H.264 vs H.265 in fleet telematics: Cracking the codec puzzle
Video Telematics 101 — Navixy Academy
Fleet managers today face a dilemma that sounds highly technical but has very real consequences for day-to-day operations: should your vehicle cameras record with H.264 or H.265? The debate around these two video codecs has become a bit of a codec conundrum in telematics. On paper, H.265 (also known as HEVC) is the shiny new successor promising up to 50% better compression than the trusty H.264 (AVC). In theory, that means half the file size for the same video quality – a big deal for fleets dealing with limited bandwidth and storage.
Yet in practice, many fleets are not rushing to switch. H.264 remains widely used alongside H.265 in modern fleet camera systems. Why hasn’t H.265 completely displaced its older counterpart? It turns out choosing a codec is not a straightforward “newer is better” call, but a careful balancing act of trade-offs. Let's cut through the marketing noise and show you exactly which codec belongs in your fleet.
Why codecs matter in fleet dashcams
H.264 (AVC) has been the video compression standard since the mid-2000s, using macroblock compression and motion estimation to efficiently encode redundant visual information between frames. It struck an excellent balance of quality and file size, becoming ubiquitous from YouTube to dashcam footage.
H.265 (HEVC) arrived in the 2010s promising twice the efficiency through smarter, more granular compression. Instead of H.264's small macroblocks, H.265 uses larger coding tree units to combine similar image areas, better handles repetitive backgrounds, and improves motion prediction. The result: same visual quality at roughly half the file size, with superior handling of 4K footage and high frame rates.
That's the theory. If this were a simple upgrade story, we'd all have switched by now. But as any engineer will tell you, "there's no free lunch." H.265's advanced compression demands significantly more processing power. Think H.264 as a steady truck engine versus H.265 as a turbocharged model – you get more video per megabyte, but it runs hotter and needs more care. In fleet scenarios, that complexity creates real-world challenges that keep H.264 very much in the game.
Compression: Lab promises vs. Road reality
H.265 promises up to 50% bitrate reduction for equivalent quality—sounds fantastic, right? In controlled tests, an H.264 stream might run at ~6 Mbps while H.265 delivers similar quality at ~3 Mbps. That 50% cut effectively doubles storage life or transmits twice the video on the same data plan.
But here's the thing: real-world fleet deployments often fall short of that neat 50% figure. Compression efficiency is content-dependent: H.265 shines with complex scenes but struggles to outperform mature H.264 encoders on simpler footage like static nighttime views. Also, some H.264 implementations are "tuned closer to perfection," narrowing the gap in certain scenarios.
Real numbers tell the story: one 4K dashcam stored 5 hours with H.264 vs. ~6 hours with H.265 on a 128 GB card – roughly 20-25% improvement, not the full 50%. Another fleet running dual 1080p cameras has shown getting 2-3 days with H.264 versus 5-6 days using H.265 – that's the theoretical 50% savings. Your mileage will vary: expect 25-50% gains depending on your specific content mix.
Here's a storage impact baseline for 1080p continuous recording on 512 GB:
Beyond storage, bandwidth costs matter hugely. If each vehicle uploads ~100 MB daily, switching to H.265 cuts that to ~50 MB. Across 100 vehicles, that's 150 GB less monthly data usage – meaningful savings when fleet data plans run pricey. H.265 also lets you stream higher quality without choking networks, critical as fleets push toward 4K and multi-camera setups.
Of course, these benefits only materialize if the rest of your system is ready for H.265. A dirty little secret in some deployments is that the back-end or software might not support H.265, forcing an on-the-fly conversion that negates the savings. We’ll talk more about compatibility in a moment, but as a pure compression technology, H.265 is clearly the efficiency champ. The main question is how much of that theoretical advantage you can harness given the realities of your environment.
The heat factor: Performance vs. Stability
H.265's compression wizardry comes at a cost: increased computational load. Those advanced algorithms demand 2-4× more processing power than H.264 for real-time encoding. In compact dashcam and MDVR units with limited headroom, pushing chips harder generates more heat.
Think flooring the gas pedal — the engine runs hotter. H.265 will "make the dash cam work harder [and] generate more heat," especially concerning in hot climates. Users report devices running noticeably hotter with H.265 enabled. In extreme conditions – dashcams mounted under direct sun in 60°C (140°F) cabins – heavily stressed devices may overheat, throttle, or shut down. For fleet managers, that's a nightmare: the fancy compression mode kills the video feed when needed most.
