ReviewerDate ReviewedVersionRatingReview
more10s May 3, 2008 1.1.3
5 out of 5
Good stuff.
 
comeoffit Jan 1, 2008 1.1.3
3 out of 5
What happen to the official website? Ever since I install Koepi's XviD codec my Vista Home Premium has been running slowly.
 
XweAponX Oct 7, 2007 1.1.3
5 out of 5
Seems like the "Dead Link" was ressurrected by one of those fake Xhit lame Mirroring websites that foogin mirror what people type in GOOGLE. That pisses me off thank you.

If the MPAA had anything to do with the removal of Keopi's Site, then they Xuk. They Xuk anyway, XuXers! It is just a CONTENT PLAYER that attached to WinAMP, WMP, and Cyberlink PowerDVD player.

I don't understand why .0 face sez this is a bad Codec, S'allright. I've used Keopi since XviD emerged from DivX on two fins and shed its fishtail and Darwin letters. Keopi's the best: As far as XviD goes. XviD is simply not as good as DivX was when it was new. The newer codex of DivX Xux X(h)it! My favourite DivX codec is Alpha 3.11- I stopped keeping up when DivX 4 or so was released and it has that lame MANDATORY player built in. No, that Xucked! So I went back to building mt Rips with that Autorun that used to come with DivX disks- The Autorun that asked you if you wanted to install DivX... And installed 3.11. It also had a lil NFO viewer, those were the days heh?

Most of the XviD releases I have downbloated are inferior to the DivX released of the same thing, and so they should be. I just don't think these kids can encode very well! I rarely had a DivX that had the amount of Audio and Video artifacts I've seen in my XviD collection.

The problem is of course, these kids try to get the product to fit on 1 CD, and then they create on overburned ISO image. That is usually the problem.

Well, I like Keopi. But if someone ain't like Keopi, then just download some of the codex from that page Celtic Dude posted, those are mostly good.

What it comes down to is having to have several installed, and hopefully at least 1 of the codex deals with the film you are looking at, at the moment.
 
Point Zero Sep 22, 2007 1.1.3
1 out of 5
Horrible codec, get version 1.0.3, that's the best one. all newer ones have real ugly output.

Best ones here : http://tirnanog.fate.jp/mirror/XviD/
 
dhry Sep 7, 2007 1.1.3
5 out of 5
Link dead. Koepi's homepage down.
 
photonboy Jul 8, 2007 1.1.3
5 out of 5
Works great.

Done correctly, Xvid and Divx are essentially identical. Getting the best quality comes from choosing the optimum encoding settings (which includes having a good software program.)

I used to use AutoGK with Xvid and switched to Dr. Divx and also the Divx Create program. *WARNING: I don't know if every standalone player will play Divx6 so test this by encoding a small file and using a Rewriteable DVD (that you know works). At first I thought no, but it's possible that Divx Create is designed to be Universally playable on all Divx machines. I'm just not sure (mine plays Divx6 so I can't test this theory.)

I used AutoGK for encoding DVD-Video, but I thought it can also recode other files?

There's also "Mediacoder" and a few others but I don't know if you can choose your own Encoder.

Also, if you have a dual/duo core CPU you'll probably want to hit CTRL-ALT-DEL to see if it's being used. Video encoding programs are limited solely by CPU speed which is partly why there'll be a market for quad-core CPU's.

Also, experiment by encoding a good quality VOB such as a movie Trailer ripped from a DVD-Video. Experiment with your settings to balance encoding time with quality.

Link: www.free-codecs.com
Links: Google and also use Wikipedia to find links
 
Dsfargeg Jun 29, 2007 1.1.3
5 out of 5
Koepi's build really is the best out there.
This is much better than DivX.
 
joeshmoe7 Nov 2, 2006 1.1.2 Final
5 out of 5
I've had nothing but bad experiences with DivX. Xvid on the otherhand always worked great. Good work!
 
DudeBoyz Nov 2, 2006 1.1.2 Final
4 out of 5
Good, but until this thing comes with an easy to use tool like Dr Divx so n00bs can transcode their TV episodes and other stuff into it without using their brains, it may not catch on as quickly as it might otherwise.
 
jk- Nov 2, 2006 1.1.2 Final
5 out of 5
xvid is vastly better than divx. divx comes with bundled spyware, it costs money, auto-installs packet filters that screw up your cd/dvdrom and there is no way to easily remove them. xvid, on the other hand, is free and has no spyware! thanks xvid crew!
 
