Quality evaluation of HEVC and VP9 video compression in real-time applications

Video consumption over Internet has increased significantly over the recent years and occupies the majority of the overall data traffic. To decrease the load on the Internet infrastructure and reduce bandwidth taken by video, higher efficiency video codecs, such as H.265/HEVC and VP9, have been developed. The availability of these two new competing video coding formats raises the question of which is more efficient in terms of rate-distortion and by how much they outperform the current state-of-the-art coding standard, H.264/AVC. This paper provides an answer to this difficult question for low-delay video applications, e.g., real-time video streaming/conferencing or video surveillance. The benchmarking of HEVC and VP9 video compression was conducted by means of subjective evaluations, assuming web browser playback, an uncontrolled environment, and HD video content. Considering a wide range of bit rates from very low to high bit rates, corresponding to low quality up to transparent quality (when compared to the original video), results show a clear advantage of HEVC with average bit rate savings of 59.5% when compared to AVC and 42.4% when compared to VP9.

[1]  Christian Keimel,et al.  QualityCrowd — A framework for crowd-based quality evaluation , 2012, 2012 Picture Coding Symposium.

[2]  Touradj Ebrahimi,et al.  Calculation of average coding efficiency based on subjective quality scores , 2014, Journal of Visual Communication and Image Representation.

[3]  Didier Le Gall,et al.  MPEG: a video compression standard for multimedia applications , 1991, CACM.

[4]  Sugato Chakravarty,et al.  Methodology for the subjective assessment of the quality of television pictures , 1995 .

[5]  Ajay Luthra,et al.  Overview of the H.264/AVC video coding standard , 2003, IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol..

[6]  ITU-T Rec. P.910 (04/2008) Subjective video quality assessment methods for multimedia applications , 2009 .

[7]  Detlev Marpe,et al.  Performance comparison of H.265/MPEG-HEVC, VP9, and H.264/MPEG-AVC encoders , 2013, 2013 Picture Coding Symposium (PCS).

[8]  Sarah Rothstein,et al.  Digital Video An Introduction To Mpeg 2 , 2016 .

[9]  Gary J. Sullivan,et al.  Overview of the High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC) Standard , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology.

[10]  Touradj Ebrahimi,et al.  Comparison of compression efficiency between HEVC/H.265 and VP9 based on subjective assessments , 2014, Optics & Photonics - Optical Engineering + Applications.

[11]  G. W. Snedecor Statistical Methods , 1964 .

[12]  Touradj Ebrahimi,et al.  Towards high efficiency video coding: Subjective evaluation of potential coding technologies , 2011, J. Vis. Commun. Image Represent..

[13]  Detlev Marpe,et al.  Comparative assessment of H.265/MPEG-HEVC, VP9, and H.264/MPEG-AVC encoders for low-delay video applications , 2014, Optics & Photonics - Optical Engineering + Applications.

[14]  Debargha Mukherjee,et al.  The latest open-source video codec VP9 - An overview and preliminary results , 2013, 2013 Picture Coding Symposium (PCS).

[15]  Ajay Luthra,et al.  Overview of the H.264/AVC video coding standard , 2003, SPIE Optics + Photonics.