Bad math (Score: 1) by fnj@pipedot.org on 2015-06-13 21:41 (#B6Q9) The VP9 codec can reduce the bandwidth needed to play a video by up to 35 percent, according to Google. This means that a user who was previously relegated to watching 480p video should now be able to watch 720p, for example.No, it means no such thing. 480p -> 640x480 -> 307,200 px; 720p -> 1280x720 -> 921,600 px. Both are the same framerate. So 480p is not 65% of the bandwidth of 720p, it is 33.3%. Re: Bad math (Score: 2, Informative) by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2015-06-14 01:09 (#B718) 480p is not 65% of the bandwidth of 720p, it is 33.3%.You're mistaken... You're using uncompressed numbers, while video compression does NOT scale-up linearly like that, at all. It does NOT take 4X the bandwidth just because the picture has 4X as many pixels. I generally ballpark a doubling of frame-rate or resolution as a 50% increase in bandwidth, and it's quite possible to do better. Re: Bad math (Score: 0) by fnj@pipedot.org on 2015-06-14 02:12 (#B73X) So much fail. Re: Bad math (Score: 1) by venkman@pipedot.org on 2015-06-14 04:35 (#B79T) So how about explain how it's a fail instead of just throwing out condescension. Educate the poor guy/gal! Re: Bad math (Score: 1) by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2015-06-14 12:39 (#B84S) You shouldn't humor him. I happen to be an expert on lossy video coding.
Re: Bad math (Score: 2, Informative) by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2015-06-14 01:09 (#B718) 480p is not 65% of the bandwidth of 720p, it is 33.3%.You're mistaken... You're using uncompressed numbers, while video compression does NOT scale-up linearly like that, at all. It does NOT take 4X the bandwidth just because the picture has 4X as many pixels. I generally ballpark a doubling of frame-rate or resolution as a 50% increase in bandwidth, and it's quite possible to do better. Re: Bad math (Score: 0) by fnj@pipedot.org on 2015-06-14 02:12 (#B73X) So much fail. Re: Bad math (Score: 1) by venkman@pipedot.org on 2015-06-14 04:35 (#B79T) So how about explain how it's a fail instead of just throwing out condescension. Educate the poor guy/gal! Re: Bad math (Score: 1) by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2015-06-14 12:39 (#B84S) You shouldn't humor him. I happen to be an expert on lossy video coding.
Re: Bad math (Score: 0) by fnj@pipedot.org on 2015-06-14 02:12 (#B73X) So much fail. Re: Bad math (Score: 1) by venkman@pipedot.org on 2015-06-14 04:35 (#B79T) So how about explain how it's a fail instead of just throwing out condescension. Educate the poor guy/gal! Re: Bad math (Score: 1) by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2015-06-14 12:39 (#B84S) You shouldn't humor him. I happen to be an expert on lossy video coding.
Re: Bad math (Score: 1) by venkman@pipedot.org on 2015-06-14 04:35 (#B79T) So how about explain how it's a fail instead of just throwing out condescension. Educate the poor guy/gal! Re: Bad math (Score: 1) by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2015-06-14 12:39 (#B84S) You shouldn't humor him. I happen to be an expert on lossy video coding.
Re: Bad math (Score: 1) by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2015-06-14 12:39 (#B84S) You shouldn't humor him. I happen to be an expert on lossy video coding.