How Video Encoder Computing Efficiency Can Impact Streaming Service Quality Mark Donnigan VP Marketing Beamr

Read the original LinkedIn article here: How Video Encoder Computing Efficiency Can Impact Streaming Service Quality

Written by:

Mark Donnigan is VP Marketing at Beamr, a high-performance video encoding technology company.

Computer system software is the bedrock of every function and department in the enterprise; appropriately, software application video encoding is important to video streaming service operations. It's possible to enhance a video codec execution and video encoder for 2 but rarely three of the pillars. It does state that to provide the quality of video experience customers anticipate, video suppliers will require to evaluate commercial solutions that have been performance optimized for high core counts and multi-threaded processors such as those offered from AMD and Intel.

With so much turmoil in the distribution design and go-to-market business strategies for streaming home entertainment video services, it might be appealing to push down the concern stack selection of new, more effective software application video encoders. With software eating the video encoding function, compute performance is now the oxygen required to grow and win versus a significantly competitive and congested direct-to-consumer (D2C) marketplace.

How Video Encoder Computing Efficiency Can Impact Streaming Service Quality

Until public clouds and common computing turned software-based video operations mainstream, the process of video encoding was performed with purpose-built hardware.

And after that, software ate the hardware ...

Marc Andreessen, the co-founder of Netscape and a16z the well known venture capital company with investments in Foursquare, Skype, Twitter, box, Lyft, Airbnb, and other similarly disruptive business, penned an article for the Wall Street Journal in 2011 titled "Why Software Is Consuming The World." A version of this post can be discovered on the website here.

"6 decades into the computer system transformation, four decades because the development of the microprocessor, and twenty years into the rise of the modern Web, all of the innovation required to change markets through software lastly works and can be widely provided at international scale." Marc Andreessen
In following with Marc Andreessen's prediction, today, software-based video encoders have practically completely subsumed video encoding hardware. With software application applications devoid of purpose-built hardware and able to run on common computing platforms like Intel and AMD based x86 machines, in the data-center and virtual environments, it is completely accurate to state that "software is consuming (or more appropriately, has consumed) the world."

But what does this mean for an innovation or video operations executive?

Computer system software application is the bedrock of every function and department in the business; accordingly, software video encoding is important to video streaming service operations. Software video encoders can scale without needing a linear boost in physical area and energies, unlike hardware.

When dealing with software-based video encoding, the 3 pillars that every video encoding engineer must resolve are bitrate effectiveness, quality conservation, and computing efficiency.

It's possible to optimize a video codec application and video encoder for 2 but hardly ever three of the pillars. The majority of video encoding operations therefore focus on quality and bitrate performance, leaving the calculate effectiveness vector open as a sort of wild card. But as you will see, this is no longer a competitive approach.

The next frontier is software computing performance.

Bitrate effectiveness with high video quality needs resource-intensive tools, which will result in slow operational speed or a substantial boost in CPU overhead. For a live encoding application where the encoder must operate at high speed to reach 60 frames-per-second (FPS), a compromise in bitrate performance or more info outright quality is frequently required.

Codec intricacy, such as that needed by HEVC, AV1, and the forthcoming VVC, is surpassing bitrate performance improvements and this has produced the requirement for video encoder efficiency optimization. Put another way, speed matters. Generally, this is not a location that video encoding practitioners and image researchers require to be interested in, but that is no longer the case.

Figure 1 highlights the advantages of a software application encoding application, which, when all qualities are stabilized, such as FPS and unbiased quality metrics, can do twice as much deal with the specific same AWS EC2 C5.18 xlarge instance.

In this example, the open-source encoders x264 and x265 are compared to Beamr's AVC and HEVC encoders, Beamr 4, and Beamr 5.

No alt text supplied for this image
For services needing to encode live 4Kp60, one can see that it is possible with Beamr 5 but not with x265. Beamr 5 set to the x264 comparable 'ultrafast' mode can encode four specific streams on a single AWS EC2 C5.18 xlarge circumstances while x265 operating in 'ultrafast' can not reach 60 FPS at 4K. As you can see in this poignant example, codec performance is straight related to the quality of service as a result of fewer makers and less complex encoding frameworks needed.

For those services who are mainly worried about VOD and H. 264, the best half of the Figure 1 graphic shows the efficiency benefit of a performance enhanced codec application that is established to produce really high quality with a high bitrate performance. Here one can see approximately a 2x advantage with Beamr 4 compared to x264.

Video encoding calculate resources cost genuine cash.

OPEX is thought about carefully by every video distributor. Expect entertainment experiences like live 4K streaming can not be delivered reliably as a result of an inequality in between the video operations ability and the expectation of the customer.

Because of efficiency limitations with how the open-source encoder x265 makes use of compute cores, it is not possible to encode a live 4Kp60 video stream on a single maker. This doesn't mean that live 4K encoding in software application isn't possible. It does state that to deliver the quality of video experience consumers anticipate, video suppliers will need to assess business solutions that have been efficiency enhanced for high core counts and multi-threaded processors such as those available from AMD and Intel.

The requirement for software application to be enhanced for higher core counts was just recently highlighted by AMD CTO Mark Papermaster in an interview with Tom's Hardware.

Video suppliers wanting to use software for the versatility and virtualization alternatives they provide will experience extremely made complex engineering obstacles unless they select encoding engines where multi-processor scaling is native to the architecture of the software application encoder.
Here is a short article that reveals the speed benefit of Beamr 5 over x265.

Things to think about concerning computing efficiency and performance:

It's tempting to believe this is only an issue for video streamers with 10s or hundreds of millions of subscribers, the very same trade-off factors to consider should be thought about regardless of the size of your operations. While a 30% cost savings at 1080p (H. 264), which is encoded at 3.5 Mbps, will offer more than triple the return, at a 1 Mbps savings. The point is, we need to carefully and methodically think about where we are investing our compute resources to get the optimum ROI possible.
An industrial software option will be developed by a dedicated codec engineering team that can stabilize the requirements of bitrate efficiency, quality, and calculate efficiency. This remains in plain contrast to open-source projects where contributors have separate and individual concerns and programs. Exactly why the architecture of x264 and x265 can not scale. It was built to attain a different set of tradeoffs.
Firmly insist internal groups and consultants carry out compute performance benchmarking on all software encoding solutions under factor to consider. The 3 vectors to measure are absolute speed (FPS), specific stream density when FPS is held continuous, and the total number of channels that can be created on a single server utilizing a small ABR stack such as 4K, 1080p, 720p, 480p, and 360p. All encoders should produce comparable video quality throughout all tests.
With so much upheaval in the distribution model and go-to-market organisation strategies for streaming entertainment video services, it might be tempting to push down the concern stack selection of brand-new, more effective software application video encoders. With software application consuming the video encoding function, calculate efficiency is now the oxygen needed to flourish and win versus an increasingly competitive and crowded direct-to-consumer (D2C) market.

You can try Beamr's software video encoders today and get up to 100 hours of complimentary HEVC and H. 264 video transcoding on a monthly basis. CLICK HERE

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *