New DXVA/GPU accel. discussion (from CoreAVC)

[hdboy]

incidentally, the just released nvidia 8500/8600 cards promise to offload 100% of avc decoding to the GPU. for ex: reduce cpu usage to 5% on a x2 3800 while playing back casino royal bluray h264.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=835630&page=4

what does this mean for coreavc? I think they need to move fast to add h/w support.

[CiNcH]

What do I need CoreAVC when everything is offloaded to the GPU? I can use just everything supporting PureVideo 2 and it mostly will be as fast...

[KoD]

Well, Nvidia might just boost lots of promises as well. Not like they haven't done so in the past with the previous gfx card generations. And I still believe the price of CoreAVC can't compare to that of buying a new monster gfx card. Still, the activation scheme was not something CoreAVC needed. It may have boosted sales in the beginning but it surely doesn't do this now and it never takes long for software protections to be removed when that software is popular.

[tomos]

reading about those cards here (http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2970&p=3), if they offer this kind of offloading on the lower end GPUs then it would be easier just to get one of those cards IMO

[migrena]

there will be people who doesnt need such gpu (read: non-gamers), integrated gpu is sufficient for normal people who will be using their pc only for working and watching hd movies, but gpu support for encoder - that would be nice :)

Betaboy about gpu support:
http://www.corecodec.com/forums/index.php?topic=89.msg558#msg558

anyway i cannot thing of anything more encouraging piracy than closing shop for several months, i would rather release buggy product marked "unstable - use at your own risk" and then series of updates as the bugs are squashed

[tomos]

deffo. am hoping thats where all these moves towards GPGPU's are taking us. then high end cards might not just be for gamers. use that power as you wish. you can game, or use it for assisted decoding/encoding.

that's just a pipe dream though huh

[zambelli]

I don't see GPU support being a high priority deliverable for CoreAVC; after all, they made their name by being the fastest *software* H.264 decoder. I'd much rather see some multicore decoding support, full H.264 profiles decoding support and most importantly - the ability to move licenses from one machine to the other without restrictions.

[hdboy]

actually, there's no need for a "monster" gfx card. a 8500 which goes for $99 right now will do it. I expect by the end of the year this will go into integrated gfx solution from nvidia.

so why should coreavc bother? well, you still need s/w to take advantage of h/w and if your favorite directshow player (read: MPC) doesn't....

On that note: zambelli have you had a chance to test how the wmp11 vc1 decoder do with the new nvidia cards?

[G_M_C]

I don't see GPU support being a high priority deliverable for CoreAVC; after all, they made their name by being the fastest *software* H.264 decoder. I'd much rather see some multicore decoding support, full H.264 profiles decoding support and most importantly - the ability to move licenses from one machine to the other without restrictions.


I second that motion.

And on the subject of GPU decoding; I would advise to wait on Ati/AMD's solution, wich is due in may 2007. The supposedly have a new decoder that decodes everything on the GPU (as i've been told). They have appropriately called it their "Universal Video Decoder" (UVD).

Seen that their track record with Avivo has been very good, i expect that UVD will be a very good product. And it might have some extra's going for it (HTPC-wise that is); Some of their HTPC-minded cards will ship with an "build-in" audio-chip; Giving the card full HDMI capabillities, for those wanting to hook their PC on to their Home Theatre systems. Haven't read what version HDMI or surround-audio they will support though (full HDMI 1.3 ?? The new Dolby/DTS-formats ??).

[Jay Bee]

I second that motion.

And on the subject of GPU decoding; I would advise to wait on Ati/AMD's solution, wich is due in may 2007. The supposedly have a new decoder that decodes everything on the GPU

Nvidia 8600 already does.

[KoD]

actually, there's no need for a "monster" gfx card. a 8500 which goes for $99 right now will do it. I expect by the end of the year this will go into integrated gfx solution from nvidia.
For people complaining about a 15$ decoder, I guess it does.

Now, about that hardware assist... am I the only one that had issues with it in its various implementations in the past ? There are a few other points I could make, but I'm lazy right now.

[Dr.Khron]

Seen that their track record with Avivo has been very good, i expect that UVD will be a very good product. And it might have some extra's going for it (HTPC-wise that is); Some of their HTPC-minded cards will ship with an "build-in" audio-chip; Giving the card full HDMI capabillities, for those wanting to hook their PC on to their Home Theatre systems.

Whoa, that sounds extremely cool... My Living Room PC needs a new video card, but maybe I'll wait until that technology comes out. Of course, its currently plugged into a crummy old CRT TV tube via a composite cable, so maybe I should get a new TV first. Then again, I think I'd prefer to buy a real set of surround speakers, and pass the audio directly to the external surround amp from the PC.

I dunno if I see a viable market in the future for CoreAVC. Its a nice peice of software, yes, but FFDshow has much more active delveopment, and I think it does just as good a job with brute force. I mean, computers are only going to get faster, cheaper and more powerful for the next few million years or so, right?

I used to use CoreAVC on the living room PC back when it was a P3-1000 (and when CoreAVC was widely distributed as "free"), becuase FFDShow just couldn't cut it. However, now that I recycled my woman's old P4 desktop as the new LRPC, FFDShow plays AVC just fine.

[JohnnyFu]

Here (http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2977&p=4) is a pretty good example about the power of GPU acceleration.

I agree with zambelli that the ability to move licenses from one machine to the other without restrictions is very very important for a many customers.
But it is now more than 12 months ago that CoreAVC announced GPU support (on a 1.0x release, we already reached 1.3). I know... you won't or can't comment on GPU support Betaboy.

