Sony X9005A Owners & Netflix 4k/HEVC Codec

[sound10]

Hi as a current owner of the 2013 55X9005A, I am wondering what Sony is planning to do for us early adopters with regards to Netflix 4k/ HEVC H.265 Codec. I hope that we early adopters are not going to be left out in the cold !

Thanks

[Batfinkk]

Thats not how content rights access work mate. You can't license or sub license a different resolution, otherwise what would stop the rights holder adding an extra couple of pixels on both axis and reselling it over and over. Rights are on a country by country basis, so the fact that something else is happening in Japan is nice but has no impact in the UK. Nor are Sony Electronics a broadcaster either.

[pmclaughlin]

@Batfinkk

I said nothing about them being a broadcaster, just saying they could facilitating the technical aspects for the BBC/ITV for producing their UK multicast broadcast via iplayer/itvplayer. It is not like the BBC/ITV won't be getting a 4K feed(dirty or clean) for their UK editing. and Sony did provide all the technical capability for the 4K recording of this competition (and the test run) and the Sony 4K screens are the official screens of the competition. But I was meaning more along the lines of how they worked with the BBC to do the Tennis at Wimbledon in 3D(in 20012 iirc) and then shoot it in 4K last year.

Although the broadcasting rights for competitive international football are specifically different in the UK to most other countries, by virtue of the TV license/ofcom rules stipulating that the games must be viewable for all license fee holders, and are exempt from the usual pay per view capitalist setup. So the only way the rights can be sold, is to free Terrestrial broadcasters. So the rights have no extra value in the UK. So I don't see how Fifa would want to restrict a UK broadcaster providing a 4K online broadcast.

[Batfinkk]

I think you've over simplfied things a bit. The commercial & technical appetitite & reality is a little different I think.

Bottom live is there would have been way to much work involved for a tiny addressable market for the BBC to consider getting involved, would have probably been stopped over plurality issues + the BBC are hyper cautious about new tech after their 3D efforts. BBC themselves say its some way off - http://www.iptv-news.com/2013/11/mark-harrison-bbc-we-are-taking-4k-very-seriously/.

All this plays to the same original point made about this technology being very young.

[pmclaughlin]

@Batfinkk

“All this plays to the same original point made about this technology being very young.”

imo, that is the statement in this thread that is over simplifying things. The “technology” as you put it is 99% software. So unless we are talking development software or neural networks, it is simply an algorithmic solution doing a lightweight deterministic task in a slice of allocated time. The lack of time between ratification is neither here nor there in this world of fully programmable vector parallel processing.

They can provide h.265 support for the X9005A via a firmware update, yet have chosen for short term and ill-conceived business reasons not to do so.

[Batfinkk]

The Sat & Cable providers are fully expecting to have to replace all STB boxes across Europe to cope with 4K-http://www.beyondhdmasters.com/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=79c7ca6f-752b-4fbf-88f8-97c2d18f0633...

http://www.beyondhdmasters.com/presentations

If you think you can do it via software alone, file that patent fella as you could make billions from the amount they save in not having to roll out new boxes. 

Not sure I can add anymore to this now as with respect as I think its pretty clear that the commercial & technical reality is that this is both a hardware & software issue.

[pmclaughlin]

@Batfinkk

Well given tha all STB boxes are only HD(eg 1280x720p, 1920x1080p signal processors), not 4K (3840x2160p signal processors) unlike the internal DSP units of all 4K Tvs released in the last two years, so maybe you are correct, and you can't add any more.

These 4K Tvs take much higher bit-rate streams, such as the mastered in 4K blu-rays and have adequate DSP to signal process and upscale 12bit deep colour at the native resolution of the screens, so suggesting they aren't high performance programmable DSP units with enough resources to handle a 15Mbit/sec H.265 data stream is a nonsense. Go back and look at the texas instruments PCB pdf I linked, and read it in the context of how light weight decoding is compared to encoding. Then remember that these TVs can signal process a raw 4K data stream from a Sony 4K handycam or can upscale and signal process a deep colour Full HD Sony Handycam.

[Anonymous]

Hi All

Warning - Long Post

I have been doing some tests on a few files recently, and unfortunately my position remains the same.  As I stated before, I do not know enough about DSPs to know its limitations. However, I don't believe that the technology was realistically available at the time that the 2013 4K TV's were in its design phase in regards to solving to issues of increased processing loads - Especially since the H.265 specifications were not even ratified.

Be aware, that these probably wouldnt hold up to scientific scrutany - just some tests that I have conducted as an indication.

Anyway, here are my findings

PS: If anyone has a "Free" test file of a 4K H265 - I would be interested to know

______________________________

Summary:

Unfortunately I am unable to test a 4K H.265 file – as I do not have access to one.  So I cannot give a direct comparison between 4K H.265 and a 1080p H.265 or even 4K H.265 to 1080p H.264.  However I have tested 3 types of files (4K H.264, 1080p H.265 and a 1080p H.264)

When decoding a XAVC (H.264) 4K file, there is a massive difference in CPU load between having Hardware Accelerated Decoding enabled, compared to when its disabled.  The CPU cannot cope unless decoding is done via hardware.  As the hardware is designed to decode the H.264 codec, there is also a difference between the GPU loads, which amazingly they are decreased as well.

There is a massive 60% to 166% difference between decoding a H.264 1080p file and a H.265 1080p file depending on whether the H.264 decoding is done via hardware or not.

Adding this difference onto a 4K file would certainly prove that a 4K H.265 file would NOT play WITHOUT hardware decoding – of which it has not been done.

