win10 hevc h265解码器 x86下载

weixin_39821228 2023-05-27 18:30:15

win10 hevc h265解码器 x86 , 相关下载链接：https://download.csdn.net/download/wf176740803/87778142?utm_source=bbsseo

...全文

717 回复打赏收藏转发到动态举报

写回复

回复

切换为时间正序

请发表友善的回复…

发表回复

win10 hevc h265解码器 x86

windows上购买还收7米... 高效解码和播放：支持HEVC/H.265视频格式，能够高效解码和播放高清视频，同时减少视频文件所占用的存储空间。支持4K和Ultra HD内容：该扩展旨在利用某些较新设备的硬件功能，包括那些具有Intel 7th Generation处理器和较新GPU的设备，以支持4K和Ultra HD内容。提高播放体验：能够充分利用硬件资源，提高视频播放的流畅度和稳定性。

使用 Windows 7 Codec Pack 它可以将您的计算机将配备解码所有常见的视频和音频格式。 Windows 7 编解码器允许播放几乎所有格式的视频和音频文件。包装中包含的所有编解码器的详细列表可在制造商的网站上找到。编解码器的解释：编解码器是设备或计算机上的一种软件，能够对文件，流和广播中的视频和/或音频数据进行编码和/或解码。编解码器一词是’compressor-decompressor’的Portmanteau 您将可以播放的压缩类型包括： x265 | h.265 | HEVC | 10位x264 | x264 | h.264 | AVCHD | AVC | DivX |MP4 | MPEG4 | MPEG2 等。您将能够播放的文件类型包括： .bdmv | .evo | .hevc | .mkv | .avi | .flv | .webm | .mp4 | .ts | .m4v | .m4a | .ogm | .ac3 | .dts | .flac | .ape | .aac | .ogg | .ofr | .mpc | .3gp 等。支持的解决方案包括：包括SD（标准清晰度）480i，480p，576i，576p，+ HD（高清晰度）720i，720p，1080i，1080p，4k及更高版本的所有分辨率。通过与此编解码器包一起使用 RedFox AnyDVD HD，用户可以播放：受保护的 Bluray，HD-DVD，AVCHD，DVD，CD 光盘。 Windows 7 音视频解码器 Windows 7 Codec Pack 下载Windows 7 音视频解码器 Windows 7 Codec Pack 中文版封装编解码器组件： ●LAV视频解码器0.74.1 Build 60 x86。 ●LAV视频解码器0.74.1 Build 60 x64。 ●Cole的ffdshow DirectShow Video Codec x86版本1.3.4533。 ●Cole的ffdshow DirectShow Video Codec x86版本1.3.4533。 ●XviD视频VFW（编码器）编解码器v1.3.7。 ●x264视频VFW（编码器）编解码器v44.2851。 ●Lagarith Video VFW（编码器）编解码器v1.3.27 x86。 ●LAV音频解码器0.74.1 Build 60 x86。 ●LAV音频解码器0.74.1 Build 60 x64。 ●Sony DSD解码器1.0。 ●DivX音频解码器4.1 ●madFLAC解码器1.1.0 x86。 ●DSP-worx低音源调制/解码器v1.5.2.0。 ●Haali Media Splitter / Decoder 16/09/11 x86-适用于MP4，MKV，OGM和AVI文件。 ●Haali Media Splitter / Decoder 16/09/11 x64-用于MP4，MKV，OGM和AVI文件。 ●LAV Splitter 0.74.1 Build 60 x86。 ●LAV Splitter 0.74.1 Build 60 x64。 ●xy-VSFilter / DirectVobSub 3.0.0.211 x86-字幕阅读器。 ●xy-VSFilter / DirectVobSub 3.0.0.211 x64-字幕读取器。 ●CDXA Reader v1.7.13 x86-也称为Form 2 Mode 2 CD或XCD。 ●CDXA Reader v1.7.13 x64-也称为Form 2 Mode 2 CD或XCD。 ●Icaros 3.1.0 x86。 ●Icaros 3.1.0 x64。 ●应用程序调整-更改 Media Player Classic，NVIDIA 3D Vision Player 和 Stereoscopic Player 的默认设置。软件包实用程序： ●Media Player Classic 1.9.6 x86 – 可以通过右键单击任何文件来选择。 ●光盘处理程序-用于双击 Windows 资源管理器中的 BluRay 光盘图标。 ●编解码器设置 GUI -允许用户修改编解码器，图形和声音设置。 ●编解码器设置 UAC（用户帐户控制）管理器-在用户之间复制设置。 ●更新检查器-每 7 天检查一次更新（仅管理员）。 ●任务栏菜单-可以轻松访问编解码器实用程序，并可以快速切换音频配置文件。 Windows 7 编解码器包几乎支持现代视频和音频文件使用的每种压缩和文件类型。要使用 Windows 7 编解码器包，计算机上必须安装视频播放器，例如 Windows Me