But i really want to know what is going on. A clear statement would be much appreciated.
Will we ever see GPU support ? In 6 months, in 12 months, in 18 months ?

[G_M_C]

I think that CoreAVC's products will more-or-less be obsolete in a few months. I say this because all new graphics cards seem to be able to do full H/X264/AVC decoding, including CABAC, in loop deblocking etc. on the GPU.

When you realize that that feature will be integrated on even the low-end board, then you'll also realize that it's very good value-for money when you buy a new graphics board and get the AVC decoding with it automatically. And depending on the manufacturer (Ati or NVidia) you'll even get regular updates of your software, 12 times a year with Ati ... and none of those updates have copy-restrictions :p

So all-in-all; I dont even want to spend money on CoreAVC anymore. I'll buy myself a mid-end passively cooled Radeon 2600HD with UVD, HDMI and full hardware decoding of video (VC-1/AVC/Mpeg2) and audio (New Ati-cards have audio build in, for output on to the HDMI !). That card even does dual-channel AVC-decoding for Picture-Picture (PiP)!

But thats only my $0,02 on the subject of CoreAVC.

[pankov]

I think that CoreAVC's products will more-or-less be obsolete in a few months. I say this because all new graphics cards seem to be able to do full H/X264/AVC decoding, including CABAC, in loop deblocking etc. on the GPU.

G_M_C,
I agree with you but I have a question though
Where did you get the idea that new cards (NVidia in particular) have x264 acceleration?? From my tests I can tell that only H264 (HD-DVD/Blu-Ray or HDTV transmissions) get's accelerated. All x264 reencodes are decoded in software.
This is on 8600GTS with Windows Vista 32bit, Forceware 158.24 and PowerDVD 7.3 (w/ the last updates). For directshow (HDTV + rips) playback I used ZoomPlayer (EVR renderer is a must) and the Cyberlink H264/AVC decoder and I had good results only with pure H264.

Anyone having different experience?

[G_M_C]

G_M_C,
I agree with you but I have a question though
Where did you get the idea that new cards (NVidia in particular) have x264 acceleration?? From my tests I can tell that only H264 (HD-DVD/Blu-Ray or HDTV transmissions) get's accelerated. All x264 reencodes are decoded in software.
This is on 8600GTS with Windows Vista 32bit, Forceware 158.24 and PowerDVD 7.3 (w/ the last updates). For directshow (HDTV + rips) playback I used ZoomPlayer (EVR renderer is a must) and the Cyberlink H264/AVC decoder and I had good results only with pure H264.

Anyone having different experience?

I dont have any hands-on experience yet. But as far as i can tell (reading about it) X264 is a H264 encoder. And H264 should be decoded through hardware.

But there have always been great differences in NVidia's PuireVideo decoders and Atis Avivo (and upcoming UVD). The problem might even be something as simple as the 4CC codes used (or recognized by PureVideo), or something in your settings/other codecs.

But as i said; I dont know for shure yet. I'm waiting untill the new Ati card come around, and start reading all over again. But i stay with my assumption: Eventually CoreAVC will be obsolete, because all decoding is done on the GPU. This conclusion is also based on the fact that Ati and NVidia have far more resources to devolope stuff like this (read this as much more money). And you can bet your ass that they will want to have a "the biggest piece of the pie possible " where High Def is concerned. Since HD is still new for most consumers world-wide, it's a nice marketing strategy to flaunt you HD-powers; And that includes X264 allmost automatically because thats the format used on the internet atm (filesharing might be illigal, but NVidia and Ati DO know that the great majority of their costumers download stuff, so it is economically viable to keep X264 in mind).

[Theliel]

G_M_C,
I agree with you but I have a question though
Where did you get the idea that new cards (NVidia in particular) have x264 acceleration?? From my tests I can tell that only H264 (HD-DVD/Blu-Ray or HDTV transmissions) get's accelerated. All x264 reencodes are decoded in software.
This is on 8600GTS with Windows Vista 32bit, Forceware 158.24 and PowerDVD 7.3 (w/ the last updates). For directshow (HDTV + rips) playback I used ZoomPlayer (EVR renderer is a must) and the Cyberlink H264/AVC decoder and I had good results only with pure H264.

Anyone having different experience?

Yes. The problems in this moment are Vista and Drivers. Nvidia series 7x00 and 8x00 (only 8600, 8500 in this moment) can decode all h264 content, HD or not, in x264 or in other format. Under XP, with cyberlink AVC/h264 video decoder filter you can enable dxva for all your h264 content and work fine.

Under vista... in this moment i only obtained h264 hardware accell with h264 raw, but in all content, QT, x264... so problem Im sure are software or driver.

[pankov]

Theliel,
I'm not sure I understand what you are saying.
As I know hardware acceleration of H264 of the 86(5)00 series is ONLY available in Vista. All my tests proved this. I get 70-80% CPU usage on my C2D6400@3.2GHz in WinXP and 3-7% usage in Vista for the same 1080p H264 content. For the tests I used BBC's Planet Earth (and some PremiereHD) DVB-S/S2 captures. It's the same with Blu-Ray discs (Casino Royale for example). All HDDVD/Blu-Ray reencodes done with x264 in matroska container (both 720p and 1080p) don't get accelerated - the CPU usage is around 30% for 720p and 80% for 1080p.
So I guess there is something wrong with the 4CC codes ... but I have to admit that I'm not exactly sure what's the difference between x264 and h264

[foxyshadis]

Are you sure that's Nvidia's fault and not Cyberlink's? An unfortunate major ommision in most online reviews of the card is that it's only tested on Vista. Driverhaven does claim that There is only one caveat to PureVideo HD at the moment and that is the feature only being available to Vista users until at least July this year. but doesn't cite a source.

