Quote:
Originally Posted by Casshern
Do i understand you correctly: you say that DiAVC is 5 times faster than coreavc on a single processor machine - 19Mbit/s vs. 4 MBit/s?
That would be impressive.
But i remain sceptical and do not like the code-obfuscation. What are you trying to protect? Optimizations to well known-algorithms?
Are you really sure you did not use any open source? Without insinuating anything: Are you aware that the two major reasons for obfuscation are hiding viruses/trojans and/or hiding open-source origin? There are other and better ways to protect intellectual property.
To me it doesn't make sense and i will not beta test an obfuscated program.
regards,
Casshern
|
No, I never mean that the DiAVC is 5 times faster than the coreavc. The 19Mbps is tested using the bitstream of resolution 1280x720 generated by JM13.0 using the CABAC and Hierarchical B frames. But the 4Mbps bistream is downloaded from the internet and It is 1920x1088 and I dont know the detail about it. The 70% CPU fullness includes the audio decoding, video decoding and rendering.
I never use any open source in the DiAVC. The code-obfuscation
is to hide the anti-debug "int 2dh". I never insert virus in the DiAVC because I want to sell it online in future.
Now I have deleted any anti-debug code in the DiAVC. You can try it.