Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

nVidia likely to remain accelerated video king?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by markg85 View Post
    @bridgman,
    Oke, you're not so silent on this XvBA subject as i thought.. It's not like i read all topics here on phoronix :P
    You really do need to read all the topics... posting the same info in a pile of different threads would make it even harder to read all the topics

    That said, we should probably move this particular discussion back to the ATI/AMD area. I'll start a new thread specific to XvBA on Evergreen.

    Originally posted by markg85 View Post
    @gbeauche
    Interesting stuff.. I wonder, what are you? You seem to be knowing a lot about UVD but i thought it was closed to ATI only.. so do you work for ATI or something? Did you somehow get the UVD specs?
    Remember when I said that XvBA was originally developed for embedded use more than for general purpose PC use ? Gwenole (gbeauche) was working on a specific embedded application (using the original NDA-only XvBA spec) but one of the by-products of his work was the nice VA-API to XvBA adapter which has allowed the use of XvBA on PCs.

    Originally posted by markg85 View Post
    to you 2 both. Here we have a "UVD implementer" and an "ATI fellow". gbeauche complainx about XvBA bugs and bridgman says it's all working and tested on evergreen. Yet here i am as a "normal" linux user with an evergreen card and UVD through whatever on linux isn't working. Can't you to meet somewhere, fix the flaws and make it finally just work?
    That's what we are doing. You are watching it as it happens, pretty cool huh ?

    Originally posted by markg85 View Post
    Another question. I haven't tested this yet but are the current XvBA VA-API UVS stuff working with the opensource ATI radeon driver (same question for both 4xxx and 5xxx cards)??
    There is no UVD support in the open source drivers. UVD support is not "in the plan" for open source support but we are going to investigate whether it might be possible to include it somehow.
    Test signature

    Comment


    • I started a new thread for XvBA on Evergreen in the ATI/AMD forum :

      Technical support and discussion of the open-source AMD Radeon graphics drivers.
      Test signature

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Qaridarium

        yes valve is cheaper than that! but apple pay for steam! and they pay for not releasing a Linux clind.
        Show me the proof. Still can't do that can you. Again pure bullshit made up by you.
        really? if i buy a chep PC without any OS lisence it costs my 300? then i install linux +steam(the linux clind or the windows clind in wine) thean i can have 100% fun without apple or microsoft.

        but apple need the PR of being a steam positive platform.

        apple payes for the PR of having a native steam Clint.
        Apple does not need in any way to be a steam positive platform. Apple has never focused on gaming nor do they need to. Their target audience has never been the gamer. Companies and developers that do develop for Apple products do so for their own finacial benefit from an ever increasing market.

        really? iTunes do have a game engine?
        What does Steam have to do with a game engine? Nothing you moron. It's a content delivery platform that is independant of the game engine. Just like iTunes.

        "What Q is feeding is pure bullshit."

        apple is the biggest bullshit ever!

        i can't compare to apple sorry i do not have the power to be that big in bullshiting.
        You far exceed Apple and MS in pure bullshit. Your credibility is completely shot.

        Comment


        • BTW your "internal" source is complete bullshit as well. Unlike you I do have real connections with the involved parties.

          Comment


          • OH I thought this was an arguement about apple recharging people for downloads. I didn't know it had gotten this crazy.

            Comment


            • Did some playing around while beta testing tonight.
              A circa 2000 athlon at 1.2 ghz takes 50 percent cpu to decode a 720p video. It's roughly 1/2 as much cpu as a N270 atom. Only thing is it sucks 50 watts doing it as that is a 20 percent overlcock. 180 micron with a 150 micron Gefoce 4 MX400.
              Reminds me of the old days when the Geforce 128 came out and lived it's entire sales life without it's hardware Transform and Lighting shaders being supported by anyone. Then when Geforce 2 came out everybody started supporting the first shader model, only thing is it was so weird compared to the cpu doing it that every game had gamma problems and was either too dark or too light or wouldn't locate the light source right. The first 6 months of DX7. What a suck time.
              You know if it weren't for this thing hammering the cpu into 100 percent oblivion too often this would actually be useable.

              Comment

              Working...
              X