Short answer

When designing video streaming solutions or implementing video encoding pipelines, select x264 or SVT-AV1 with faster presets to minimize energy consumption and carbon footprint, unless superior coding efficiency at the cost of higher energy use is a strict requirement.

Field
Sustainability
Source
IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine (2023)
Method
Experimental comparison
Evidence
Strong effect

Selecting specific video encoders and their associated presets can significantly reduce energy consumption and carbon emissions during video streaming. This sustainability research insight is drawn from a 2023 study published in IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine. Using Experimental comparison, researchers explored how this design variable affects real-world outcomes. The key design takeaway: When designing video streaming solutions or implementing video encoding pipelines, select x264 or SVT-AV1 with faster presets to minimize energy consumption and carbon footprint, unless superior coding efficiency at the cost of higher energy use is a strict requirement.

Study
SustainabilityRecentStrong effect

Optimizing Video Encoding for Reduced Carbon Footprint: x264 and SVT-AV1 Lead the Way

Selecting specific video encoders and their associated presets can significantly reduce energy consumption and carbon emissions during video streaming.

IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine · 2023

01

Key Findings

  • 01x264 and SVT-AV1 encoders, particularly at faster presets, demonstrated the lowest energy consumption and CO2 emissions.
  • 02x264 achieved the most energy-efficient performance, with CO2 emissions ranging from 0.28 g (faster preset) to 9.74 g (slower preset).
  • 03Slower presets on SVT-AV1 and VVenC offered superior coding efficiency but incurred higher computational complexity and CO2 emissions.
  • 04Video resolution and encoder presets are critical parameters for managing energy consumption and CO2 emissions.
02

Application

Design takeaway

When designing video streaming solutions or implementing video encoding pipelines, select x264 or SVT-AV1 with faster presets to minimize energy consumption and carbon footprint, unless superior coding efficiency at the cost of higher energy use is a strict requirement.

How to apply

When developing or selecting video encoding solutions for web platforms, mobile applications, or content delivery networks, evaluate the energy efficiency of different encoder options and presets using metrics like CO2 emissions per minute of video.

Project actions

  • 01When choosing software for a design project that involves video, research its energy efficiency.
  • 02Consider how different settings in software affect its power usage and environmental impact.
03

Method & Evidence

AimTo quantify and compare the energy consumption and associated carbon dioxide emissions of various modern video encoders under different operational presets.
MethodExperimental comparison
ProcedureFive popular open-source video encoders (x264, x265, VVenC, libvpx-vp9, SVT-AV1) were tested using the JVET-CTC video dataset. Encoding was performed on an Intel x86 multi-core processor across four distinct presets (faster, fast, medium, slower). Energy consumption was measured, and CO2 emissions were calculated based on the energy mix of a French server (101 g/kWh). Coding efficiency was assessed using three objective quality metrics, alongside computing density and memory usage.
ContextDigital media, video streaming, software engineering, environmental sustainability

Variables

IV["Video encoder type (x264, x265, VVenC, libvpx-vp9, SVT-AV1)","Encoding preset (faster, fast, medium, slower)","Video resolution"]
DV["Energy consumption (kWh)","Carbon dioxide emissions (g CO2)","Coding efficiency (quality metrics)","Computational complexity","Memory usage"]
CV["Processor type (Intel x86 multi-core)","Video dataset (JVET-CTC)","CO2 emission factor (101 g/kWh for France)"]
04

Strengths & Limitations

Strengths

  • +Comprehensive comparison of multiple popular encoders.
  • +Inclusion of various presets to reflect real-world usage.
  • +Quantification of both energy consumption and carbon emissions.

Limitations

It can be difficult to accurately measure the exact energy consumption of software on a personal computer, and the carbon footprint depends heavily on the local electricity source.

Reliability & validity

Reliability could be enhanced by repeating tests multiple times and averaging results. Validity is supported by using objective quality metrics and a standardized dataset, though the specific energy mix of the server location limits generalizability.

Think critically

How can the trade-off between video quality, encoding speed, and energy consumption be optimally managed for different user contexts and devices?

05

Design Principles

"Prioritize energy-efficient algorithms and configurations in digital processes to reduce environmental impact."

As digital content consumption, particularly video, continues to grow, the energy demands of encoding processes become a substantial contributor to environmental impact. Designers and engineers can leverage this insight to make informed choices that minimize the ecological footprint of digital products and services.

06

What This Means for Your Design

Choosing the right software for making videos smaller (encoders) and how fast you make them (presets) can really help save energy and reduce pollution.

How to use in your project

  • 1.Reference this study when discussing the environmental impact of digital media processing in your design project.
  • 2.Use the findings to justify the selection of specific software or settings for energy efficiency.
07

Add to My Project

08

Quick Cite

Paragraph starter

This research highlights that the choice of video encoder and its operational preset significantly influences energy consumption and carbon emissions. For instance, the x264 encoder at faster presets was found to be highly energy-efficient, producing minimal CO2 emissions. Conversely, slower presets on encoders like SVT-AV1, while offering better compression, resulted in substantially higher energy demands. This underscores the importance of considering software-level optimizations for environmental sustainability in digital design projects.

09

Source

IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine

Energy Consumption and Carbon Emissions of Modern Software Video Encoders

journal · 2023

View source

Questions About This Research

What does the research say about optimizing video encoding for reduced carbon footprint: x264 and svt-av1 lead the way?
When designing video streaming solutions or implementing video encoding pipelines, select x264 or SVT-AV1 with faster presets to minimize energy consumption and carbon footprint, unless superior coding efficiency at the cost of higher energy use is a strict requirement. Evidence: IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine (2023).
Why does "Optimizing Video Encoding for Reduced Carbon Footprint: x264 and SVT-AV1 Lead the Way" matter for design?
As digital content consumption, particularly video, continues to grow, the energy demands of encoding processes become a substantial contributor to environmental impact. Designers and engineers can leverage this insight to make informed choices that minimize the ecological footprint of digital products and services.
How can designers apply this research?
When designing video streaming solutions or implementing video encoding pipelines, select x264 or SVT-AV1 with faster presets to minimize energy consumption and carbon footprint, unless superior coding efficiency at the cost of higher energy use is a strict requirement.
What were the main findings?
x264 and SVT-AV1 encoders, particularly at faster presets, demonstrated the lowest energy consumption and CO2 emissions.. x264 achieved the most energy-efficient performance, with CO2 emissions ranging from 0.28 g (faster preset) to 9.74 g (slower preset).. Slower presets on SVT-AV1 and VVenC offered superior coding efficiency but incurred higher computational complexity and CO2 emissions.. Video resolution and encoder presets are critical parameters for managing energy consumption and CO2 emissions.
What research method was used?
Experimental comparison.
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence strength is rated Strong effect, based on a 2023 journal from IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine.
What should I do differently in my next project?
When developing or selecting video encoding solutions for web platforms, mobile applications, or content delivery networks, evaluate the energy efficiency of different encoder options and presets using metrics like CO2 emissions per minute of video.
What are the limitations?
The CO2 emission calculation is based on a specific server's energy mix in France; results may vary with different energy sources and geographical locations. The study focused on specific software encoders and may not represent all available encoding technologies.