Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 51 to 56 of 56

Thread: Qt 5.3 Might Depend On SSE2 CPUs

  1. #51

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gens View Post
    To others that might read this; it is only written for this child and there is no reason to get excited

    as some one who actually knows what hes talking about i tell you

    no
    no
    and no

    atom and brazos can suck my athlon xp

    32bit is sometimes faster to use on 64bit cpus and even P4 had sse

    even the top arm can suck an atom



    i have a new monster cpu now
    you know whats it good for ?
    its good only for new, poorly optimized, games
    like the CoD you probably play

    advances ?
    what fucking advances
    Moore's law does not apply anymore, and it didnt for a while now
    even so what complex thing does a 2D gui do that it needs a monster cpu

    third world countries holding first world back ?
    what the fuck are you talking about
    i know plenty of people that have money to god and never get a new computer
    why dont they ?
    'cuz they dont need it
    in fact you can run a fairly high load server on a P4

    also google cpu dispatching
    not that i expect you too understand what it means


    To others:
    KDE devs know what they are doing and it will not hurt none of users
    not the old computers, neither the newest
    cpu dispatching is a method to make this kind of things work at best efficiency (example glibc, x264, etc.)
    You must do absolutely no content creation, because good luck using those old chips for video editing, they where slow for transcoding DVDs, let alone editing the 1080p video that my camcorder outputs. I don't have a week for my computer to be completely tied up processing the same edit before I can upload it to youtube.

    Just because you can't find a use for all that AMD and Intel giveth doesn't mean the world needs to wait for your old box to finally fail to boot before we can come up with ever more process intensive things to do. 3840x2160 4K video is here and 7680x4320 8K is on its way.

    I've got a 1.8Ghz Thoroughbred AthlonXP myself, and it was great for quite some time, but you know what it's good for these days? A glorified typewriter w/ built in MP3 player. It can jest barely handle Youtube videos if they are downloaded in no higher then 640x480 in h.264 or VP8, at the very least my old Clawhammer Athlon64 3500+ is able to handle those in 1280x720 on CPU only decoding which no matter how you cut it looks far better.

    My Brazos E-450 netbook however can handle 1920x1080 in either h.264 or VP8.


    Gaming is almost always GPU limited, the only time it's not is in high number of units RTS games and simulators that are doing allot of physics calculations to have as close to real world conditions a computer can give you.

  2. #52
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    520

    Default Flash video takes much more CPU than mplayer or xine

    Quote Originally Posted by Kivada View Post
    I've got a 1.8Ghz Thoroughbred AthlonXP myself, and it was great for quite some time, but you know what it's good for these days? A glorified typewriter w/ built in MP3 player. It can jest barely handle Youtube videos if they are downloaded in no higher then 640x480 in h.264 or VP8, at the very least my old Clawhammer Athlon64 3500+ is able to handle those in 1280x720 on CPU only decoding which no matter how you cut it looks far better.
    Part of the issue with Youtube is that Flash is such a fat pig. Things like jwplayer (like Liveleak uses) running in Flash are even heavier, to the point that an Athlon 64 3200+ that could play 720p video on the CPU with ease in mplayer would sometimes stutter on a non-HD Liveleak video even after all of it had downloaded.That was with what apears to be only a 270p file that at least some Pentium III's could play in mplayer or xine.

    A 1.8GHZ Athlon should be more than a match for a 2.0GHZ Pentium 4. I've got one of the latter with Mint 14 that can play 720p H264 video in mplayer so long as it is not running a compositing DE. Xine has better framedropping code than mplayer for H264, so with Xine it will probably play decent 720p in compiz-mate, maybe even in Cinnamon, tests of that coming. If you have issues with Youtube on old machines, download the files to the desktop and play them in a real video player. For 720P close anything else that's using up the CPU first.

    For machines with PCI-E slots, or maybe with an H264 hardware-decoding capable AGP card (Nvidia GT9600 maybe?) in an older machine, there is a way to force Flash to seek out and use vdpau playback, have yet to test that but if it tracks with my mplayer work that could mean being able to play any video your connection can deliver on P4 class machines. Never throw out an AGP card that supports hardware decoding of H264, no matter how bad it is for games!

    For years switching to Linux has been a way to speed up and save older machines, this still works today with the right software selection and some smart hardware scrounging.

  3. #53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Luke View Post
    Part of the issue with Youtube is that Flash is such a fat pig. Things like jwplayer (like Liveleak uses) running in Flash are even heavier, to the point that an Athlon 64 3200+ that could play 720p video on the CPU with ease in mplayer would sometimes stutter on a non-HD Liveleak video even after all of it had downloaded.That was with what apears to be only a 270p file that at least some Pentium III's could play in mplayer or xine.
    I never once mentioned Flash, now did I? I mentioned WebM and h.264, I haven't had Flash of any kind installed on any machine in 5 years. A combination of https://www.youtube.com/html5 and Flashgot allows me to either watch directly or download the video in all available formats. Those formats are .WebM, .MP4, .FLV and .3GP

    Though it seems Google is intentionally sabotaging their HTML5 player if you don't have Flash installed as it will tell you that the video requires Flash, while the Flashgot Firefox addon allows you to download that video in 1080p .WebM and if you embed that video in another webpage the HTML5 player works properly, never complaining about the lack of Flash.

