Context Navigation

Version 46 (modified by Antoine Martin, 8 years ago) (diff)
--

[[Image(...)]] Picture Encodings

This page is strongly related to WindowRefresh, the Network and client rendering are also relevant.
For video encodings (vpx and h264), colorspace conversion is also required reading.

Introduction

Xpra supports a number of picture encodings, provided you have the required libraries installed. Even then, the features of each encoding may vary based on the version of the libraries and other dependencies, both client and server side.
Here is the list as of v0.13

lossless encodings:
- rgb: rgb24 for regular windows, rgb32 for transparency support (compressed with zlib or lz4, just like packet compression)
- png (24/32-bit colour), png/L (8-bit grayscale) and png/P (8-bit colour palette)
- webp (lossless mode)
lossy encodings:
- jpeg
- webp (lossy mode)
- vpx (VP8 and VP9)
- h264: either using x264 or nvenc
- h265 using x265 (not usable, far too slow)

Note: for backwards compatibility, on versions older than 0.10.10 you have to specify the encoding as x264 to get h264 and vpx to get vp8. Newer versions use h264 and vp8, but x264 and vpx will remain for command-line backwards compatibility.

Choosing an Encoding

The best thing to do is to try them all and choose the one that provides the best results.

Here are some rough guidelines:

on LANs with 100MBit/s or higher: rgb + zlib/lz4 should give you the best latency possible (whilst consuming quite a lot of bandwidth in the process..)
if you have the required hardware, use NVENC
to save a little bit of bandwidth at the expense of framerate and latency, use lossless encodings: png or webp
otherwise, choose h264 and tune the speed/quality to suit your needs (see below)

The other encodings are somewhat less useful:

vpx : VP8 is similar to h264 but it does not support all speed and quality tuning, it also subsamples colours which leads to visual degradation. VP9 is so slow it is unusable.
just like VP9, h265 is far too slow to encode
jpeg gives lower size/quality than other lossy encodings, use this if the video encodings are not available and you need better compression than png or webp can give you
webp (lossy mode) is a single image subset of vpx, and therefore lacks intra-frame compression - but latency is decent

Colourspace conversion step - CSC

Before passing the pixels to the video encoder, we may or may not include a colourspace conversion step, (some newer versions of x264 support BGRA pixels as input directly) it is required when downscaling the video.

See: Colourspace conversion step - CSC

Tuning

The best way to choose the right options is through wiki/Testing. Though you may find some good illustrations online to give you an idea of the trade offs. (ie: fps vs noise, fps vs size) Be aware that the lossless auto-refresh will trigger a lossless frame encoded using png or rgb. If the delay is too low, it may negate the benefits of using efficient compression.

Notes

When comparing performance, make sure that you use the right metrics... The number of updates per second is not always a good one (if there are more small regions, this can be a good or a bad thing), more examples here: Misleading Statistics

Statistics

As part of encoding improvements (mostly in #419), we have collected encoding performance statistics for 4 still test pictures using the current crop of codec code (pre-release version 0.13). These encodings are also used when a video encoding is selected as primary encoding, this is done to optimize bandwidth and CPU usage: video encodings require a full frame everytime, so we use still picture encodings for smaller regions and for automatic lossless refresh.

Mode					Desktop 2560x1600		Browser 1920x1080		Diagram 640x800		Small Alpha 64x48
Encoding	Compressor	Preset	Quality	Speed	MPixels/s	comp	MPixels/s	comp	MPixels/s	comp	MPixels/s	comp
png	PIL (old)	optimized		0	1.6	8.1
png	PIL (old)			100	6.5	8.5
png	PIL			100	11.6	10.0	16.1	3.1	14.6	5.0	6.0	30.1
png/P	PIL			100	21.8	4.7	17.2	9.0	23.9	3.9	2.2	14.0
png/L	PIL			100	24.3	3.8	31.1	1.4	29.7	2.6	7.6	4.7
webp	PIL		0		5.5	0.5	6.3	0.5	5.9	0.7	0.4	13.4
webp	PIL		50		5.1	2.1	6.0	1.1	5.6	1.6	0.4	16.7
webp	PIL		100		4.3	6.2	5.9	3.1	5.3	4.3	0.4	28.8
jpeg	PIL	optimized	0		71.0	0.5	68.5	0.4	80.6	0.5	16.6	3.2
jpeg	PIL		50		86.0	3.1	68.1	1.9	68.2	2.5	12.7	8.8
jpeg	PIL	optimized	100		48.0	10.8	56.8	5.7	56.0	7.7	9.5	26.1
jpeg	PIL		100		72.0	13.0	58.4	5.7	56.5	7.7	8.4	26.1
rgb	lz4			100	224.0	15.0	497.0	4.3	526.0	6.9	76.7	56.0
rgb	zlib			50	21.0	9.1	30.2	2.5	27.8	3.1	11.3	39.4
webp	python-webm		0		6.0	0.8	6.7	0.5	6.2	0.7	0.5	13.4
webp	python-webm		50		5.3	2.1	6.5	1.1	5.7	1.6	0.6	16.7
webp	python-webm		100		0.3	4.8	1.0	0.7	0.7	1.6	0.1	25.0
webp	Cython	TEXT	0	100	18.6	0.6	19.4	0.4	18.9	0.6	1.5	2.9
webp	Cython	TEXT	50	100	15.5	2.7	17.7	1.5	16.6	2.2	1.2	11.9
webp	Cython	TEXT	99	100	12.6	6.7	15.2	3.3	13.9	4.6	0.8	29.7
webp	Cython	TEXT + lossless	100	0	0.1	4.9	0.6	0.7	0.3	1.6	0.0	24.7
webp	Cython	TEXT + lossless	100	100	2.3	5.9	27.8	1.3	27.2	1.9	1.5	26.9

Notes:

all tests were performed on an AMD FX-8150 (octa-core 3GHz AMD CPU)
video encodings are not included, and should generally be preferred to the single picture encodings shown here
this shows both speed in mega pixels per second (higher is better), and compression ratio (lower is better)
Low quality at low speed doesn't really make much sense, so some values have been omitted
changing the webp preset does not affect speed or output size much, it probably does affect the perceived picture quality (seems best to stick with TEXT to ensure that text remains readable)
The new webp encoder seems to perform about the same with speeds >50%, only low speed is really slow, and lossless is unbearably slow (it can take more than 30 seconds to encode a single frame using lossless + low speed!)
quality is not the same for each encoder, some have lossless modes others not, etc..
for data showing the differences between the various png compression types (HUFFMAN_ONLY, FIXED, RLE, FILTERED, DEFAULT), see ticket:419#comment:6