WRFan Nov 1, 2006 1.1.2 Final
5 out of 5
koepi's build is definitely the best xvid build out there, but actually divx uses less cpu power than xvid, so I always switch the fourcc to divx before playing mpeg4 movies. this way the divx decoder is used for decoding purposes
 
matt2971 Nov 1, 2006 1.1.2 Final
4 out of 5
In response to the previous poster; from my understanding, when you play the same file using the xvid codec or using ffdshow there won't be much quality difference, because the quality is mainly determined by the way it was encoded, rather than the way you play it.

The main difference is that using the divx codec, or especially the xvid codec, to play a file, takes a lot of CPU time, whereas using ffdshow (which can decode anything that divx or xvid, or a host of other codecs created) to play the file seems to use a lot less processing power. You notice this on older PCs - using xvid might cause jitter in the playback, whereas ffdshow does not.

"The open source library libavcodec can decode MPEG-4 video encoded with DivX (and other MPEG-4 codecs, such as XviD or libavcodec MPEG-4). Combined with image postprocessing code from the MPlayer project, it has been packaged into a DirectShow decoding filter called ffdshow, which can be used with most Windows video players and reportedly achieves higher image quality while generating less CPU load than the DivX codec[2]."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DivX_;-)

So with ffdshow, you get the same result for less cost, and also more versatility, since ffdshow will also render a whole lot of other formats.

Additionally, some oddly encoded xvid files that cause players to not play them properly when using the xvid codec will play fine using ffdshow.

However, it's always been the case I believe that when you actually create (encode) the file, xvid produces a better quality result than divx for the same file size. I don't know if this is still the case with newer divx versions.

Additionally xvid is also open source and not bundled with a player or ads anything else.

So far as different versions of xvid - that's cos it's open source I guess. I always use this Koepi's version. There's not much difference if you're just using it to render rather than encode I would think, although I believe there are versions especially optimized for PCs with certain features like SSE versions and the like.

I have to say, I'm an IT bod by trade and know at least a little about most IT subjects, but digital/PC video has to be one of the most complicated things to get your head around, simply because of the seemingly endless formats of codecs and containers and renderers and players, each one with it's limitations and idiosyncrasies. Most IT subjects get like that when you delve deep enough, but with this one, you hit those complications almost right away... It's a minefield!
 
photonboy Mar 15, 2006 1.2.127 Build 25022006 Beta
3 out of 5
I'm getting fed up with all the builds with no easy way to determine which one is best.

Xvid is still very popular, but I expect Divx to eventually replace it mainly due to the work at www.divx.com and the advertisment of "Divx Compatible" on the DVD players.

I just have the Xvid codec that came with AutoGK 2.27 installed, but I'm no longer really using it.

I've compared ffdshow, divx, xvid and whatever VLC media player uses. I can't see any clear difference in quality at all. VLC media player is great for slower computers.

High Definition is going to become an issue soon, especially for slower computers. The need for great compression will be even more important since the video content in High Definition contains NINE TIMES the number of pixels in 16:9 format. My 3000+ Athlon 64 can play Windows Media High Definition but not the Highest Apple Quicktime HD. Those aren't avi files but I'm illustrating a point. For transferrence of High Definition files over the internet, I expect 720p (720 horizontal lines) to become a preferred method for "sharing" high definition as the best size/quality ratio.

I suspect Xvid won't keep up in this area and Divx at all for will take over. I love Xvid, but it's dying folks.
 
Kramy Jan 9, 2006 1.2.127 Build 07012006 Beta
5 out of 5
WARNING: Xvid 1.2.127 is the Xvid architecture of newer systems, built with a totally multi-threaded design.

It (apparently) performs quite poorly on single-processor single-thread systems. If you have a new 64bit processor, or dual-core processor, try it out. If you have an older processor(P4, AMD Athlon XP, P3, AMD Duron), then you'll probably want to just stick with the 1.1.0 build.

http://www.koepi.org/xvid.shtml

Great stuff though, for those that can use it!
 
Adrian79 Jan 9, 2006 1.2.127 Build 07012006 Beta
5 out of 5
yay!
 
Kramy Dec 31, 2005 1.1.0 Build 30122005
5 out of 5
Simply perfect!

Isn't it funny how perfect stuff keeps getting more perfect? :P

Edit: Some uninstall problem was silently patched. Make sure you have the download with the X icon.

