@sundown

Quote:

I will admit, a 1080p vid is a different story at the moment. I'm sure overlay would help there, but I have better ways to watch blue ray videos then on a computer.

In other words, "I don't need it so neither should anyone else!!"

@sundown

Proves the point that you can live without overlay or the like with a fast CPU for now .

Are you using the latest avcodec.library beta or not ?
I am and it is about 5 % fater than the older one without Overlay.

http://os4depot.net/index.php?function=showfile&file=video/misc/avcodec.lha

_________________
Sam460ex : Radeon Rx550 Single slot Video Card : SIL3112 SATA card

@Spectre660

What fast CPU ?

Did I miss something ? You are talking PPC right.

@nikosidis

Ok you caught me .

Anyway features that enhance video playback etc will be added to the Radeon HD driver.
But after the work required to allow Hyperion to use it for their 3D output .
At that point both 2D and 3D efforts can continue at the same time.
The eventual results should be beyond basic Overlay .


Quote:

nikosidis wrote: @Spectre660 What fast CPU ? Did I miss something ? You are talking PPC right.

_________________
Sam460ex : Radeon Rx550 Single slot Video Card : SIL3112 SATA card

@thread

From Harry (credit Amiga.org)

Please keep this discussion civil. Thanks.

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@sundown

Quote:

Hans:"Next, about overlay. In short, it's obsolete technology. I don't even know if the latest Radeon HD cards support it. What I can tell you that the Radeon X1000 series (R500 chipsets) are the last Radeon series whose Linux drivers support overlay. It's a dead end; please forget about it."

Sometimes conveying a thought is all about the wording.

Today from HDR:

Quote:

I understand why users are interested in overlay or an alternative. I want it too. However, this is an incredibly complex driver, and so development can only ever proceed one step at a time.

source

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@Spectre660

Quote:

Proves the point that you can live without overlay or the like with a fast CPU for now .

Good point right there.

I wonder why no-one noticed earier that we don't actually even need this forthcoming "full MESA-based hardware accelerated 3D", as we can just do it all in software instead. There are several working MESA versions on aminet already.

@sundown

Quote:

720x304, full screen, thank you, with no overlay.

Impressive! Outstanding! Just like my Efika at 400Mhz with no dma access to HD! Depending on compression used even a CSPPC with Frogger may be able to achieve that.

FYI, people is watching youtube HD videos directly on OWB on MorphOS thanks to overlay, try that on your x1000.

_________________
The only spanish amiga news web page/club: CUAZ

@number6

Hush. This is a discussion, and as such it should all be about FEELINGS, not realities.

_________________
This weeks pet peeve:
Using "voltage" instead of "potential", which leads to inventing new words like "amperage" instead of "current" (I, measured in A) or possible "charge" (amperehours, Ah or Coulomb, C). Sometimes I don't even know what people mean.

@Franko

Quote:

Hmmm... strange... me good old miggies have always run at the same speeds for their graphics display (not even slowed down despite being 20 odd years old) and they still run perfectly well at the same speed even in this day and age... Mind you I still use good old CRT monitors and not them new fangled flat screen LCD wot nots with their built in motion blur...

CRTs are the onles with motion blur. Becomes very clear when moving a while mouse pointer over a black screen. Modern LCDs doesn't have this problem, certainly not more than CRTs.

About supported resolution: Why not set the display to a resolution matching the screen..? Oh wait, the A1200 is too old to do that....

@number6

Many opreation can be a lot easier to do on YUV data since the luma and chroma parts are separated. This is especially true for saturation, tinting and brightness which is trivial on YUV data and also only half the amount of data, but requires RGB data to be broken down first. If the RGB is 16 or 24-bit it becomes really tedious for the CPU to do it since the pixels doesn't align to a datatype the CPU knows. 32-bit is easiest but is more than twice the size which puts burdens on memory bandwidth etc.

_________________
- Don't get fooled by my avatar, I'm not like that (anymore, mostly... maybe only sometimes)
> Amiga Classic and OS4 developer for OnyxSoft.