Thermals vary by device, though. Higher-end units handle heat better with quality heat sinks and power management, while budget cameras might struggle even on H.264. In our tests, one ruggedized DVR stayed around 53°C regardless of codec, but another model ran 3-4°C hotter with H.265, peaking at ~56.8°C. That difference can mean "warm but stable" versus "overheating risk."
Processing strain also causes performance hiccups: dropped frames, stuttering video, reduced frame rates. This is problematic when dashcams handle simultaneous tasks like ADAS or driver monitoring. Some manufacturers learned this the hard way: one brand disabled H.265 on newer models due to stability concerns after real-world benefits didn't justify the headaches.
The key takeaway: H.265's efficiency is enticing, but it stresses devices more. In 24/7 commercial scenarios with vibration, heat, and long hours, stability trumps compression. H.264 runs cooler and safer on thermally constrained hardware. If choosing H.265, use hardware truly designed for it and test under worst-case conditions—better to discover overheating issues in testing than have cameras shut off on the job.
Compatibility check: Can everyone play your video?
Efficiency matters, but compatibility is king. H.264's status as the universal standard gives it a massive advantage – virtually any device plays it out-of-the-box. H.265? Not so much. Many older PCs and operating systems lack native H.265 decoding, leaving you with choppy playback or dreaded "file not supported" errors.
In fleet operations, this becomes a serious problem. Picture sending dashcam footage to an insurance adjuster after an accident, only to have them unable to view your H.265 file. Telematics service providers find that many fleets (e.g. police, government) use older computers that cannot adequately play H.265 files… Your critical evidence gets overlooked due to codec issues – hardly the outcome you want when fighting a claim.
Even internally, compatibility varies. Many telematics platforms now support H.265, but not all. Drop H.265 cameras into an older system, and you might need software updates or transcoding servers – added complexity and potential failure points.
Web browser support remains spotty. While H.264 plays everywhere via simple HTML5 tags, H.265 still hits roadblocks in many browsers due to licensing concerns. Safari and newer Edge/Chrome can leverage system codecs, but don't expect HEVC videos to just work on random web portals. Recipients often need to download files and open them in VLC – an extra step that creates friction.
H.264 wins on ubiquity: everyone can open it, from courtrooms to corner offices. H.265 is catching up as devices upgrade, but we’re still in a transitional period. Smart fleets using H.265 now provide police and insurance contacts with compatible players or converted files when sharing footage. Platforms like Navixy bridge the gap by supporting both codecs and handling transcoding automatically – delivering H.265 for efficiency where possible and H.264 fallback for legacy systems – so insurance, law enforcement, and clients never run into access issues.
Hidden costs: Licensing, chips, and real-world hurdles
Two less obvious factors shaped the H.264 vs H.265 debate: licensing fees and hardware costs. While end-users don't pay these directly, they've heavily influenced industry rollout speeds.
H.264 became ubiquitous partly because it was cheap and easy to implement: much of its technology fell under affordable licensing pools, with many patents now expired. H.265 brought a tangled web of patents and multiple licensing bodies charging fees. For manufacturers, this meant higher costs and legal complexity to include H.265 support. In the late 2010s, you'd typically see H.265 only in premium dashcams where the extra cost was justified.
Regionally, this created interesting dynamics. North American and European companies, careful about patent compliance, wouldn't include H.265 without sorting out royalties. Meanwhile, some Chinese manufacturers were more lax – advertising H.265 support freely without necessarily paying all licensing fees. By the mid-2020s, tons of affordable Chinese-made MDVRs list "H.264/H.265" dual support, often letting users choose between codecs.
Hardware costs initially required beefier processors for H.265 encoding. Five years ago, a $500 high-end dashcam might have had H.265, while a $100 one definitely didn't. By 2025, even mid-range chips can handle multi-channel H.265 encoding – which is why $100-$200 dual dashcam kits now boast H.265 support.
The bottom line: the industry is moving toward H.265, but cautiously. Legal and cost considerations slowed initial adoption, though most new devices now include it. As a fleet buyer, you don't pay codec licenses yourself, but it's useful knowing why some older or cheaper products might lack H.265 – it's not always purely technical, sometimes it's business.
Global adoption: Where H.265 is taking hold
When will H.265 truly take over? North America has been a bellwether for codec adoption. Large fleets with bigger tech budgets lead the charge in piloting H.265 cameras: if new compression tech saves money or improves video quality, early adopters test it out. Many premium fleet camera systems in the U.S. now come standard with H.265, and the rest of the world often follows suit in time.
