Originally posted by gens
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Qt 5.3 Might Depend On SSE2 CPUs
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by darkcoder View PostYes, while Gentoo well tuned can do miracles (I used it for a couple of years), some people try to use very old computers with the latest software. And you have to know when you need to move.
The gap between generic builds and optimized for modern CPU builds has grown ever larger. Only after x86_64 was introduced, SSE2 became the new common baseline for 64 bit code. From that perspective, the decision to require SSE2 in the official builds seems certainly understandable (distros will change the build parameters anyway to match their supported platforms).
Comment
-
I just played 1080p video on a P4 running Cinnamon, so P4 is hardly dead
Originally posted by gens View Postthird 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
This being so, going to someone and suggesting they spend even $300 to throw away a computer that works is nuts. Wonder why MS has so much trouble selling pre-installed Windows 8 on new machines to people who have XP machines that work? You don't even save any power replacing Prescott with a 4 core (or 6, or 8 core) processor that uses even more power when it is wide-open, you just get the ability to do things you didn't do before and may or may not need to do now. As for Atom, my netbook is at its limits on 720P video, has no PCI-e slot for a VDPAU capable video device.
Comment
-
Originally posted by gens View PostTo 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.)
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.
Comment
-
Flash video takes much more CPU than mplayer or xine
Originally posted by Kivada View PostI'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.
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.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Luke View PostPart 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.
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.
Comment
-
What are you playing the videos with?
Originally posted by Kivada View PostI 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.
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.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Luke View PostOK, 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.
Everything will run much better on the cheapest of the cheap current hardware. Let the pre 64-bit hardware die already.
Comment
-
Not everyone has ANYTHING to spend on new hardware
Originally posted by Kivada View PostAnd 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.
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!
Comment
Comment