@Deniil715

Quote:

Many opreation can be a lot easier to do on YUV data since the luma and chroma parts are separated. This is especially true for saturation, tinting and brightness which is trivial on YUV data and also only half the amount of data, but requires RGB data to be broken down first. If the RGB is 16 or 24-bit it becomes really tedious for the CPU to do it since the pixels doesn't align to a datatype the CPU knows. 32-bit is easiest but is more than twice the size which puts burdens on memory bandwidth etc.

Thank you.

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@Deniil715

Quote:

Deniil715 wrote: @Franko CRTs are the onles with motion blur. Becomes very clear when moving a while mouse pointer over a black screen. Modern LCDs doesn't have this problem, certainly not more than CRTs. About supported resolution: Why not set the display to a resolution matching the screen..? Oh wait, the A1200 is too old to do that....

CRT's Don't have motion blur, they have phosphor trails which is totally different from the motion blur every LCD suffers from...

Dunno how many times I've got to say this but I'll say it once again...

ALL LCD's HAVE MOTION BLUR, there has not been one single consumer LCD TV or Monitor built or sold to this very date that has Zero Milliseconds delay and the delay is the cause of the motion blur, simple fact that can be easily proven by the naked eye... (let alone the specs)...

Never mentioned supported resolution but seeing as how you mention it, all my multisync CRT monitors support all the native resolutions on the A1200 so there are no problems there (nor with drivers either which seem to be a bit of a problem for NG machines lately)...

_________________

so x1k cant even play low res video without frame skipping?

@wawa

Quote:

so x1k cant even play low res video without frame skipping?

Source?

@pavlor

Quote:

Source?

my guess

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@wawa

that's DVD video quality?

it skipped 1 frame in 4000+ frames, no biggie...

_________________

@WolfToTheMoon

Quote:

that's DVD video quality?

IF that's the source of his post, it certainly reads as an unusual DVD resolution. I would expect 480 or 576 myself.
Or is that possibly for widescreen aspect ratio?

Perhaps a check through MPlayer verbose output regarding size to confirm.

Bah. nevermind. One poster is talking about a rip and the other not. I still wish we had an upload area so everyone could use the same test files, as painful as that sounds.

#6

Last edited by number6 on 28-Jun-2012 at 06:10 PM.
Last edited by number6 on 28-Jun-2012 at 06:04 PM.

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@number6

well, a DVD is always STORED as 720x480 (ntsc) or 720x576 (pal/secam). But when you want to VIEW this, you gotta take into consideration the aspect ratio of the source and the aspect ratio of the screen. So if you want to view a cinema format movie on a 4:3 TV, it'll be scaled to about 720x304 by the DVD player before being sent to the TV. Unless it was STORED with the black bars up and down, in which case you go to the store you bought it from and you slap them silly until they agree to give your money back

Obviously if you have a 16:9 TV it'll be scaled differently.

But with a computer you can choose either downscaling to match the 1:1 pixel format, or you can choose to up scale.

So a DVD viewed on a PC either becomes 720x304 or 1024x576 (roughly. I'm drinking beer so it's not a good time to discuss details).

Anyhoo, 1 skipped frame in over 4000 is not statistically significant. We would need to see the result of a higher resolution to make any properly educated guesses.

_________________
This weeks pet peeve:
Using "voltage" instead of "potential", which leads to inventing new words like "amperage" instead of "current" (I, measured in A) or possible "charge" (amperehours, Ah or Coulomb, C). Sometimes I don't even know what people mean.

@olegil

Quote:

Anyhoo, 1 skipped frame in over 4000 is not statistically significant. We would need to see the result of a higher resolution to make any properly educated guesses.

Agree.

Isn't 720 really a holdover from 704 plus left/right pixel guards and therefore the view on CRT anyway? I mean, that's why Amiga had that resolution for low overscan, iirc.

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

the only person who has the final say in this, is the person doing the hard work.

Hans has said overlay is way down on the list of things to do, and I dont see anyone else making drivers for Radeon HD cards.

I dont understand all the calls for traditional overlay, when a newer technique for it is available. Only one will be implemented, and I know which one I would prefer. That it has to wait for OS4.2 is another matter.

Or is the issue that this driver has been released with no overlay at all, even though all the dev log entries and driver releases for the sam460's and X1000's have never had this. why an issue now and not a few years back?

_________________