![]() Something like 95% of video files are x264 and have much better direct play support. It can't be changed to something else without a huge loss of quality. Also, once you go x265, typically that file is done. If the media isn't source quality/remux, then there will be a loss of quality every time. X265 is good for for 4k stuff or 1080p if they used the the remuxes as source. I got x264 for anything 1080p or lower, and x265 for anything higher than 1080p. Got an old episodes of friends? Compress the shit out of it - it’s almost definitely not going to be noticeable due to the low quality image source. If it’s x265 (as is the case with many blu-rays), stick with that along with the higher bitrate. That special 4K movie that’s just beautiful? Keep it in its original format - if that was x264, stick with x264. My advice, as a guy who works with video daily for services you probably use, is to try and keep as many bits as you are comfortable with for vids you really want quality on, meaning x264. ![]() Many, many devices use the same decoders under the hood. With regards to devices, pretty much all devices bought within the last 18-24 months will support both without question, and a large percentage of those older than that will as well. The question is: will you notice it or even care? Both x264 and x265 are lossy, meaning some data is lost from compression. It’s really simple: compression isn’t magic. I just don't know why that assumption is made, because when you configure your encoders, you can directly or indirectly influence both the file size and the quality, and you can choose to encode the same video to both h264 and h265 targeting similar quality, or targeting similar file size.īoth options are valid so you can easily rip a movie into both formats and have two files where there are quality differences. To my knowledge there are no quality differences u/casterly_cock somehow made the assumption that quality is always a constant: That also means if allow the codec to use more data, it can save more detail and thus better quality. The difference is that h265 does a better job, and can represent similar quality using less data. In both cases, a bigger file size generally means better quality. However, the two codecs we are talking about works similarly when it comes to the relation of quality and size. Size isn't equatable to quality across different encodes/formats. You can configure both encoders to get better or worse visual results, and that correlates to their file size. I wouldn't mention FLAC and WAV in this comparison. Please go to the relevant subreddits and support forums, for example: Build help and build shares posts go in their respective megathreads ![]() No referral / affiliate links, personal voting / campaigning / funding, or selling posts ![]() Welcome to /r/Plex, a subreddit dedicated to Plex, the media server/client solution for enjoying your media! Plex Community Discord Rules Latest Regular Threads: No Stupid Q&A: Tool Tuesday: Build Help: Share Your Build: Submit Troubleshooting Post Files not showing up correctly? ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |