Svideo vs. Component

Paul, have you actually CREATED any WM9 material yourself?  How about any mpeg-4?  I do all the time.  To say one is so much better than the other is poppycock.

WM9


Xvid


You\'d be hard pressed to tell me WM9 stomps mpeg-4 in this SS, I\'d even say Xvid retains the colors better, not to mention you can make out the letters on the boat.  Check out Doom9\'s codec comparisons (who also prefer mpeg-4 over WM9).  The thing is the Mpeg-4 derivatives are always getting updates, while WM9 sits in the same build forever.

Component is not the same thing as RGB.  With component you have sync on green.  RGBH/V is video in its purest form.  Thing is no one can tell the difference and component is just as capable for hi-def material.

ps- forgot to add this:

So again,
WM9 > MPEG-4
another test was shown that MPEG-4 is very bad and pale in comparison to WM9. Even DiVX outpeform MPEG-4 easily. So, it seems like only DiVx is a very close competitor to WM9.

Divx IS a form of mpeg-4 you goofball.

Then if RGB supports progressive scan then why can I not play, for instance, Tekken 4, in progressive scan with my Sony CRT? This is also going through an Extron scaler.

It doesn\'t even give me the option, yet when I play with component I can.

I\'m not saying your wrong, i\'d just like to know why its not working if it theoritically CAN, because RGB does look better IMO. Maybe I have a dodgy component cable or a really, really good RGB one.

Extron scaler.. egad your pappa has some cash to spare.

I\'m not sure of all the hookups you aussies have (SCART or is that just Euro?), but RGB most certainly supports progressive scan.  Your monitor is progressive scan and the VGA cable going to it is sending an RGBH/V signal.  What video connections are available on the Aussie PS2, or are you using some sort of adapter?

[Paul2]

Hmmm...

I remember a website that test WM9, DivX4?, and MPEG-4.

From the look of it, WM9 outperform  MPEG-4.

Also, THX, what bitrate is the compressor of th XVid is running comparing to WM9?

Because from a website,

they tested the Matrix compressed from WM9, MPEG-4, and Divx.  All compressed to the same bitrate and resolution for a fair comparison.

They make two tests.
The three codecs at 1 Mbits running at 720 x 480 DVD resolution.
and another one at 512 Kbits.

another test is three codecs running at 1 Mbits running at 320 x 240 or a quarter resolution of DVD.
and another 1 at 512 Kbits.

From the test, of course the original looks the best.  Then WM9 look better than the other 3 codecs.  But in some cases DIVX look just as good as WM9 or a bit better while other tests, WM9 look a bit better than DIVX.
But MPEG-4 look worst on all the tests.  MPEG-4 look very bad.  Especiall scenes with fast motion where it have trouble compression it well.

And I believe all of the three tests are running at 24 fps.