Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion. Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules. |
19th December 2006, 17:24 | #2421 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 433
|
pankov, I feel your pain. I was not happy and vented my frustration here and got flamed for it.
Anyways, moving on: toytown, it is possible that you still have an old version of CoreAVC kicking around in your system. Did you install any codec packs? I would do a complete search of your C: drive for coreavc.ax files (or whatever it is called) and unregister and delete them. Then reinstall CoreAVC 1.2. Good luck! |
20th December 2006, 11:03 | #2422 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 123
|
one thing i like to be fixed is the following:
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/8547/coremessng9.jpg the installer misses to remove the old entry in this software list. or it should tell me to remove the old version first (which the new version simply overwrites). |
21st December 2006, 22:46 | #2423 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 97
|
Quote:
When i downgraded back to the earlier WHQL nvidia drivers, my cpu usage whilst watching the movie dropped to around 40% usage. Whilst bringing up the statistics i also get about 1-5 dropped frames after running for several minutes. But the cpu never peaked above 60% total usage according to task manager. This leaves me to believe that its only using 1 core and that taskmanager is only showing usage on both cores due to the task switching cores constantly. Is it possible that there is a SUPER HIGH quality test mp4 i can use, that would simply not play on a single core machine, or even a method of seeing if the application is really using multiple cores? |
|
21st December 2006, 23:36 | #2424 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Germany, Hamburg
Posts: 111
|
Quote:
CPU usage is almost 100% the whole time on my 3500+@2.7Ghz (single core). Do you have the AMD Dual-Core Optimizer installed ? Last edited by JohnnyFu; 21st December 2006 at 23:40. |
|
23rd December 2006, 01:51 | #2425 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Germany, Hamburg
Posts: 111
|
I just wrote a support ticket. 5min later i had a reply.
Quote:
|
|
23rd December 2006, 05:19 | #2429 | Link | |
Mr. Sandman
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Haddonfield, IL
Posts: 11,768
|
Quote:
I change HW very often...
__________________
MPEG-4 ASP Custom Matrices: EQM V1(old), EQM AutoGK Sharpmatrix (aka EQM V2), EQM V3HR (updated 01/10/2004), EQM V3LR, EQM V3ULR (updated 04/02/2005), EQM V3UHR (updated 17/12/2004) and EQM V3EHR (updated 05/10/2004) Info about my ASP matrices. MPEG-4 AVC Custom Matrices: EQM AVC-HR Info about my AVC matrices My x264 builds. Mooo!!! |
|
24th December 2006, 20:35 | #2431 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,926
|
yes for low complexity streams (progressive) the difference is only 25% now
so you can allready playback 720p H.264 @ 30 fps with 800 mhz (MMX,SSE1) x86
__________________
all my compares are riddles so please try to decipher them yourselves :) It is about Time Join the Revolution NOW before it is to Late ! http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=168004 Last edited by CruNcher; 24th December 2006 at 20:39. |
25th December 2006, 00:46 | #2433 | Link | |
ангел смерти
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Lost
Posts: 9,558
|
Quote:
0.4 tests single-threaded, 1.0-pre tests multithreaded. Only with dual core is the difference huge, and then only if you have something that can actually saturate the system, like hd-dvd. Ignore fps in timecodec and concentrate on dfps, which measures total time to complete. (fps measures thread-time and gets faked out by the clock wonkiness in speedstep and c&q systems.) |
|
25th December 2006, 18:35 | #2434 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 567
|
What I would like to see are timed tests from Px and Cruncher that proves the numbers in their posts. I would definitely like to see how ffdshow benefits from the second core for Px and timed tests from Cruncher on that 800 Mhz machine with a 720p file. Let's keep on topic.
Last edited by KoD; 25th December 2006 at 18:38. |
26th December 2006, 16:19 | #2435 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 849
|
Quote:
__________________
Geforce GTX 260 Windows 7, 64bit, Core i7 MPC-HC, Foobar2000 |
|
27th December 2006, 01:43 | #2437 | Link | |
>>^^__^^<<
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 222
|
Quote:
This is RivaTuner text log for playing first 1:47 of this file - http://multimediacom.free.fr/HD-DVD/H264/24Mbps/ |
|
27th December 2006, 04:46 | #2438 | Link | |
Does it really matter?
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,542
|
Quote:
|
|
27th December 2006, 08:37 | #2439 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany
Posts: 7,259
|
little question:
Atm I'm running WinXP but I plan to check out Vista in a couple of weeks (MSDN AA), do I have to fear any problems installing my coreavc pro version on vista? And If I switch back to WinXP (restore an image) will CoreAVC still run? Cu Selur |
27th December 2006, 11:29 | #2440 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Germany, Hamburg
Posts: 111
|
Quote:
Restoring an image wich includes an already activated CoreAVC should work i think. But i don't think you will be able to install/activate CoreAVC on Vista if it was activated on an XP installation before. Last edited by JohnnyFu; 27th December 2006 at 11:33. |
|
Tags |
codec, coreavc, corecodec, coremvc, cuda, decoder, dxva, h.264, mvc, scam |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|