Author Topic: Codec Comparison (Read 9398 times)

Daffy · « **on:** October 25, 2005, 09:25:05 AM »

I was testing some codec settings earlier today to see which one was the best with almost identical settings.
I used a 50mb, 9 second recording of a stunt without any audio and compared the results and here's some information and a rating.
I hope this can help you to save some time.
Please note that the results may vary for different kinds of clips but this was just a short test so don't hang me if you get better results with a different codec

Codec: 3ivX[/u]
Version: 4.5.1
Rendertime: 20 seconds
Kilobits per second: 2543
Filesize: 2716kb
Quality (1-10) : 7

3ivx was definately the codec which rendered the clip fastest but the quality wasn't that great and the clip became a little too dark.
The codec is extremely easy to use, it has few options and everyone can get some decent quality with it.
3ivx is a free codec.

Codec: DivX[/u]
Version: 6.0.3 Pro
Rendertime: 2 Minutes
Kilobits per second: 2610
Filesize: 2787kb
Quality (1-10) : 9

DivX gave me better quality like the other, it wasn't a big difference from DivX to XVid but it was slightly better.
DivX is like 3ivx, very easy to use.
The only bad thing about DivX is that the rendertime was the longest.
DivX comes in a free version and a more advanced version you have to pay for.

Codec: XVid[/u]
Version: 1.1.0 Beta 2
Rendertime: 1 Minute and 30 Seconds
Kilobits per second: 2335
Filesize: 2495kb
Quality (1-10) : 8

XVid is a wellknown codec but it's very hard to use for a beginner, there's a lot of settings you can choose to play with and it's easy to feel lost.
The quality is great and the rendertime was ok.
XVid is a free codec.

Finally here's the settings i used.

3ivx:

DivX:

XviD:

BTW: I'll add the wmv codec and some screenshots of the quality later

marklund · « **Reply #1 on:** October 25, 2005, 09:30:42 AM »

Lovely dude.

When reading your review, I went over to the XviD side.

comaboy · « **Reply #2 on:** October 25, 2005, 11:45:57 AM »

Can you add >> X264 << to the list? I've started using it for some other non-GTA projects and find it's better than XVid, but I want to see it in a proper comparison.

P.s. Great thread :rock: :rock: :rock: :rock: :rock:

Daffy · « **Reply #3 on:** October 25, 2005, 12:05:42 PM »

I guess i can... can i have your settings so i can test them?

comaboy · « **Reply #4 on:** October 25, 2005, 12:07:20 PM »

My current settings won't be that great for this test, they're set up for very high quality rendering.

DeathCobra · « **Reply #5 on:** October 25, 2005, 12:36:45 PM »

Great review man.
Could you include a link to where you can download each one too

Daffy · « **Reply #6 on:** October 25, 2005, 01:17:18 PM »

Click on the codecs name (not the picture)

m3rrix · « **Reply #7 on:** October 25, 2005, 05:11:54 PM »

This is brilliant, cheers man.
For some reason my dad bought the better version of DivX a while back, I haven't played around with it yet though.

comaboy · « **Reply #8 on:** October 25, 2005, 05:39:33 PM »

If you're a vegas user the x264 codec opens up a lot of options, my next vid will probably be in mp4 format.

Daffy · « **Reply #9 on:** October 26, 2005, 12:37:55 AM »

Nero Recode?

[madman] · « **Reply #10 on:** October 26, 2005, 06:23:05 AM »

did u render with vegas?

you can get better results with other programs like virtualdub.

Daffy · « **Reply #11 on:** October 26, 2005, 06:25:57 AM »

I used Virtual Dub but it wouldn't look any worse/better if i used Vegas.
The codec and the settings is all that matters.

[madman] · « **Reply #12 on:** October 26, 2005, 06:29:15 AM »

i get better results with virtualdub than vegas.

Daffy · « **Reply #13 on:** October 26, 2005, 06:43:09 AM »

That's not the programs fault, you must have changed the resolution or something in the project or the render settings.

[madman] · « **Reply #14 on:** October 26, 2005, 06:45:05 AM »

i always use same res.

Author Topic: Codec Comparison (Read 9398 times)

[madman]

[madman]

[madman]