Before you start looking into things like fourccs (which don't even exist in properly encoded mkvs, only in vfw-compatible mkv), find out what decoder is being used. The AVC stream in x264, nero, and captured TS are mostly the same (except captures usually have interlacing and recovery bits that the others don't). That should be pretty easy in zoomplayer, which reports the filters in a menu and lets you customize which ones get used for which formats. It may even be that an existing customization is interfering.

[G_M_C]

Are you sure that's Nvidia's fault and not Cyberlink's? An unfortunate major ommision in most online reviews of the card is that it's only tested on Vista. Driverhaven does claim that but doesn't cite a source.

Before you start looking into things like fourccs (which don't even exist in properly encoded mkvs, only in vfw-compatible mkv), find out what decoder is being used. The AVC stream in x264, nero, and captured TS are mostly the same (except captures usually have interlacing and recovery bits that the others don't). That should be pretty easy in zoomplayer, which reports the filters in a menu and lets you customize which ones get used for which formats. It may even be that an existing customization is interfering.

OFFTOPIC, this thread is about CoreAVC !!

tssk tssk foxyshadis, and that for a moderator :p !!

:devil: (just kidding) :devil:

But anyway; I brought up the HW decoders wich are integrated in the new GPU's just because i think those will be the main compatitor of CoreAVC; Unless they come up with something new (or revolutionary), AND the long-time-requested GPU assistance

But since they dont seem to be reacting in this thread anymore, i think that my conclusion isn't far from the truth ...

[DigitalDeviant]

Another downside of the new cards is that they're all PCI Express. Unfortunately, my PC has only AGP and I suspect a lot of the people relying on CoreAVC are in the same boat.

And it's not just this forum they're ignoring. They've been consistently refusing to reply on their own boards as well (including PM). Emails go unanswered and support tickets go unresolved. I've been waiting 6 weeks for some sort of help from them.

[G_M_C]

Another downside of the new cards is that they're all PCI Express. Unfortunately, my PC has only AGP and I suspect a lot of the people relying on CoreAVC are in the same boat.

And it's not just this forum they're ignoring. They've been consistently refusing to reply on their own boards as well (including PM). Emails go unanswered and support tickets go unresolved. I've been waiting 6 weeks for some sort of help from them.

I too have an APG system, that currently plays 1080p fine btw ;). But Ati and NVidia have both announced AGP versions of their mid-end GPU's :)

[kikker]

Theliel,
I'm not sure I understand what you are saying.
As I know hardware acceleration of H264 of the 86(5)00 series is ONLY available in Vista. All my tests proved this. I get 70-80% CPU usage on my C2D6400@3.2GHz in WinXP and 3-7% usage in Vista for the same 1080p H264 content. For the tests I used BBC's Planet Earth (and some PremiereHD) DVB-S/S2 captures. It's the same with Blu-Ray discs (Casino Royale for example). All HDDVD/Blu-Ray reencodes done with x264 in matroska container (both 720p and 1080p) don't get accelerated - the CPU usage is around 30% for 720p and 80% for 1080p.
So I guess there is something wrong with the 4CC codes ... but I have to admit that I'm not exactly sure what's the difference between x264 and h264

This jives with what I've found over the weekend. My P4 2.6 with 7600GS rig running VISTA could not properly handle a x264 encode even at 720p using PowerDVD 7.3/Hardware acceleration combo. I verified that indeed the Cyberlink filter was used in Zoom. However, while CPU usage hovered around a relatively low 25%, the playback was quite jerky.

CoreAVC, on the other hand, played very nicely, albeit with higher CPU utilization.

[pankov]

Are you sure that's Nvidia's fault and not Cyberlink's? An unfortunate major ommision in most online reviews of the card is that it's only tested on Vista. Driverhaven does claim that but doesn't cite a source.

Before you start looking into things like fourccs (which don't even exist in properly encoded mkvs, only in vfw-compatible mkv), find out what decoder is being used. The AVC stream in x264, nero, and captured TS are mostly the same (except captures usually have interlacing and recovery bits that the others don't). That should be pretty easy in zoomplayer, which reports the filters in a menu and lets you customize which ones get used for which formats. It may even be that an existing customization is interfering.
foxyshadis,
I'm not sure of anything. I'm just sharing my findings and I hope someone with more knowlage can clear things up for me.
Last night I tried playing all the files with FFDShow and it reports them all as "Input FOURCC: AVC1" :( but some of them get accelerated by Cyberlink Decoder + NV86(5)00 combo
:(
So how can I or someone else tell the difference?
If needed I can provide some samples.


P.S.
I apologize for the OT but I didn't know where else to find any help

[arfster]

This jives with what I've found over the weekend. My P4 2.6 with 7600GS rig running VISTA could not properly handle a x264 encode even at 720p using PowerDVD 7.3/Hardware acceleration combo. I verified that indeed the Cyberlink filter was used in Zoom. However, while CPU usage hovered around a relatively low 25%, the playback was quite jerky.


