265 product family – announced at IBC 2015

Visual Compute Accelerator

PCIe Card with 3x Xeon E3v4 per card

Multiple cards per Xeon E5 server

Aggressively priced solution

Industry leading performance/powerHighly scalable architecture

Industry first Live 4K60 encoder for VCA

Highly optimized, GPU accelerated

Tiles based encoder for multiple CPU+GPU

4-5x faster than comparable software (x265)

Copyright 2015 Ittiam Systems | Ittiam Proprietary | www.ittiam.com


47/67


Where will HEVC Play?

• Desktop/notebook

• Mobile

• OTT/SmartTV


48/67


Notebooks/PCs – Will it Play

• Limited sample• 720p HEVC should play on most 2-core computers

•

1080p will only play on 4/8 core and above• (I’m guessing that) by far, the bulk of video streamed today is

720p or smaller (at least non-OTT)


49/67


HEVC Software Players

• DivX 10 with HEVC decode shipped – 9/2013• Installed base over 10 million

• VLC Player with HEVC – 11/15/2013

• Flash – Adobe to include HEVC decode inPrimetime platform in 2015 but not Flash Player

• So – no general purpose HEVC player; must come

from the browser


50/67


Browser Market Share

HEVC VP9

Chrome No Yes

IE 11 No No

Edge Yes Coming

FirefoxMozilla

No Yes

Safari No No

• With no cap, HEVC will costbrowser vendors billions yearly

• No pressing need for UHD,x.264 is good, VP9 is free

• Content producers – all thingsbeing equal, why not use VP9?


51/67


Computers/Notebooks

• CPU playback isn’t the issue

• The player side isn’t there

• If publisher, would have to install own player – pay

royalty• If monetized – pay royalty

• Why would content publisher not use VP9?


52/67


What About Mobile

• Installed Base• Battery life issues

• New devices• Burgeoning HEVC support (a beachhead!)


53/67


Installed Base With no HEVC Hardware

• Techspot: Mobile Playbacktests• H.264@1080p -- 8.6 hours

• HEVC@1080p – 4.36 hours

• While HEVC delivers fantasticquality for the file size, it’s

impractical for a battery-powered device when it lastshalf as long as an equivalent-resolution H.264 file.

• bit.ly/HEVC_batt


54/67


What About Apple and iOS

• Apple:• Added HEVC encode/decoder for FaceTimeonly in iPhone 6 (http://bit.ly/iphone_HEVC)

• Not available for general purpose playback oniPhone

• No word on Safari/Mac


55/67


What About Android

• Google:• Added software decoder and hooks to HEVChardware decode in Android 5

(http://bit.ly/iphone_HEVC)• Some HEVC capable devices announced (Sony

Experia Z3, http://bit.ly/sony_HEVC)

• Announced before HEVC Advance

• Google member of Open Media Alliance

http://bit.ly/iphone_HEVChttp://bit.ly/sony_HEVChttp://bit.ly/sony_HEVChttp://bit.ly/iphone_HEVC


56/67


Mobile Summary

• HEVC looks good; as it stands today• Decisions made before HEVC Advance

• No real technology advantage over VP9 (which is

free)


57/67


HEVC on OTT and Smart TVs

• OTT• New Apple TV – no

• New 4K Roku – yes

• Amazon Fire TV – yes• Smart TVs

• All 4K

• Most relevant specs• HbbTV

• Smart TV Alliance

• These platforms are verystandards sensitive• Presume they will continue to

support HEVC


58/67


Producing HEVC

• General concepts

• Elemental

• X265• Preset

• MainConcept• P/Q Value


59/67


Technical Comparison

From ElementalWhite paper MPEG-2/H.264/

HEVC

bit.ly/Elemental_HEVCWP


60/67


Elemental – Quality vs Density (speed)

• 0 – 3

• 0 – best quality

• 3 – fastest speed


61/67


X265 - Choosing a Preset

• What’s a Preset?

• Controls a range ofparameters

• Enables tradeoffbetween quality andencoding time


62/67


X265 Presets

• Presets

• Parameters

• The big issuesare how muchquality, how muchencoding time?

http://bit.ly/x265_presets


63/67


Choosing an x265 Preset


64/67


Choosing an x265 Preset

1.23% 1.65% 2.23% 2.42% 3.38% 4.38%12.76%

42.81%

62.26%

100.00%

41%

67% 70% 71%

80% 83%

92%97% 100%

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

120.00%

Ultrafast superface veryfast faster fast medium slow slower veryslow placebo

Preset Quali ty and Encoding Time (normalized to 100%)

Time

Quality


65/67


Main Concept – P/Q Values

• Same concept

• Single switch that controls a number ofconfigs trading off quality and encoding time


66/67


Main Concept – P/Q


67/67

Questions

Implementing HEVC-SMW 2016

Documents

Transcript of Implementing HEVC-SMW 2016