AVS Forum banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
does anyone know the difference between AVC 1080p and mpeg-2(6144kbps) 1080p. only thing i can tell so far is the size difference AVC is obviously alot bigger. is AVC better? its for the ps3 converter program just wondering what the best is. i have a 60 inch sony 1080p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,038 Posts
The original poster cited 6Mbps bitrate MPEG-2. Which I'd not recommend to use for 1080p MPEG-2... Maybe that's why he's seeing "bigger" file sizes for AVC.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,325 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by e20dylan /forum/post/0


does anyone know the difference between AVC 1080p and mpeg-2...so far is the size difference AVC is obviously alot bigger.

You should start with an explanation how you came to this "obvious" conclusion.

Size is a function of bitrate (bandwidth). Bitrate is a variable set (or calculated) by the compressionist (in the software used).


Diogen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
212 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelHDDVD /forum/post/0


When speaking about codecs being used for High Definition isn't it fair to discuss all 3 major codecs being used?

If I asked for the differences between a Silverado LTZ and an F150 Lariat it would be helpful to say they're both worse than a Tundra Limited?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,392 Posts
What program are you using dylan?


AVC will be better in general. Mpeg2 is what DVDs are encoded in, whereas AVC is similar to divx and xvid.


You should be able to change the output specifications of the AVC encode to get down to the Mpeg2 filesize.


What are you trying to achieve exactly?

You try a realtime transcode, if you have you computer and PS3 on the same network.
http://www.orb.com/gamers/ps3.htm


But I suspect that won't be doable if you're working with 1080p material.



Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelHDDVD /forum/post/0


When speaking about codecs being used for High Definition isn't it fair to discuss all 3 major codecs being used?

But that's not what OP asked at all. rdjam didn't even try to help the OP at all. Thus the statement about him pushing a political agenda is correct IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,610 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by kitzi /forum/post/0


If I asked for the differences between a Silverado LTZ and an F150 Lariat it would be helpful to say they're both worse than a Tundra Limited?

But we're not talking about cars. This is about codecs. It would a more accurate comparison would be


"Do you prefer your music encoded with MP3 or WMA?"


response "Actually I prefer Vorbis"


But nice try
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,610 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by zBuff /forum/post/0



But that's not what OP asked at all. rdjam didn't even try to help the OP at all. Thus the statement about him pushing a political agenda is correct IMO.


Right a political agenda. I always knew those VC-1 people had ties to the Democratic party. But thats nothing next to the devout Republican rhetoric of the AVC lovers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
480 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by rdjam /forum/post/0


VC1 is the best, AVC second, Mpeg2 a distant third...

There is nobody more biased concering codecs on this entire forum than rdjam (save for Amir), so take this with a grain of salt. It's more like this:


VC-1 and AVC are roughly equivalent. Mpeg 2 is less efficient, but can look as good as the other codecs for certain material if given enough space and bandwidth.


To answer your question specifically: at the same data rate (6144 kbps) AVC will look a LOT better than Mpeg-2 (as would VC-1). If you are converting things for the PS3, always use AVC (but note that it will probably take longer than MPEG 2 to encode).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
480 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelHDDVD /forum/post/0


But we're not talking about cars. This is about codecs. It would a more accurate comparison would be


"Do you prefer your music encoded with MP3 or WMA?"


response "Actually I prefer Vorbis"


But nice try

Except it sounds like he's encoding files to play on a PS3 via XMB, so VC-1 encoding isn't even an option. Alternatively he could be using a Mac which also makes VC-1 pretty much impossible while AVC support is abundant.


And thus the "nice try" ball is back in your court. The agenda is obvious.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,610 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Padriac /forum/post/0


Except it sounds like he's encoding files to play on a PS3 via XMB, so VC-1 encoding isn't even an option. Alternatively he could be using a Mac which also makes VC-1 pretty much impossible while AVC support is abundant.


And thus the "nice try" ball is back in your court. The agenda is obvious.


You Blu-Ray fanboys are relentless


When talking about HD video codecs as he is, hence the '1080p' thing, it is appropriate to talk about all of them.


Nice Try has been smacked back at you, and on top of that it is a rather pathetic failure on your part. Although the relentless BR hoards won't stop till sony gets their monopoly
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
278 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelHDDVD /forum/post/0


You Blu-Ray fanboys are relentless


When talking about HD video codecs as he is, hence the '1080p' thing, it is appropriate to talk about all of them.


Nice Try has been smacked back at you, and on top of that it is a rather pathetic failure on your part. Although the relentless BR hoards won't stop till sony gets their monopoly

I cant even begin to imagine how your home life is if your this out of touch with whats happening on this topic
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,850 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Padriac /forum/post/0


There is nobody more biased concering codecs on this entire forum than rdjam (save for Amir), so take this with a grain of salt.

Try to stay away from personal invectives, as part of your debate. The same could easily be said about you in reverse.


I'm actually very pro-HD DVD - and the reason HD DVD releases usually look better is because of VC1 being used on most releases. On Bluray, most releases are in Mpeg2, so BD fans generally try to promote the Mpeg2 being "great, when given enough space" argument. Which, BTW, I don't buy into.

Quote:
It's more like this:


VC-1 and AVC are roughly equivalent. Mpeg 2 is less efficient, but can look as good as the other codecs for certain material if given enough space and bandwidth.

See?...

Quote:
To answer your question specifically: at the same data rate (6144 kbps) AVC will look a LOT better than Mpeg-2 (as would VC-1).

Believe me, at 6 mbps, VC1 will look a lot better than AVC. There are a number of reasons for this, but Ben Waggoner can explain it best, I'm sure.


There will be a few who will react to my making this statement, but it is true.

Quote:
If you are converting things for the PS3, always use AVC

Why? The WMV VC1 encoder from Miscrosoft is readily available and will most likely do a better job.


Dylan, skip Mpeg for this, IMO. If you are not sure about the whole VC1/AVC debate, try them both, using the new MS encoder for VC1.


I think you'll find the VC1 easily better at that bitrate, but think trying and deciding for yourself is the best way to go.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
427 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by rdjam /forum/post/0



Dylan, skip Mpeg for this, IMO. If you are not sure about the whole VC1/AVC debate, try them both, using the new MS encoder for VC1.


I think you'll find the VC1 easily better at that bitrate, but think trying and deciding for yourself is the best way to go.

Try the free open source x264 encoder for even better results than WMV VC1.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top