Xvid HD Category

[shipwreck]

Quotas? No traffic limitations on all fixed line broadband products (mobile broadband is a different matter). Otherwise I'd feel like living in a third world country, no offense.

If you do HD, do it right or don't do it at all. That's how I see it. If bandwidth is an issue, HD simply is no option.

Besides, XviD is a less efficient codec than h.264. To achieve the same picture quality, it actually needs more bandwidth, not less. And while it's true that decoding XviD is less CPU demanding, that's hardly relevant today, since cheap $50 streamers support h.264 decoding these days (x264 MKV), as already mentioned.

[mjmacky]

That's the point, XVID HD actually doesn't look nice if you're still starving the bit rate. That's why I say if you're still choosing XVID over x264, just stick with the SD stuff, getting the HD version is like putting rims on your Geo Metro (analogous reference might be both outdated and only relevant to a specific subculture).

[tesco]

Quotas? No traffic limitations on all fixed line broadband products (mobile broadband is a different matter). Otherwise I'd feel like living in a third world country, no offense.

If you do HD, do it right or don't do it at all. That's how I see it. If bandwidth is an issue, HD simply is no option.

Besides, XviD is a less efficient codec than h.264. To achieve the same picture quality, it actually needs more bandwidth, not less. And while it's true that decoding XviD is less CPU demanding, that's hardly relevant today, since cheap $50 streamers support h.264 decoding these days (x264 MKV), as already mentioned.

Well that's just great except that no release groups release small x264 720p releases. Take what you can get.

x274 720p > xvid 720p > xvid 480

[mjmacky]

x264 480p > xvid 720p (at current file sizes)
I'm just not sure what's taking so long to switch
I think it'd be a hard argument to make that anyone's machine can't handle 480p x264

[shipwreck]

Quotas? No traffic limitations on all fixed line broadband products (mobile broadband is a different matter). Otherwise I'd feel like living in a third world country, no offense.

If you do HD, do it right or don't do it at all. That's how I see it. If bandwidth is an issue, HD simply is no option.

Besides, XviD is a less efficient codec than h.264. To achieve the same picture quality, it actually needs more bandwidth, not less. And while it's true that decoding XviD is less CPU demanding, that's hardly relevant today, since cheap $50 streamers support h.264 decoding these days (x264 MKV), as already mentioned.

Well that's just great except that no release groups release small x264 720p releases. Take what you can get.

x274 720p > xvid 720p > xvid 480

Define "small". Certain groups like x264s DiRTY do release a lot of SD x264 rips and 'small-ish' 720p rips of 2-4GB of size. Dedicated movie trackers have a lot of smaller x264 rips, too.

[Disme]

XviD is obsolete. Invest $50 on a streamer and enjoy the superior quality of x264 rips. HD XviD? Pure anachronism.

Quota grows on trees in your country?

... in some parts of the world people still have FUP's

[mjmacky]

[QUOTE=Disme;3567955]

... in some parts of the world people still have FUP's

FUPAs?

[iLOVENZB]

Fair Usage Policies (FUP)*

[tesco]

Well that's just great except that no release groups release small x264 720p releases. Take what you can get.

x274 720p > xvid 720p > xvid 480

Define "small". Certain groups like x264s DiRTY do release a lot of SD x264 rips and 'small-ish' 720p rips of 2-4GB of size. Dedicated movie trackers have a lot of smaller x264 rips, too.

2-4gb was what I had in mind.
I don't always see the small 720p releases, at least not posted to FST which admittedly is about as far as I usually look when it comes to the popular items. I also didn't use to see too many x264 SD releases, though they're becoming more common this year.