You must use a player with EVR (WMP11, PDVD Ultra, Theatertek 2.5, etc), or you don't get any 8500/8600 h264 acceleration. Reason is that PV2 is DXVA2 only, and only EVR supports DXVA2. You can verify this in graphedit if you like - I have, and with the Cyberlink decoder+EVR combination I get hardware acceleration to <1% CPU with all forms of h264.

Stupidly enough, it's the other way round for MPEG2. Cyberlink's decoder (and everyone elses' afaik) are PV1 only, so EVR doesn't work.

[zambelli]

Stupidly enough, it's the other way round for MPEG2. Cyberlink's decoder (and everyone elses' afaik) are PV1 only, so EVR doesn't work.
The Microsoft MPEG-2 decoder in Vista supports DXVA2 and EVR, AFAIK.

[Sirber]

The Microsoft MPEG-2 decoder in Vista supports DXVA2 and EVR, AFAIK.mkay, but why mpeg2 needs acceration in 2007? ;)

[JohnnyFu]

What is the meaning of EVR and PV1/2 ? :)

thank you
Johnny

[arfster]

mkay, but why mpeg2 needs acceration in 2007? ;)

It's not for CPU, but for advanced functions only available in hardware mode. Mainly, spatial-temporal deinterlacing of live video material - there's simply nothing to replicate that available in software (you can do it offline with avisynth scripts and some hand-tweaking, but not live). It's even worse with interlaced h264, which absolutely murders modern CPUs - you need 3.3ghz C2D to play some video AVC HDDVDs in software :eek:


JohnnyFu: EVR (Enhanced Video Renderer) is the new renderer available in Vista to replaced VMR9/overlay etc - it's really impressive, but cos it's new there are lots of application/driver bugs. PV1 is Purevideo 1 - the video hardware acceleration features available on 6xxx/7xxx/8800 cards. PV2 is the new version on the 8500/8600 for h264, which reduces CPU load to 1%. PV2 requires DXVA2, DXVA2 needs EVR to work....

[wozio]

PV2 requires DXVA2, DXVA2 needs EVR to work....
That is not true. Main DXVA 2 advantage over DXVA 1 is that decoders can use it without renderer. In DXVA 1 renderer was something like proxy to driver. Now in DXVA 2 there is separate interface independent on renderer.

And also if PV2 requires DXVA 2 that would mean it's not possible to implement it in win xp but nvidia claims that 8500/8600 acceleration will be available for xp in june.

[Theliel]

really EVR is needed under vista if you want to have any video hardware accell, no only for PV2.

Nvidia Serie 6x00, 7x00 and 8x00 (in this moment, only 8500/8600) have video hardware accell for h264 under vista, the problem is that EVR is needed in all cases. PowerDVD have got a good DS filter, but EVR support are "poor" in this moment. Other problem is that newer powerdvd filter work only in EVR mode, and no all player support EVR.

resuming...

CoreAVC only work fine FOR ME under vista in EVR mode.
Cyberlink decoder (with Dxva in use) only work fine in vista in EVR mode. -> Yes, all h264 content have hardware accell with a 7600 and 8600 with cyberlink decoder. Of course, with 8600 or 8500 CPU load are practicaly cero and with 7x00 serie CPU load are about 20-30%

for now, the only players that work for me are the latest ZP alpha version 5.5 with add EVR and KMplayer. PDVD 7.3 dont work fine (yes, increible that filter work fine and player not)

the most interesting are that CoreAVC work fine only in EVR too... in VMR9 CPU load go to 90-100%

[zambelli]

PV1 is Purevideo 1 - the video hardware acceleration features available on 6xxx/7xxx/8800 cards. PV2 is the new version on the 8500/8600 for h264, which reduces CPU load to 1%. PV2 requires DXVA2, DXVA2 needs EVR to work....
Actually, the difference is that PureVideo 2 supports VLD decoding - where the entire bitstream is decoded on the card, unlike with earlier DXVA profiles where only parts of the decoding process were processed by the GPU (i.e. MoComp, iDCT, Postproc).

really EVR is needed under vista if you want to have any video hardware accell, no only for PV2.
That's incorrect. DXVA 1.0 is still supported with VMR7 and VMR9. Any decoder designed to work with DXVA 1.0 and VMR will still work under Vista (DXVA 2.0 emulates DXVA 1.0). Naturally, the WDDM driver would also need to support both interfaces.

The differences in DXVA in Vista vs XP are mostly due to the video driver differences. Certain apps like WMP also use EVR by default, which adds to the difference. But generally any app designed for XP, VMR and DXVA 1.0 will continue to work under Vista.

[DeepBeepMeep]

The differences in DXVA in Vista vs XP are mostly due to the video driver differences. Certain apps like WMP also use EVR by default, which adds to the difference. But generally any app designed for XP, VMR and DXVA 1.0 will continue to work under Vista.


zambelli since you seem to know lots about DXVA, I would be grateful if you could answer my following question: I have been sticking to software decoders like CoreAVC so that I can used postprocessor filters such as ffdshow or DirectVobSub.

Is there a version of DXVA or a combination of filters that allows me to use a hardware decoder and still have a software decoder next in the chain ?
Basically I am looking for a graph that allows me to use a hardware decoder and still to able apply on the resulting picture some subtitles for instance.

Thanks

[Sulik]

Actually, only MPEG2/VC1 are supported for DXVA1 compatibility (VMR7/9). H.264 is only available through DXVA2 on Vista.