Edit2: Interesting that hardware is supposedly starting to support Xvid stuff. Their blog post says otherwise though?

http://www.xvid.org/modu...amp;order=0&thold=0

That was two years ago...and the person below linking the DLink Media Streamer commented almost a year back, so...wait, why was their 1.1.0 source released in 2003?

http://www.xvid.org/modu...;file=index&catid=1
 
Adrian79 Dec 31, 2005 1.1.0 Build 30122005
5 out of 5
koepi! yes! this is the only way i know how to install xvid lol
 
Birger_nord Apr 6, 2005 1.1.0 Beta 2 Build 04042005
5 out of 5
This was the first thing I looked after I did see the new XviD build last night!

Go Koepi! Your own..
 
bsr500 Apr 6, 2005 1.1.0 Beta 2 Build 04042005
5 out of 5
very quick as always... But then again koepi just compiles it.
 
aerthling Apr 6, 2005 1.1.0 Beta 2 Build 04042005
5 out of 5
That was quick ;)
 
bsr500 Jan 17, 2005 1.1.0 Beta 1 Build 16012005
5 out of 5
Xvid is the best, does simply amazing encodes in such a small file size.
 
Choda_Boy Oct 22, 2004 1.1 Build 127-13102004
5 out of 5
For anyone that thinks XviD will not be supported by a commercial product:

http://www.dlink.com/products/?sec=1&pid=318
ftp://ftp10.dlink.com/pdfs/products/DSM-320/DSM-320_ds.pdf
 
darkpepe Sep 7, 2004 1.0.2 Build 29082004
5 out of 5
Amazing quality! Is there any difference to other binaries?
DVD Players will support whatever consumers want to buy. There are allready players that claim to fully support Xvid. No matter if it's used for piracy or whatever, if I decide not to buy any player that doesn't support Xvid, then I have the power in my hands.
 
FailedCRC Sep 7, 2004 1.0.2 Build 29082004
5 out of 5
I think you may be mistaking 'cleaner' for lack of detail :)
 
GeneralLeoFF Sep 7, 2004 1.0.2 Build 29082004
5 out of 5
DivX is anything but dead. No comercial products will likley ever use XviD becouse of it's open sourced roots. The MPAA just isnt going to go for that.

XviD's future is in home movies and DVD/TV piracy. All the comercial MPEG 4 stuff is going to use DivX witch they can have better controll over.

Also DivX 5 produces a slightly cleaner image then XviD at all bitrates. Has less blocking in dark areas as well however theres a price to be paid in file size. XviD will create a smaller file size then DivX 5 at the same bitrate.

XviD is still great and erns 5 stars easy I just know the future is DivX for lagitimate movies.
 
httpd.confused Jul 17, 2004 1.0.1 Build 05062004
5 out of 5
XviD rules, end of story.
 
Lokheed Jun 8, 2004 1.0.1 Build 05062004
5 out of 5
THE best compression codec out there and THE best compile of the XVID source. Koepi did a wonderful job.

DIVX is dead. Nothing compares to XVIDs compression capabilities, its crispness and overall quality retention without the heavy blurring other MPEG4 codecs produce. With a proper configuration, XVID produces the nearest quality to DVD at a fraction of the bitrate.

Hands down the best MPEG4 codec on the market and its open source and it doesn't cost a thing. I guess the best things in life are still free.
 
speedmeister Jun 8, 2004 1.0.1 Build 05062004
5 out of 5
I first downloaded this codec to watch some episodes of "the o.c." and I have found that in practice that this codec like Divx is capable of some decent quality video. Obviously the quality of an individual file is going to be limited by the quality of the source material but I have found that the codec is as capable of very good quality picture and frame rates at full screen with my 700 mhz Athlon and it's four year old video card.
 
ericus May 17, 2004 1.0 Build 09052004
5 out of 5
Does it support Premiere Pro? It crashed when I try to export media?!
 
animecabbit May 16, 2004 1.0 Build 09052004
5 out of 5
Final Release! I wonder how long before koepi messes with it and add more updates ;)
 
animecabbit Apr 7, 2004 1.0 RC4 Build 05042004
5 out of 5
Excellent codec! Hope it goes final soon! =o) --- BTW, that VP6 looks like another wannabe codec, similar to xvid, divx, wm9, real, quicktime, etc. I suppose they are putting out free codecs and players and when it gets popular enough, WHAMO, they slam you with license fees for the encoder, decoder, etc.
 
Metsn Apr 5, 2004 1.0 RC4 Build 05042004
5 out of 5
Great....new version...! .)

