Is it worth doing double conversion to get quality with a narrow channel?

Question

RTMP

There is a point from where the broadcast will be. There is a narrow channel of the Internet. I smoked the tests h.265 vs h.264 and came to the conclusion that this is a good idea, there the quality really increases many times with the same bitrate. The task at the end is to get RTMP c h.264 with a minimum delay between the stage and the viewer. You will
get something like:
Camera > H.265 > H.264 (on the server-side receiver) > Spectator
. The outgoing bitrate can be made higher, it doesn't matter on the server anymore.

Answer 1

Falls
Depending on the type of action in the video stream, it can fall from the level "ok" to the level - "mixture of pixels"
You need to convert only from the h265
source, I would advise using it only if the client has it embedded in hardware

Answer 2

For example, some comrades from Israel solve such a problem, in connection with a super expensive upload.
You can do this, and it will even work, but there are a few BUT:
1. h265 is good for super fat bitrates from FHD and 10-20 Mbps in such conditions, h265 starts to show itself especially well.
2. h265 is very greedy for resources for both encoding and decoding
3. the codec is younger and hence there are many nuances and limited support from various systems.
In short, give more specifics:
What channel, what stream?