[Theliel]

exactly, in vista h264 only work in DXVA2+EVR

DeepBeepMeep, its posible, but your sentence are contradictory.

You want hardware decoder+software decoder?

If you want use Hardware decoder + filter for subtitles (for example) its posible:

Only need add to the chain ffdshow video raw:


1º. Configure ffdshow video decoder for raw:

http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/5084/86558750ff5.jpg

2º. Add ffdshow video raw filter to the chain:


In graphedit:

http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/7100/46494947qm4.jpg


I prefer ZoomPlayer, but the graph its the same.


Notes:
Under Vista you MUST select EVR, no VMR. Under XP you must select VMR.
For audio, you can choose any other filter you want.
For Mov content you must have haali splitter installed.
For hardware accel you must enter in the filter properties and set dxva


Now, your video are decoding in cyberlink filter with dxva and output go to ffdshow, where you can add any filter you want.

http://img154.imageshack.us/img154/8723/finalln0.jpg

Image are compose because i can't open all windows in the same time :)

[arfster]

And also if PV2 requires DXVA 2 that would mean it's not possible to implement it in win xp but nvidia claims that 8500/8600 acceleration will be available for xp in june.

Sure, I was only talking about the current situation with drivers/decoders. There's no way NVidia would have made a new card that required XP users to use EVR - that would just be daft.

[DeepBeepMeep]

Thanks Theliel for your help,

You guess what I want: Hardware decoder + software subtitles.

It seems to me that if the hardware decoder is not the last filter in the chain that is the filter before the video renderer, the hardware decoder switches automatically to software mode even if the DXVA option is set.

Unfortunately, this happens whenever ffdshow is added after the decoder. I have tried your graph on a H264 file.
With ffdhow: 95% CPU usage, which is the same CPU usage if I turn off DXVA
Without: 60% CPU usage

Can you confirm similar behaviours or it is just my system? thanks

[pankov]

DeepBeepMeep,
you are correct. If there is a subtitle filter (VobSub or FFDShow) added in the graph you lose the DXVA. You can see this if you use the NVidia Purevideo decoder (for MPEG2 stuff) - it shows the real decoding method (software vs. hardware).
I've been searching for solution for this problem more than an year now without any real progress. I did a lot of testing and found out that if the subtitle filter is not connected to the main decoding chain but to the second VMR imput pin you can get both subtitles and DXVA. There are two problems with this scenario:
- there is no subs filter that can take direct input from text (.srt/.sub/.txt) file and render is as a video stream (for the tests I used avisynth scripting)
- the player should add special support for this kind of subs rendering because the subs stream should be mixed with the main video stream either using transparency or some kind of PIP technique to place the subs over the main video but only in the desired position ... I suppose there should be black background for the subs - rectangular video is probably a must ...

Sadly noone seems to care for us - non native English speakers
;)

[zambelli]

Is there a version of DXVA or a combination of filters that allows me to use a hardware decoder and still have a software decoder next in the chain ?
Not with DXVA 1.0. DXVA 1.0 requires decoding to the renderer. If you insert Ffdshow between the decoder and the renderer, then DXVA can't work. Imagine DXVA 1.0 as living inside the renderer. If you want it to decode something, you need to give it an encoded bitstream. If you insert Ffdshow between the decoder and the renderer, then the renderer ends up receiving the uncompressed YUV video - and there's no decoding to be done on that.

H.264 is only available through DXVA2 on Vista.
It's not that H.264 decoding is not supported in DXVA. It's that the current crop of H.264 decoders don't support anything other than DXVA2 and Vista. DXVA support must be implemented in the decoder and the driver. One could theoretically have DXVA decoding support for H.264 with DXVA1/VMR under XP. The fact that nobody is doing it is not a restriction of DXVA API or Vista.

Sadly noone seems to care for us - non native English speakers
In order to support subtitling of DXVA decoded video, one would have to composite the subtitles with the video in the renderer - not before the renderer. It would require a custom presenter. It'd be up to the player developers to create such a feature.

The problem with most current subtitling plugins is that they work by overlaying the text onto the decoded video before it reaches the renderer.

[pankov]

zambelli,
am I right to think that in DXVA 2.0 it will be possible to have acceleration done in the decoder (H264/AVC/MPEG2) and then add the subs with a software decoder attached between the main video decoder and the renderer (EVR for example)?

[SBeaver]

I'm sorry if I'm a little off-topic, but is there a decoder with dxva support like the cyberlink h264 decoder above that works with vc1 video?
I though the MS decoder supported hardware decoding but I'm not getting performance anywhere near what I should get.

[_xxl]

vc1 video
MS decoder is multithreaded and DXVA.

[Theliel]

MS decoder never worked for me (work but wihtout dxva). Anyway, cyberlink have a VC1 decoder with dxva too.

[SBeaver]

Thanks for the replies.
Unfortunatly dxva for ms or cyberlink doesnt work for me.
I found the setting in wmp11 for directx accelleration (or something like that) and when I tried to play video it crashed my computer.
Cyberlinks decoder only freezes (and wont work outside powerdvd).
Maybe I should be looking for a better forceware driver, I was using the latest beta 165.xx for xp x64, must be some kind of strange bug.

[_xxl]

Is DXVA available for XP X64?

[Sirber]

Thanks for the replies.
Unfortunatly dxva for ms or cyberlink doesnt work for me.
I found the setting in wmp11 for directx accelleration (or something like that) and when I tried to play video it crashed my computer.
Cyberlinks decoder only freezes (and wont work outside powerdvd).
Maybe I should be looking for a better forceware driver, I was using the latest beta 165.xx for xp x64, must be some kind of strange bug.Which card?