....btw....does anybody know the codec On2 VP6...? Very interesting... ,) (Homepage: http://www.on2.com/vp6.php3)
 
FailedCRC Feb 29, 2004 1.0 RC3 Build 29022004
5 out of 5
the choppy playback will be due to the packed bitstream option (and because you have ffdshow installed). xvid == the daddy, no question about it now since the dev4-api became public :)
 
Toropop Feb 7, 2004 1.0 RC2 Build 07022004
4 out of 5
Much improved over RC1 in terms of processing and playback quality. There is, however, a new twist... sudden spontaneous loss of data during playback. It's making for choppy video playback on occasion.
 
Attyk Jan 26, 2004 1.0 RC1 Build 25012004
5 out of 5
stealthspy, it is based on a final code. XVID source is 1.0. All these flavours are based on that code. Go to xvid.org to get more info. They dont release binaries yet but they did finalize their code...

To review this codec...Koepis codec? Awesome. This guys really deserves a lot of credit for his work. The codec itself is truely the best MPEG4 out there...far surpasses DIVX. This proves the natural law of life...greed only kills, the best things are always free...wether they last is another story...
 
arman68 Jan 2, 2004 1.0 Beta 3 Build 26122003
5 out of 5
If your file render upside down you need to go into the codec properties and change to color space to YUY2 or YV12. This only happens with RGB which I think is the default.
 
doubleJ Dec 31, 2003 1.0 Beta 3 Build 26122003
1 out of 5
Ummm...
I just installed beta3 and now my xvid files render upside down!!!
I uninstalled and installed an older version and it's back to normal.
 
stealthspy Dec 30, 2003 1.0 Beta 3 Build 26122003
5 out of 5
Ok, that's really odd, since I reviewed PowerDVD and it came up here.....

Anyway, this codec is progressing very nicely. I'd really like to see some kind of finalized Xvid codec soon, rather than different builds.
 
FailedCRC Dec 1, 2003 1.0 Beta 1 Build 30112003
5 out of 5
been waiting for the release of the dev4-api for a long time. this has some good speed improvements and it's nice to see stats generation fully supported in the api now. keep up the good work
 
WRFan Nov 30, 2003 1.0 Beta 1 Build 30112003
1 out of 5
sloooow. xvid eats too many cpu resources. I switched to Nik's xvid build, seems to be a little faster. only a little bit, actually not worth mentioning. I still prefer mpeg2 to either xvid or divx, cause mpeg4 is slow and the video is too dark, as compared to mpeg2.
 
Bachalor Jun 24, 2003 Build 19062003-1
5 out of 5
Thanks to Koepi !!! - Yesterday I want burn a movie, but the problem was, I have not a valid codex. This guy has help me, it works fine .... a lot of thx !!
 
vis666 Mar 26, 2003 Build 22032003-1
5 out of 5
i used to be a heavy sbc encoder with nandub & divx 3.11a, but now it's back to good ol' virtualdub :D Excellent codec if ur into heavy quality encoding :) 5/5
 
Zulithe Feb 19, 2003 Build 17022003-1
5 out of 5
Perfect! The codec of choice these days, XviD is where it's at. I haven't even had problems with these unstable builds. I highly recommend you give them a go.
 
trapanator Feb 18, 2003 Build 17022003-1
5 out of 5
very good!
 
toxicthunder Feb 4, 2003 Build 02022003-1
4 out of 5
these are the latest development (unstable) binary releases. xvid is an open source mpeg4 encoder/decoder, and yes it's basically the same as divx. unlike divx though it is open source. koepi's is my favorite one to use, but i stay away from the dev bin's... i'm using the latest stable binary and it works 100%.
 
polarbear_ak Feb 3, 2003 Build 02022003-1
5 out of 5
ok first the xvid codec is the next stage in the divx release, as if you didn't know xvid is divx spelled backwards. It is a newer codec which has shown to be very promising for movies, though one thing that I find strange is that this is made by "Koepi" and is redirected to a different site, I though the offical site was www.xvid.org Can anyone clarify this for me?
Polar~
 
onetouch Jan 27, 2003 Build 26012003-1
5 out of 5
Looks good. The last time I tried a Xvid codec, all my divx movies started playing upside down, so we'll see.
 
trapanator Jan 27, 2003 Build 26012003-1
5 out of 5
Better than DivX.
 
Znoo Jan 27, 2003 Build 26012003-1
5 out of 5
Very nice codec. In my opinion it's better than the DivX 5.03. I can make my files better looking and smaller with XviD. Keep up the exelent work XviD developers and fans :-)