You measuring the best of VP9 Encoder in Image quality, and then points to SVT-VP9 being the fastest encoder which isn't optimise for quality.

The VP9 encoder also tends to smooth ( clean ) the video rather than working with the noise ( Not a problem for most short internet video ), which even as of today x264 is very very good and possibly the best at.

I made two separate, unrelated statements. In any case, libvpx isn't the best VP9 encoder for quality. EVE is.

The point is that you can select the VP9 encoder that makes the most sense for your use case. You can choose from EVE, libvpx, Intel SVT-VP9, Intel Quick Sync, NGCodec, mobile device encoders, etc.

That's an interesting claim. I have to say it doesn't match my experience at all, e.g. when playing VP9 videos on Youtube. Several thoughts:

* I'm not sure what the "ffh264" decoder they're talking about is. My understanding is that pretty much everyone is using libx264 for both encoding and decoding. Maybe the latter is more performant?

* Using SSIM to pick "equal quality" files will probably not give very accurate results.

* SVT-VP9 is, if I'm not mistaken, a hardware encoder. One of the issues with these is that they require some significant tradeoffs to get better speed, so they'll have worse quality than a software encoder at the same bitrate. If you go with software you really pay the price when it comes to encoding time.

Some corrections:

ffh264 is FFmpeg's decoder. libx264 only does encoding, not decoding.

SVT-VP9 is a software encoder, specially optimized for Intel Xeon Scalable and Intel Xeon D processors.

libx264 isn't used as a decoder, it only encodes.

I thought SSIM was not a very good metric for measuring quality? My impression has always been that the VP9 encoders optimize for these simple “objective quality metrics”, therefore they do well on those metrics. But encoders like x264 don’t, so they do not do as well on those metrics.

VP9 outperforms H.264 on both objective and subjective metrics:

http://www.compression.ru/video/codec_comparison/hevc_2018/

http://www.compression.ru/video/codec_comparison/hevc_2018/#...

Their subjective testing methodology:

http://www.compression.ru/video/codec_comparison/hevc_2018/p...

This is true according to my observations. And really, nobody cares about "objective" quality (except for quick feedback during development, I guess). It has to look good.

And VP9 is actually usable on TI Sitara platforms, while H.264 and H.265 cause 100% CPU load and still stutter.