[SBeaver]

Which card?

6600 GT, it should support decoding acording to nvidias site. that was 160.03 driver btw. http://www.nvidia.com/page/purevideo_support.html here it says vc1 decode supported for standard and hd material.

[Sulik]

It's not that H.264 decoding is not supported in DXVA. It's that the current crop of H.264 decoders don't support anything other than DXVA2 and Vista. DXVA support must be implemented in the decoder and the driver. One could theoretically have DXVA decoding support for H.264 with DXVA1/VMR under XP. The fact that nobody is doing it is not a restriction of DXVA API or Vista.

While it is possible to support H.264 acceleration in DXVA1 on XP, it is NOT possible for the driver to support H.264 acceleration in DXVA1 on Vista.
This is a limitation of the Microsoft DXVA1->DXVA2 translation layer (WDDM driver can only support DXVA2 DDI), which currently only supports official MPEG-2 and VC1 guids.

[Theliel]

offtopic and ontopic

interesting newer datas:


CPU: P4 3.4 HT
card: 7600GT


sample 1-> Dolphins_1080.wmv (downloaded from MS HD gallery)
sample 2-> nancy_drew-tlr1_1080p.mov (downloaded from QT trailers gallery)
all metric are CPU used.


Sample 1:


WMP work fine now with dxva(dont ask me ¿?)
Remember that WMP in vista use EVR.

WMP with Dxva disable -> 90% max, 34% min, 57% overall
WMP with Dxva enable -> 60% max, 22% min, 26% overall


ZoomPlayer with WMV decoder DMO in EVR -> 62% max, 30% min, 38% overall
ZoomPlayer with WMV decoder DMO in VMR9 -> Don't work, green colors
ZoomPlayer with WMV decoder DMO in Haali Renderer -> 70% max, 10% min, 32% overall <- Interesting

ZoomPlayer with libavcodec in EVR/VMR9 -> 72% max, 58% min, 63% overall
ZoomPlayer with libavcodec in Haali Renderer -> dont work fine, upper half show fine, down half are all green
ZoomPlayer with Cyberlink VC1 video decoder -> impossible (for now) connect filter.

Note: WMV decoder dont have any options for enable or disable dxva. In WMP you can enable dxva under preferences, in other

player you can't, so is it dxva enable by default in MS decoder?



Sample 2:


WMP + Cyberlink h264/AVC Video Decoder with Dxva disable or enable in codec -> 60% max, 14% min, 35% overall


Zoomplayer + Cyberlink h264/AVC Video Decoder dxva enable in EVR -> equal to MMP, maybe ZP a little more CPU use?
Zoomplayer + Cyberlink h264/AVC Video Decoder dxva disable in EVR/VMR -> 98% max, 34%min, 78% overall
Zoomplayer + Cyberlink h264/AVC Video Decoder dxva enable in VMR9 -> dont work.
Zoomplayer + Cyberlink h264/AVC Video Decoder dxva enable/disable in haali renderer -> 100% max, 30%min, 80% overall

Zoomplayer + libavcodec in VMR -> 90% max, 20% min, 45% overall <- Maybe no deblocking
Zoomplayer + libavcodec in EVR -> little more CPU use than VMR

ZoomPlayer + CoreAVC 1.3 in VMR -> 90% max, 32% min, 71% overall
ZoomPlayer + CoreAVC 1.3 in Haali/EVR -> 70% max, 18% min, 45% overall

ZoomPlayer + MainConcept AVC/H264 video decoder dxva enable/disble -> 90% max, 65% min, 80% overall


Conclusion:

My ffdshow have some problems with debloking :P
EVR take a little more resources than VMR9
Cyberlink h264 decoder with dxva enable only avalible in EVR
MS WMV decoder enable by default dxva.
EVR are the best renderer, but have some problems with AR sometimes
Haali renderer are a good election for non h264 content
Nvidia serie 7x00 work fine under vista in h264/VC1 with hardware support. Serie 8500/8600 are much better, tomorrow i can post some other result.

If somebody want other decoder test or suggestion, please, tell me.

[zambelli]

@Moderator:
Can we split this DXVA discussion into a separate thread? I'd rather not hijack CoreAVC's thread.

am I right to think that in DXVA 2.0 it will be possible to have acceleration done in the decoder (H264/AVC/MPEG2) and then add the subs with a software decoder attached between the main video decoder and the renderer (EVR for example)?
That's my understanding too. DXVA 2.0 video processor API can be used to perform subtitle blending. I think subtitles could also be composited with the decoded picture before it's passed off to the custom allocator.

Even though DXVA 2.0 separates decoding from the renderer, a renderer is still required. I don't think DXVA 2.0 would allow HW acceleration to be used for decoding in something like Avisynth's DirectShowSource(), for example.

WMV decoder dont have any options for enable or disable dxva. In WMP you can enable dxva under preferences, in other player you can't, so is it dxva enable by default in MS decoder?
I agree it's confusing. DXVA support for WMV decoder is controlled via a registry key. You can use the WMV PowerToy (http://www.citizeninsomniac.com/WMV) to enable/disable it. The confusing part is that WMP uses the same reg key to control DXVA for WMV - so the setting actually has a wider effect than just on the player application.