Contrast that with developing regions or smaller fleets: if budgets are tight and H.264 systems work fine, there's little urgency to switch. Many local fleets keep using existing H.264 cameras until they naturally age out. However, as new hardware becomes default, these markets get H.265 capability "for free" – simply because new devices include it and prices have dropped.
As of 2025, the landscape is mixed. H.264 still dominates the installed base: millions of dashcams from the 2010s remain in service (enterprise fleets operate on 3-5 year refresh cycles). On the flip side, H.265 is becoming standard in new deployments, especially mid-range and high-end solutions. Many telematics providers now offer 1080p or 4K cameras using H.265 to achieve quality without ballooning file sizes.
H.264 isn't going to disappear overnight. Given installed system inertia and fleet operators' caution, we'll see a hybrid environment for a while: some fleets run H.265 cameras on high-value vehicles while keeping H.264 elsewhere. So H.264 and H.265 will be the two main options for the foreseeable future, and understanding their market position will help you plan your fleet's roadmap.
Which codec fits your fleet? A practical guide
So, given all these considerations, how should a fleet manager or telematics service provider decide between H.264 and H.265? It comes down to your specific priorities and constraints. Here’s a quick guide based on the common factors we’ve discussed:
Maximizing video retention / Minimizing data use Need to store a week's worth of footage instead of three days? Want to cut monthly cloud transfers in half? H.265 is your answer. Just make sure your workflow can handle those files downstream.
Device constraints (cost, heat, power) Working with budget hardware or extreme environments? H.264 might be safer. Basic dashcams and older MDVRs run cooler and more reliably on H.264. In hot climates or 24/7 operations, H.265's extra heat could cause throttling or failures. Stability often trumps storage savings.
Video quality and resolution needs Aiming for higher resolution footage, especially for evidence like license plates or driver behavior? H.265 is practically essential. It enables 1440p, 4K, and high-FPS recording without overwhelming storage. H.264 struggles here unless you throw massive storage at it.
Compatibility and sharing Need to share clips with insurance, law enforcement, or clients who aren't tech-savvy? H.264 offers peace of mind: it works on virtually anything. With H.265, have a conversion plan ready or provide viewers with a compatible player.
Cloud platforms and analytics Verify your telematics platform's H.265 support. Most modern systems handle it, but if yours doesn't, you're stuck with H.264. Platforms like Navixy, built to ingest and process multi-codec video streams, let fleets upgrade devices without fearing backend limitations.
Mixed strategies Consider a hybrid approach: record locally in H.265 to maximize SD card storage, but stream in H.264 for live view or sharing. Modern devices can handle dual streams, giving you the best of both worlds (though managing this complexity requires a capable platform – something we've certainly seen at Navixy).
H.264 vs. H.265: Why the answer might be both
At the end of the day, choosing between H.264 and H.265 in your fleet cameras is about matching the tool to the task. H.264 is like that dependable veteran driver who knows every backroad – it’s reliable, universally understood, and “just works” with minimal fuss. H.265 is the ambitious new hire with fresh ideas – it can do more for you (more video, more quality, less cost), but you might need to invest in training and new equipment to get the best out of it.
The ongoing debate between these codecs isn’t really about which one is “better” in an absolute sense – it’s about what’s better for you. As we’ve seen, each codec shines in different aspects. H.264 wins in compatibility, simplicity, and low hardware burden. H.265 wins in efficiency, future-proofing for high-res video, and squeezing the most out of every gigabyte and megabit. No wonder they continue to coexist in the fleet world. Many fleets will continue to use a bit of both for the foreseeable future, and that’s okay.
When making your decision, weigh the factors we discussed: how much storage or data budget do you have? How critical is it that anyone can play your footage at a moment’s notice? What are the conditions your devices operate in? And what capabilities do you need in terms of video quality or analytics? In North America, we’re seeing a clear trend toward H.265 as companies push the envelope on video telematics, which likely signals where global practices are headed. But the shift is gradual and pragmatic. The smartest approach is often a phased one – start integrating H.265 where it makes the most impact (and where you can support it), while keeping H.264 as a fallback or for less demanding parts of your operation.
In the end, whether you stick with AVC or move to HEVC, being informed is your best asset. Fleets that understand these trade-offs can turn video compression from a headache into a strategic advantage. And as a telematics community (here on Navixy Academy and beyond), we’ll keep sharing insights as the technology evolves.
Happy filming, and stay safe out there!
Last updated
Was this helpful?