世界上最快的VP9视频解码器 As before , I was very excited when Google released VP9 – for one, because I was one of the people involved in creating it back when I worked for Google (I no longer do). How good is it, and how much better can it be? To evaluate that question, Clément Bœsch and I set out to write a VP9 decoder from scratch for FFmpeg. The goals never changed from the original ffvp8 situation (community-developed, fast, free from the beginning). We also wanted to answer new questions: how does a well-written decoder compare, speed-wise, with a well-written decoder for other codecs? TLDR (see rest of post for details): as a codec, VP9 is quite impressive – it beats x264 in many cases. However, the encoder is slow, very slow. At higher speed settings, the quality gain melts away. This seems to be similar to what people report about HEVC (using e.g. x265 as an encoder). single-threaded decoding speed of libvpx isn’t great. FFvp9 beats it by 25-50% on a variety of machines. FFvp9 is somewhat slower than ffvp8, and somewhat faster than ffh264 decoding speed (for files encoded to matching SSIM scores). Multi-threading performance in libvpx is deplorable, it gains virtually nothing from its loopfilter-mt algorithm. FFvp9 multi-threading gains nearly as much as ffh264/ffvp8 multithreading, but there’s a cap (material-, settings- and resolution-dependent, we found it to be around 3 threads in one of our clips although it’s typically higher) after which further threads don’t cause any more gain. The codec itself To start, we did some tests on the encoder itself. The direct goal here was to identify bitrates at which encodings would give matching SSIM-scores so we could do same-quality decoder performance measurements. However, as such, it also allows us to compare encoder performance in itself. We used settings very close to recommended settings forVP8,VP9andx264, optimized for SSIM as a metric. As source clips, we chose Sintel (1920×1080 CGI content, source ), a 2-minute clip from Tears of Steel (1920×800 cinematic content, source ), and a 3-minute clip from Enter the Void (1920×818 high-grain/noise content,screenshot). For each, we encoded at various bitrates and plotted effective bitrate versus SSIM . sintel_ssimtos_ssimetv_ssim You’ll notice that in most cases, VP9 can indeed beat x264, but, there’s some big caveats: VP9 encoding (using libvpx) is horrendously slow – like, 50x slower than VP8/x264 encoding. This means that encoding a 3-minute 1080p clip takes several days on a high-end machine. Higher –cpu-used=X parameters make the quality gains melt away. libvpx’ VP9 encodes miss the target bitrates by a long shot (100% off) for the ETV clip, possibly because of our use of –aq-mode=1. libvpx tends to slowly crumble at higher bitrates for hard content – again, look at the ETV clip, where x264 shows some serious mature killer instinct at the high bitrate end of things. Overall, these results are promising, although the lack-of-speed is a serious issue. Decoder performance For decoding performance measurements, we chose (Sintel)500 (VP9), 1200 (VP8) and 700 (x264) kbps (SSIM=19.8); Tears of Steel4.0 (VP9), 7.9 (VP8) and 6.3 (x264) mbps (SSIM=19.2); and Enter the Void 9.7 (VP9), 16.6 (VP8) and 10.7 (x264) mbps (SSIM=16.2). We used FFmpeg to decode each of these files, either using the built-in decoder (to compare between codecs), or using libvpx-vp9 (to compare ffvp9 versus libvpx). Decoding time was measured in seconds using “time ffmpeg -threads 1 [-c:v libvpx-vp9] -i $file -f null -v 0 -nostats – 2>&1 | grep user”, with this FFmpeg and this libvpx revision (downloaded on Feb 20th, 2014). sintel_archs tos_archsetv_archs A few notes on ffvp9 vs. libvpx-vp9 performance: ffvp9 beats libvpx consistently by 25-50%. In practice, this means that typical middle- to high-end hardware will be able to playback 4K content using ffvp9, but not using libvpx. Low-end hardware will struggle to playback even 720p content using libvpx (but do so fine using ffvp9). on Haswell, the difference is significantly smaller than on sandybridge, likely because libvpx has some AVX2 optimizations (e.g. for MC and loop filtering), whereas ffvp9 doesn’t have that yet; this means this difference might grow over time as ffvp9 gets AVX2 optimizations also. on the Atom, the differences are significantly smaller than on other systems; the reason for this is likely that we haven’t done any significant work on Atom-performance yet. Atom has unusually large latencies between GPRs and XMM registers, which means you need to take special care in ordering your instructions to prevent unnecessary halts – we haven’t done anything in that area yet (for ffvp9). Some users may find that ffvp9 is a lot slower than advertised on 32bit; this is correct, most of our SIMD only works on 64bit machines. If you have 32bit software, port it to 64bit. Can’t port it? Ditch it. Nobody owns 32bit x86 hardware anymore these days. So how does VP9 decoding performance compare to that of other codecs? There’s basically two ways to measure this: same-bitrate (e.g. a 500kbps VP8 file vs. a 500kbps VP9 file, where the VP9 file likely looks much better), or same-quality (e.g. a VP8 file with SSIM=19.2 vs. a VP9 file with SSIM=19.2, where the VP9 file likely has a much lower bitrate). We did same-quality measurements, and found: ffvp9 tends to beat ffh264 by a tiny bit (10%), except on Atom (which is likely because ffh264 has received more Atom-specific attention than ffvp9). ffvp9 tends to be quite a bit slower than ffvp8 (15%), although the massive bitrate differences in Enter the Void actually makes it win for that clip (by about 15%, except on Atom). Given that Google promised VP9 would be no more than 40% more complex than VP8, it seems they kept that promise. we did some same-bitrate comparisons, and found that x264 and ffvp9 are essentially identical in that scenario (with x264 having slightly lower SSIM scores); vp8 tends to be about 50% faster, but looks significantly worse. Multithreading One of the killer-features in FFmpeg is frame-level multithreading, which allows multiple cores to decode different video frames in parallel. Libvpx also supports multithreading. So which is better?

Windows 10支持HEVC视频解码补丁

下载资源悬赏专区

13,655

社区成员

12,654,473

社区内容

发帖

与我相关

我的任务

其他技术论坛（原bbs）

社区管理员

加入社区

近7日
近30日
至今

加载中

查看更多榜单

社区公告

暂无公告

试试用AI创作助手写篇文章吧

+ 用AI写文章