Estimates show that HEVC is supported by only 30% as many devices as AVC, and fewer video file formats support HEVC than AVC. The relatively limited device and browser compatibility for H.265 widens this gap even further. Due to this, the popularity of this codec is still lacking.

For starters, the processing power necessary for HEVC to work makes the required hardware quite costly. As advanced as this codec is, it still has significant drawbacks. However, this doesn’t mean you should switch over to H.265 and never look back. All of this makes for a much more efficient video compression process. It also has over three times as many intraframe motion prediction modes - 35, as opposed to AVC’s nine - and uses more advanced prediction technology.

It requires half as much bandwidth as H.264, both for encoding and broadcasting, while retaining the same video quality. Mkv, mp4, qtff, asf, avi, mxf, ps, ts, 3gpįrom the table above, you can probably conclude that, in most ways, H.265 is better than H.264. Mkv, mp4, qtff, asf, avi, mxf, ps, ts, m2ts, evo, 3gp, f4v Let’s take a look at a side-to-side H.264 vs. Now that we’ve covered the basics of each of these codecs, it’s time to crunch some numbers.

Limited compatibility with devices and browsers.

How to use ffmpeg to convert h.265