By default (if DXVA reg key doesn't exist), DXVA 2.0 support is enabled for WMV decoder (implies MF and EVR pipeline) but disabled for DXVA 1.0 (implies DirectShow/WMFSDK and VMR pipeline). When the reg key is set (0 or 1), then it disables/enables both DXVA 1.0 and 2.0 support.

@All:

Some basic facts about DXVA 2.0 vs 1.0:

DXVA 2.0 requires EVR and Vista. VMR7 and VMR9 support only DXVA 1.0, and this is true in both XP and Vista.
DXVA 2.0 is supported in both DirectShow and Media Foundation on Vista. A DShow decoder filter can be designed to support both DXVA 1.0 (with VMR) and DXVA 2.0 (with EVR). The WM Format SDK only supports DXVA 1.0 for WMV decoding.
Vista only has a native DXVA 2.0 driver, but the driver is designed to translate DXVA 1.0 API calls into equivalent DXVA 2.0 functions if the video driver is WDDM compatible. This allows legacy (XP) DXVA 1.0 decoders to still work in Vista.


A few MSDN topics on DXVA 2.0:
DirectX Video Acceleration 2.0 (http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa965263.aspx)
Supporting DXVA 2.0 in DirectShow (http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa965245.aspx)
What's New in DirectShow (http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms788119.aspx)

Finally, if anybody has technical questions (Sulik, you might want to ask about that H.264 DXVA 1.0 issue), you can e-mail askdxva@microsoft.com with questions and somebody from the DXVA team will get back to you.

[zambelli]

This post summarizes DXVA support in Microsoft's WMV decoder:

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=954165#post954165

[CiNcH]

DXVA 2.0 requires EVR and Vista.


What about using EVR under Windows XP? This is perfectly possible by copying evr.dll and dxva2.dll to system32 folder (for example) and registering evr.dll.

[KoD]

That's not officiailly supported. There might lie dragons.

[wozio]

That's my understanding too. DXVA 2.0 video processor API can be used to perform subtitle blending. I think subtitles could also be composited with the decoded picture before it's passed off to the custom allocator.

Even though DXVA 2.0 separates decoding from the renderer, a renderer is still required. I don't think DXVA 2.0 would allow HW acceleration to be used for decoding in something like Avisynth's DirectShowSource(), for example.

I think when gpu processing is being used then video frames must be in video card memory, that's why renderer must know where these frames are stored and which device is being used. So every filter after decoder must operate on video memory. Copying from video memory to main memory is veeeery slow at least on xp.

Anyway after quick look on the docs it looks like providing extra filter after decoder would require implementing all dxva interfaces from evr to pass everything to renderer.

[zambelli]

What about using EVR under Windows XP? This is perfectly possible by copying evr.dll and dxva2.dll to system32 folder (for example) and registering evr.dll.
You can use EVR under XP - it comes with the .NET 3.0 runtime - though it's not registered by default. But you can't use DXVA 2.0 in XP - it requires Vista video driver model.

[arfster]

Am I correct in thinking that for NVidia to enable 8500/8600 h264 acceleration in XP next month, they will have to change their drivers to allow it with DXVA1 and VMR9? (at present you need to use Vista+EVR or you get no acceleration at all with these cards).

If this is right, will Microsoft then need to change the Vista DXVA1>DXVA2 conversion thingy for it to work with h264 acceleration and VMR9?

TIA.

[Ronin-7]

Hey someone correct me if I'm wrong but as far as I knew NVIDIA H.264 decoding was done through a custom API or hooks into their own driver & not exposed through DXVA 1.x under XP.

Companies like Nero, Cyberlink etc had to sign agreements to get access to the hooks in NVIDIA's drivers for H.264 support which is why it was limited to their players.

It the same deal again with Purevideo VP2 under XP those players only will get the support but under Vista NVIDIA exposes the H.264 decoding through DXVA 2.0 so anyone can tap into it.

From Firingsquad article (http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/geforce_8500_8600_purevideo_hd_overview/page2.asp) on Purevideo VP2.

When it comes to software, NVIDIA no longer requires a NVIDIA-branded PureVideo software decoder. (They haven’t since last year).

With Windows XP, PureVideo quality features will be available to any DXVA application but H.264 decode will only be enabled with partner software such as Intervideo, Cyberlink, and Nero via a proprietary interface.

With Windows Vista, NVIDIA is writing to the Vista-only DXVA2. This allows any developer to tap into NVIDIA’s H.264 decode abilities as well as NVIDIA’s video processing features.

With the standardized DXVA2 interface, even enthusiasts can write to this API, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see software such as ffdshow or DScaler being written to take advantage of the new technology. Officially, PureVideo quality features are enabled by the built-in Windows Vista MPEG-2 decoder, but I still seem to have had better results with Intervideo’s decoder.

[Theliel]

I agree it's confusing. DXVA support for WMV decoder is controlled via a registry key. You can use the WMV PowerToy (http://www.citizeninsomniac.com/WMV) to enable/disable it. The confusing part is that WMP uses the same reg key to control DXVA for WMV - so the setting actually has a wider effect than just on the player application.

By default (if DXVA reg key doesn't exist), DXVA 2.0 support is enabled for WMV decoder (implies MF and EVR pipeline) but disabled for DXVA 1.0 (implies DirectShow/WMFSDK and VMR pipeline). When the reg key is set (0 or 1), then it disables/enables both DXVA 1.0 and 2.0 support.

