How Software Encoder Computing Efficiency Is Able To Improve Streaming UX Mark Donnigan Vice President 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 software application is the bedrock of every function and department in the business; appropriately, software application video encoding is important to video streaming service operations. It's possible to optimize a video codec implementation and video encoder for two however rarely 3 of the pillars. It does state that to deliver the quality of video experience consumers expect, video distributors will require to examine business services that have been efficiency enhanced for high core counts and multi-threaded processors such as those offered from AMD and Intel.

With so much upheaval in the circulation design and go-to-market company plans for streaming entertainment video services, it might be tempting to press down the priority stack choice of new, more effective software video encoders. With software application eating the video encoding function, calculate efficiency is now the oxygen required to prosper and win against a progressively competitive and congested direct-to-consumer (D2C) marketplace.



How Video Encoder Computing Efficiency Can Impact Streaming Service Quality

Till public clouds and ubiquitous computing turned software-based video operations mainstream, the process of video encoding was carried out with purpose-built hardware.

And then, software ate the hardware ...

Marc Andreessen, the co-founder of Netscape and a16z the famed endeavor capital firm with financial investments in Foursquare, Skype, Twitter, box, Lyft, Airbnb, and other equally disruptive companies, penned a short article for the Wall Street Journal in 2011 entitled "Why Software application Is Eating The World." A version of this post can be found on the a16z.com website here.

"Six decades into the computer system transformation, four years since the innovation of the microprocessor, and 20 years into the increase of the contemporary Web, all of the innovation needed to change industries through software application lastly works and can be widely provided at international scale." Marc Andreessen
In following with Marc Andreessen's prophecy, today, software-based video encoders have almost totally subsumed video encoding hardware. With software application applications released from purpose-built hardware and able to operate on ubiquitous computing platforms like Intel and AMD based x86 machines, in the data-center and virtual environments, it is totally precise to say that "software application is consuming (or more appropriately, has consumed) the world."

What does this mean for an innovation or video operations executive?

Computer software is the bedrock of every function and department in the business; appropriately, software video encoding is necessary to video streaming service operations. Software video encoders can scale without requiring a direct boost in physical space and utilities, unlike hardware.

When handling software-based video encoding, the 3 pillars that every video encoding engineer must attend to are bitrate effectiveness, quality conservation, and computing performance.

It's possible to optimize a video codec application and video encoder for 2 however rarely three of the pillars. A lot of video encoding operations hence concentrate on quality and bitrate efficiency, leaving the compute effectiveness vector open as a sort of wild card. But as you will see, this is no longer a competitive method.

The next frontier is software computing efficiency.

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

Codec complexity, such as that needed by HEVC, AV1, and the forthcoming VVC, is exceeding bitrate efficiency advancements and this has actually produced the need for video encoder efficiency optimization. Put another way, speed matters. Traditionally, this is not an area that video encoding practitioners and image researchers require to be interested in, but that is no longer the case.

Figure 1 illustrates the advantages of a software encoding implementation, which, when all attributes are stabilized, such as FPS and objective quality metrics, can do twice as much work on the precise 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 attended to 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 equivalent 'ultrafast' mode can encode four private 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 directly related to the quality of service as an outcome of less makers and less complicated encoding frameworks required.

For those services who are primarily worried about VOD and H. 264, the right half of the Figure 1 graphic shows the performance benefit of More Info an efficiency optimized codec implementation that is set up to produce very high quality with a high bitrate performance. Here one can see up to a 2x benefit with Beamr 4 compared to x264.

Video encoding compute resources cost genuine cash.

OPEX is considered carefully by every video supplier. However suppose home entertainment experiences like live 4K streaming can not be provided reliably as an outcome of a mismatch in between the video operations capability and the expectation of the consumer. Remembering that lots of mobile gadgets sold today can 1440p if not 4K display. And customers are wanting material that matches the resolution and quality of the devices they bring in their pockets.

Because of efficiency limitations with how the open-source encoder x265 uses compute cores, it is not possible to encode a live 4Kp60 video stream on a single device. This does not imply that live 4K encoding in software application isn't possible. However it does say that to provide the quality of video experience customers expect, video suppliers will require to assess business solutions that have actually been efficiency optimized for high core counts and multi-threaded processors such as those offered from AMD and Intel.

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

Video suppliers desiring to use software for the flexibility and virtualization alternatives they supply will come across excessively made complex engineering difficulties unless they select encoding engines where multi-processor scaling is native to the architecture of the software encoder.
Here is a short article that reveals the speed benefit of Beamr 5 over x265.

Things to consider worrying computing efficiency and performance:

Don't chase the next advanced codec without considering initially the complexity/efficiency ratio. Dave Ronca, who led the encoding group at Netflix for 10 years and just recently delegated sign up with Facebook in a comparable capacity, recently published an exceptional post on the topic of codec intricacy entitled, "Encoder Complexity Hits the Wall." Though it's tempting to think this is only an issue for video streamers with 10s or numerous countless customers, the exact same trade-off considerations must be considered regardless of the size of your operations. A 30% bitrate savings for a 1 Mbps 480p H. 264 profile will return a 300 Kbps bandwidth savings. While a 30% savings at 1080p (H. 264), which is encoded at 3.5 Mbps, will offer more than triple the return, at a 1 Mbps cost savings. The point is, we must carefully and systematically think about where we are spending our calculate resources to get the optimum ROI possible.
A business software service will be developed by a devoted codec engineering team that can stabilize the requirements of bitrate efficiency, quality, and compute efficiency. Exactly why the architecture of x264 and x265 can not scale.
Firmly insist internal teams and consultants perform compute performance benchmarking on all software application encoding solutions under consideration. The 3 vectors to measure are absolute speed (FPS), specific stream density when FPS is held constant, and the total variety of channels that can be created on a single server using a small ABR stack such as 4K, 1080p, 720p, 480p, and 360p. All encoders must produce similar video quality throughout all tests.
With so much turmoil in the distribution model and go-to-market company strategies for streaming home entertainment video services, it may be tempting to push down the priority stack choice of brand-new, more effective software application video encoders. With software eating the video encoding function, compute efficiency is now the oxygen required to prosper and win against an increasingly competitive and crowded direct-to-consumer (D2C) market.

You can attempt out 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 ON THIS LINK

Leave a Reply

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