    As of right now 95% of the videos I've looked at over the last year have a .WebM version, 100% have an h.264 version.

    WebM uses VP8, both MP4 and FLV use h.264, never checked the .3GP videos as they are a cellphone format and as such very low quality.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    520

    Default What are you playing the videos with?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kivada View Post
    I never once mentioned Flash, now did I? I mentioned WebM and h.264, I haven't had Flash of any kind installed on any machine in 5 years. A combination of https://www.youtube.com/html5 and Flashgot allows me to either watch directly or download the video in all available formats. Those formats are .WebM, .MP4, .FLV and .3GP

    Though it seems Google is intentionally sabotaging their HTML5 player if you don't have Flash installed as it will tell you that the video requires Flash, while the Flashgot Firefox addon allows you to download that video in 1080p .WebM and if you embed that video in another webpage the HTML5 player works properly, never complaining about the lack of Flash.

    As of right now 95% of the videos I've looked at over the last year have a .WebM version, 100% have an h.264 version.

    WebM uses VP8, both MP4 and FLV use h.264, never checked the .3GP videos as they are a cellphone format and as such very low quality.
    OK, your Athlon XP machine is having trouble with H264 video at VGA or sub-VGA (360p) resolutions. I've played videos twice that size, 4x the pixels, on Pentium 4-2 GHZ. Your 1.8GHZ Athlon XP has similar RAM (I assume at least DDR 266), a better front-side bus, has SSE (Thunderbird did not), and a better on-chip architecture then Pentium 4. Should be able to play at least as big a video. Graphics cards should not be the issue assuming XV output, but an Athlon XP should be able to play 360p in straight CPU with x11 output and plenty to spare if necessary.

    What are you playing the videos with? Mplayer and Xine are very good for this, Totem-Gstreamer is not, I really doubt a browser would do well in this situation. What desktop environment are you using? If using mplayer, what video output option? I brought up Flash because I've had terrible results with it in older machines, losing fully half the possible playback resolution. As I said before, all my video benchmarks are with nothing else running. If your browser is using a lot of CPU and you are trying to play the newly downloaded video at the same time, that could be the issue. Hell, that might be part of the problem I've had with Flash as well.

  5. #55

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Luke View Post
    OK, your Athlon XP machine is having trouble with H264 video at VGA or sub-VGA (360p) resolutions. I've played videos twice that size, 4x the pixels, on Pentium 4-2 GHZ. Your 1.8GHZ Athlon XP has similar RAM (I assume at least DDR 266), a better front-side bus, has SSE (Thunderbird did not), and a better on-chip architecture then Pentium 4. Should be able to play at least as big a video. Graphics cards should not be the issue assuming XV output, but an Athlon XP should be able to play 360p in straight CPU with x11 output and plenty to spare if necessary.

    What are you playing the videos with? Mplayer and Xine are very good for this, Totem-Gstreamer is not, I really doubt a browser would do well in this situation. What desktop environment are you using? If using mplayer, what video output option? I brought up Flash because I've had terrible results with it in older machines, losing fully half the possible playback resolution. As I said before, all my video benchmarks are with nothing else running. If your browser is using a lot of CPU and you are trying to play the newly downloaded video at the same time, that could be the issue. Hell, that might be part of the problem I've had with Flash as well.
    And therein lies the problem. These old boxes can't playback video with anything else running and it's not really worth it to try and dig up a GPU that will work with UVD or VDPAU that fits either the AGP or PCI slot.

    Everything will run much better on the cheapest of the cheap current hardware. Let the pre 64-bit hardware die already.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    520

    Default Not everyone has ANYTHING to spend on new hardware

    Quote Originally Posted by Kivada View Post
    And therein lies the problem. These old boxes can't playback video with anything else running and it's not really worth it to try and dig up a GPU that will work with UVD or VDPAU that fits either the AGP or PCI slot.

    Everything will run much better on the cheapest of the cheap current hardware. Let the pre 64-bit hardware die already.
    If I am going to set up 3 or 4 boxes for community use, I cannot afford to burn money on new ones! There are plenty of people on my side of the house using Pentium 4 class machines because that's what others are throwing away and they can get for free. I am not employed, only a judgement for an illegal mass arrest allowed my to buy my video camera and video editing systems. A lot of people I work with qualify for Medicaid, food stamps, that sort of thing. If I told them to throw out everything that has been dunpsterd or scrounged and buy new hardware just for Internet use, people would wonder what I was smoking. It's much cheaper to close the browser to watch a video than to buy a new computer!

    Increasingly, folks with little money are resorting to unsafe, zero-privacy smartphones as their only access to the Internet. A Pentium 4 with Linux on it back home can cost nothing, far outperform that smartphone especcially for video, and offer far better privacy and security,

    Where I am, Pentium IIIs stayed in service until Pentium 4's appeared in dumpsters. P4s will be around until Core2/Phenom class machines appear in dumpsters, and that may be a long way off for offices, who are retaining them until they die because they can still do anything most offices will ever need them to do. Expensive, high-powered stuff gets reserved for content creation where it's really needed.

    With all this talk of "let the older machines die," I sure am glad I archive all software packages I ever download!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •