Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Is Still Working On G45 VA-API Video Acceleration

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

  • const
    replied
    i don't think the information in this news is entirely correct - i can recall clearly that few months ago there was driver and test report http://intellinuxgraphics.org that state VA-API is supported and working on "GMA 4500MHD" and i even remember checking in Wikipedia about device hardware IDs, because 0x2A42 and 0x2A43 was mentioned in the information that they are the working ones. so, even i didn't test personally and i still haven't looked again on http://intellinuxgraphics.org for the information i found there before, i have doubts in the correctness of the news and more specifically about GM45 with device IDs 0x2A42 and 0x2A43.

    Leave a comment:


  • DebianAroundParis
    replied
    That would be nice if they could extract some decoding power from older chipsets, too. People with older chipsets have older CPUs, so any improvement is very valuable.

    Leave a comment:


  • Veerappan
    replied
    Originally posted by agd5f View Post
    Shaders can be used as an alternate means to decode video. They are more flexible than a fixed function block like UVD, but can't be used for certain aspects of the decode pipeline that are not easily done in parallel. They can be used to add decode support for newer video formats (like vp8) that can't be added to fixed function blocks.
    Tell me about it... I've spent the last 3-4 months discovering how difficult it is to parallelize video decoding (with VP8). I've got a functional OpenCL VP8 decoder, but Functional != Fast.

    Leave a comment:


  • finite9
    replied
    unbelievable...

    The GM4500MHD (G45) chipset had h.264 hardware acceleration from the word go... on Windows with Win driver. That was years ago!

    What the heck is taking so long for it to get implemented in the Linux driver? The only reason I bought an Intel chipset was so that I could get full Linux support before other chipsets even dreamt of it (like AMD/nVidia) in X.org/Mesa/DRM etc. Now i'm beginning to wonder if I would have been better off with nVidia and proprietary driver.

    Leave a comment:


  • agd5f
    replied
    As has been mentioned before ad nauseam, the issue with UVD is exposing the programming information without putting our DRM (Digital Rights Management) implementation at risk on other OSes. At the hardware level the decode and DRM are somewhat intertwined with UVD. Intel's decoder may be less intertwined with DRM, or maybe it is and they are still trying to work out how to enable it while still protecting their DRM implementation on other OSes.

    Shaders can be used as an alternate means to decode video. They are more flexible than a fixed function block like UVD, but can't be used for certain aspects of the decode pipeline that are not easily done in parallel. They can be used to add decode support for newer video formats (like vp8) that can't be added to fixed function blocks.

    Leave a comment:


  • deanjo
    replied
    Originally posted by darkbasic View Post
    Bah... you already know the answer. It's the usual old story UVD vs shader based approach.
    AFIK the intel does not use a shader based approach and UVD only uses shaders for post-processing.

    Leave a comment:


  • darkbasic
    replied
    Originally posted by deanjo View Post
    So how again can intel provide accelerated h264 support with open drivers but when it comes to AMD it becomes a "legal issue"? w00t 5k posts!
    Bah... you already know the answer. It's the usual old story UVD vs shader based approach.

    Leave a comment:


  • deanjo
    replied
    Also for that matter intel does not *officially* support linux as well. Their driver is provided "as is".

    NO WARRANTY
    11. BECAUSE THE PROGRAM IS LICENSED FREE OF CHARGE, THERE IS NO WARRANTY FOR THE PROGRAM, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW. EXCEPT WHEN OTHERWISE STATED IN WRITING THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND/OR OTHER PARTIES PROVIDE THE PROGRAM "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR CORRECTION.
    http://intellinuxgraphics.org/license.html

    Leave a comment:


  • deanjo
    replied
    Originally posted by HokTar View Post
    I think rafirafi is right. Remember, the ATI driver is not *officially* supported, however ridiculous it is.
    *officially* supported does not equal provide.

    Leave a comment:


  • HokTar
    replied
    I think rafirafi is right. Remember, the ATI driver is not *officially* supported, however ridiculous it is.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X