I also must conclude that a TV (of any brand) certainly would not be able to decode a 4K H.265 in software alone.  A 4K H.265 @ 15Mbps stream via Netflix is one thing, but higher bitrate video files are another.

Laptop Specifications

Processor              :                Intel Core i5 3210M @ 2.5Ghz

Graphics                :                Nvidia GeForce GT 650M (Memory:2048MB)  /  Intel HD 4000

RAM                        :                6GB DDR3 @ 1600Mhz

OS                            :                Windows 7 SP1 – 64bit

4K Video Test

Hardware Accelerated Decoding : DISABLED

The following is the CPU usage chart – CPU usage is averaging approx. 92% (and generally ranges between 88-96% CPU load) – Playback also stutters:

The below screenshot is GPU usage (Graphics) – GPU usage averages approx. 10% (and generally ranges between 7-14% GPU load):

Hardware Accelerated Decoding : Enabled

CPU usage is now down to approx. 20% load (with no stuttering) and generally ranges between 17-24%

GPU usage is the biggest surprise – It’s a constant and stable 13-14% load. 

H.265 / HEVC – 1080p

Hardware Accelerated Decoding : DISABLED

The following is the CPU usage chart – CPU usage is averaging approx. 40% (and generally ranges between 35-50% CPU load):

The below screenshot is GPU usage (Graphics) – GPU usage averages approx. 6% (and generally ranges between 5.5-7% GPU load):

Hardware Accelerated Decoding : Enabled

There is no measureable difference between having hardware accelerate decoding enabled compared to disabled.  Still averaging approx. 40% CPU load (with a variation between 35-50%) - this is probably due to the hardware not having special instructions to decode the H.265 codec.

Again there is no measurable difference on the load of the GPU compared with having hardware accelerated decoding disabled:

1080p File Test

Hardware Accelerated Decoding : DISABLED

The following is the CPU usage chart – CPU usage is averaging approx. 25% (and generally ranges between 20-30% CPU load):

The below screenshot is GPU usage (Graphics) – GPU usage averages approx. 5.7% (and generally ranges between 5.5-6% GPU load):

Hardware Accelerated Decoding : Enabled

CPU usage is now down to approx. 15% load and generally ranges between 12-20%

There is no measurable difference on the load of the GPU compared with having hardware accelerated decoding disabled:

END

[pmclaughlin]

@Anonymous

Please, please, please just stop. All your tests actually prove the opposite point, as your PC is bandwidth limited by the virtual memory resident on a HDD that is many magnitudes slower than the memory buffer a 4K TV will use for DSP. Even then, the bandwidth of you laptop's RAM will be magnitudes slower than the small but very fast memory used on DSP boards.

The h.264 data you are processing is an offline file, not a 15Mbit/sec datastream, and even then the data you are reading in, is roughly 4times the datasize(and IO bandwidth) needed to read the data into the a h.265 decoder. The Pc is also far away from being used as dedicated hardware, in which it would gain massive advantages

All you've successfully done, is muddy up the thread and deny customers like myself the opportunity to hold Sony to account to get the features I implicitly felt they were selling with the X9005A. Thanks for nothing.

[Jonnie1266]

Well, the water has just got muddier. If you are correct in your theory pmclaughlin then I am even more incensed. I notice that our television model is not even advertised any more on the Sony UK website - ever feel like you have just been done ? I reckon that all owners of this television who read this thread should complain bitterly if, what you say, is the reason for no update - however, you have to wonder if all these companies got together prior to deciding to sell an add on box rather than send out an update, make a bit more money then bring out television model 'B' and make even more money. It is interesting how Sony were able to send an update to make HDMI 4 input version 2.0 (which they apparently planned for), actually mine did not need this update as I only purchased it in February. If only I'd waited !!

Quinnicus, I understand your replies but I also wonder if you are 'out gunned' here

Also, your comment below -

"To conclude -

As far as Im aware, there are 5 stages of a consumer product life cycle (refering to generational/evolutionary change in technology)

1. Introduction
2. Growth
3. Maturity
4. Saturation
5. Decline

The 2013 4K TV adopters (such as yourself) fit in the introduction stage - this is where cost of the product is at its highest and that technical aspects may not have been fully implemented/solved.  Unfortunately the specifications of the H.265 was not ratiffied in time for the 2013 4K TV's (hence HDMI 2.0 saga also) and do not "believe" that this can be done with a FW update."

It is rather a lot of money to spend to only be in the introduction stage, how about this television got to maturity prior to the decline, it never had a chance. I am now a " you should have bought the next model you fool" person !

I intend to purchase a 4K camcorder but I will definitely wait a while.

[Anonymous]

I welcome healthy debate (really!!) and would also welcome to be proven wrong - however at this moment in this debate there is massive over-simplification and have not seen any evidence on why a 2013 4K TV could support H.265 @ 4K resolution.  If there is a mass manufacture 'conspiracy' it needs to be proven beyond reasonable doubt.

I fully understand that you guys/gals have paid a lot of money a technology that is in the 'introduction' phase.  Those 5 stages can be applied to everything (either generalised or specific) such as a Car/Radio and even a BBC TV License (ie Black and White) or a brand new video codec...

But I think at this moment between myself and pmclauglin, it might be best to agree to disagree.

If you want a response to this from Sony directly, you may what to write a letter?

Cheers

EDIT:

I own a Network Media Player from a company called Mede8er - and this is their responses in regards to H.265

http://www.mede8erforum.com/index.php/topic,14108.0.html

http://www.mede8erforum.com/index.php/topic,13461.0.html

http://www.mede8erforum.com/index.php/topic,12739.0.html

The same principle will probably apply to TV's and other devices.