AVI, MKV, RMVB which format is better? which is the best quality?

Certainly MKV.
(CHILI) SAUCE: Wikipedia

If you are asking for quality, non of them, cause they are just multimedia container,

Currently the best video codec is H264, and the opensource implementation, x264.
and its competition codec, VP8, Ogg Theora, Dirac, FFmpeg Snow, and loads more which many info you can find on wikipedia yourself.

MKV > AVI > RMVB

there goes the answer..

MKV.. super clear

what do you mean by multimedia container?

MKV is not a video format, but a multimedia container format,
read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mkv
Yes MKV is the best... the best container.
The best video format currently is H264 and very soon, h265.

MKV video container with AVC/H264/MPEG-4 =

they are all multimedia container
rmvb most low quality，and i press one episode drama to rmvb ，need 3 hour
MKV is the best !

doesn't matter really, as long you have the correct software and codecs, you set to go.

btw those are media containerz, it is useless comparing containers.

i'm wondering on tis question too, looks like evy1 saying mkv is better.

why MKV is better?
it support all the audio/video codecs and subtitles formats, that rmvb/avi supports.

AVI is ancient container which cant support audio with VBR without hack, normally you will get audio/video out-of-sycn if mux VBR mp3/aac/vorbis/...(endless of list) eith conventional method.

Also, it cant support H.264 specialized B-FRAMES, Dxva/hardware acceleration does not work if your H264 in inside AVI.

while RMVB is exclusive for Real network's audio/video formant only.
they are outdated and no longer updated IIRC. so quality is far behind h264 already.

1 word sums it up for MKV = superior/versatile

mkv.
even the small sized mkv is far better than rmvb

LOL, dont know how to reply to this post
read the previous post by other member please, im pretty sure you know how to read

Hummm semua format tak best... saya pernah convert ke macam2 format kualiti selalunya ikut sumber utama. kalau sumber utama bagus maka baguslah hasilnye kalau sumber utama Cam awak convert ke blueray pun tak lawa tQ

x264 is the trend now.

Rmvb format is so terrible it changes my believe to not use it--

rmvb is not for high definition usage. its purpose of a much compressed size makes it friendly to users who don't have high bandwidth or capped bandwidth. it's also deemed suitable for those who still use crt monitors or tube tv's. not everyone has unlimited bandwidth, high bandwidth or lcd tv's u know.

The development of RMVB codecs a.k.a. RV40 stopped long time ago, basically the quality is much inferior compare to its competitor aka h264.

now their development only focus on the multiplatform video player.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helix_(multimedia_project)

Most videos is using RMVB format now because it's much lighter and each 45minute movie only about 300MB size.

you are ignoring the video resolution and the quality here.
Most recent video codec also could compress a 45mins video to 300mb size but may be with poor video quality and low video resolution.
perhaps h264 or vc1 could do better.

there are also many 2 hour movies that can fit in 300-500MB mkv with h264 video and aac audio.
it's all about quality.

It is because the encoder encodes the video file into those sizes and also shrink the resolution
Everyone can do that. Don't need RMVB, AVI can get the job done good enough

but currently for the home user that play movie on the dvd player can mostly support avi and rmvb, meanwhile mkv is still not available in the market is this right?

Not sure about DVD players but I know of a portable player that plays mkv files natively. You can just use the HDMI out and connect it to your TV.

Guys, despite 1024kbps saying MKV/AVI/RMVB is a multimedia container, you still talk about it like it's a codec.

Please get your facts straight before you want to be wiseguy and talk about like you know what is codec or container.

MKV is good because it support multi stream audio and subtitle. Even multi video angle. But it is just a container.

If you want best quality versus filesize, h.264 is the best right now.

But if you want the video to support most videoplayers and media players, use AVI with xvid/divx codec.

Stay away from RMVB. The quality sucks unless you can get a hardware RMVB encoder. Plus, a lot of standalone players does not support RMVB.

This 1 right. Most of the 720p or 1080p video are MKV. While DVD quality will be AVI file. And RMVB are similar to VCD or better a bit.

Absolutely Not right from your reply
720/1080p is video resolution, not video quality, 1080p means 1920 or 1440 x 1080 video resolution in Progressive Mode.
And read more wiki... MKV, AVI and RMVB ARE MULTIMEDIA CONTAINER
DVD are MPEG2 video with up to ~9Mbps bitrate, VCD are MPEG1 video 1.1Mbp/s.
AVI and RMVB quality can be vary because the encoder can encode them using various profile + video codec, You cant compare them with VCD or DVD, its like compare orange and apple

---

Added on January 23, 2011, 1:57 amDont worry, normal ppl dont even know what the heck is AVI/RMVB/MKV. Codec stuff is for geek only lol.
i think its quite fun when ppl keep say MKV are better, then i will keep reply the same stuff, i must be crazy or nothing better to do LOL

This post has been edited by 1024kbps: Jan 23 2011, 01:57 AM

Don't worry bro, you are not the only 1 doing that
We had our share of fun here back in those days and we still do here

mkv>avi>rmvb

rmvb ruins my video

of coz is mkv has the best quality

Read post #3 and other posts by 1024kbps in this topic.

i like mkv, its file quite small and videos quality is quite good, i am heavy download of movies, so i know what i am talking

its been like 5 years since my last time following updates of thing like this, so technically today mkv is the best format available while my 2006 mindset still thinking of avi as the best format for movies, time to go for the next level

AVI is still as good as mkv if i understand this page http://www.alexander-noe.com/video/amg/en_myths.html

But it does not support B-frames, and h264 make thing worst because h264 use arbitrary b frame order.
Plus DXVA may not work if your H264 was muxed into the AVI container, your PC may crash or the video player will simply give you "Green Screen of Death"

MKV (which i means h.264) is best. very efficient compression, but at cost of processing power though.

Dont associate H264 with MKV, its great on everywhere regardless the type of container.
and you are discussing something off topic.

its just common reference.
rm or divx on mkv is not people (and even geeks) usually encounter.

I just compare the file size..
bigger size will have better quality, rite?

gnerally yes. but much depends on encoder's skill.
..and there are absolutely no connection between formats and resolution size.

Video dimension and compression format must taken into consideration too,
Large file size not necessary mean its better quality, unless you are comparing 2 video with same dimension, playback duration and compression format.

For example if i uploaded a uncompressed RGB video(hundreds GiG) to a net, again i uploaded a h264 compressed video(10GB), both are from same source(MPEG2) btw,
which one will you download?

Its same for Image and Audio too.

This post has been edited by 1024kbps: Mar 21 2011, 06:35 PM

Yup,

But it depends on some people, if you want less hassle of someone encoding wrongly from the original source, take latter as it's safer but compromises on size.

MKV is the best. You can include chapter ordering too