@All:

Some basic facts about DXVA 2.0 vs 1.0:

DXVA 2.0 requires EVR and Vista. VMR7 and VMR9 support only DXVA 1.0, and this is true in both XP and Vista.
DXVA 2.0 is supported in both DirectShow and Media Foundation on Vista. A DShow decoder filter can be designed to support both DXVA 1.0 (with VMR) and DXVA 2.0 (with EVR). The WM Format SDK only supports DXVA 1.0 for WMV decoding.
Vista only has a native DXVA 2.0 driver, but the driver is designed to translate DXVA 1.0 API calls into equivalent DXVA 2.0 functions if the video driver is WDDM compatible. This allows legacy (XP) DXVA 1.0 decoders to still work in Vista.


A few MSDN topics on DXVA 2.0:
DirectX Video Acceleration 2.0 (http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa965263.aspx)
Supporting DXVA 2.0 in DirectShow (http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa965245.aspx)
What's New in DirectShow (http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms788119.aspx)

Finally, if anybody has technical questions (Sulik, you might want to ask about that H.264 DXVA 1.0 issue), you can e-mail askdxva@microsoft.com with questions and somebody from the DXVA team will get back to you.

Interesting and thank.

anyway, registry keys only work with WMP. When dxva in registry are enable WMV decoder is forced to EVR and dxva2, its true. In this mode, other player in VMR dont work. If you dont force dxva dxva1 its used and VMR9 work again. for last, if you force dxva to disable under WMP wmv dont have hardware accel but have hardward accel in other player.

More interesting are dxva log. I can force dxva enable for WMV decoder, but log said me that dxva2 Never is used in other player than WMP, however i sure i have hardware acceleration in WMV.


Am I correct in thinking that for NVidia to enable 8500/8600 h264 acceleration in XP next month, they will have to change their drivers to allow it with DXVA1 and VMR9? (at present you need to use Vista+EVR or you get no acceleration at all with these cards).


yes, its true.

If this is right, will Microsoft then need to change the Vista DXVA1>DXVA2 conversion thingy for it to work with h264 acceleration and VMR9?


No. MS musn't change nothing. XP work with DXVA1 and VMR, so nvidia only have to add support for this under XP. 8500/8600 serie work fine in this moment under Vista, they dont have change nothing.

[arfster]

No. MS musn't change nothing. XP work with DXVA1 and VMR, so nvidia only have to add support for this under XP. 8500/8600 serie work fine in this moment under Vista, they dont have change nothing.

What I was getting at was that they don't work with VMR9 in Vista, so apps without EVR support can't use 8500/8600 h264 acceleration. Without a MS update, can this be made to work?

[zambelli]

Hey someone correct me if I'm wrong but as far as I knew NVIDIA H.264 decoding was done through a custom API or hooks into their own driver & not exposed through DXVA 1.x under XP.
Actually, I think you're right, Ronin. The comment from Sulik about H.264 decoding not working under DXVA 1.0 in Vista got me thinking... and I realized that there was never a spec for H.264 DXVA 1.0 decoding. Any H.264 HW acceleration support under XP was likely done using custom API hooks.

This presentation confirms that H.264 decoding has only ever been supported in DXVA 2.0 (slide 13):

http://download.microsoft.com/download/5/b/9/5b97017b-e28a-4bae-ba48-174cf47d23cd/MED025_WH06.ppt

And so does this MSDN doc:

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms697067.aspx

Am I correct in thinking that for NVidia to enable 8500/8600 h264 acceleration in XP next month, they will have to change their drivers to allow it with DXVA1 and VMR9? (at present you need to use Vista+EVR or you get no acceleration at all with these cards).
Looks like there will never be DXVA support for H.264 decoding in XP and DXVA 1.0. That doesn't mean there can't be HW acceleration for H.264 in XP - it just can't be done with any public DirectX APIs.

[zambelli]

Just a few more notes about DXVA:

DXVA is more than just for decoding. It also includes video processing and capture support.

In order to have DXVA decoding support, you need 4 components:
An MPEG-2, VC-1 or H.264 decoder that supports offloading parts of the decoding process to the GPU by using DXVA API calls
DXVA system driver - this is the OS runtime library that powers the DXVA API. You have DXVA 1.0 in XP and DXVA 2.0 in Vista. In Vista this component also translates DXVA 1.0 API calls into equivalent DXVA 2.0 functions.
Video driver that supports DXVA decoding/processing. It's up to the driver to report the capabilities of the card to the DXVA driver. Because many of the actual decoding/processing functions are generic and implemented in a whole class of GPUs, sometimes it only takes a driver update to bring a particular DXVA feature to life.
Video card that has particular decoding/processing features implemented in its hardware.

[zambelli]

anyway, registry keys only work with WMP. When dxva in registry are enable WMV decoder is forced to EVR and dxva2, its true. In this mode, other player in VMR dont work. If you dont force dxva dxva1 its used and VMR9 work again. for last, if you force dxva to disable under WMP wmv dont have hardware accel but have hardward accel in other player.
No, trust me, the "DXVA" registry key works for the WMV decoder in general, not just WMP.

Let me repeat:

If "DXVA" does not exist, HW acceleration will be enabled for DXVA 2.0 in Media Foundation with EVR. It will be disabled for DXVA 1.0 in DirectShow with VMR7/9.

If "DXVA" = 0, HW acceleration will be disabled in the WMV decoder for all apps, regardless of pipeline or renderer.

If "DXVA" = 1, HW acceleration will be enabled in the WMV decoder in both DirectShow (DXVA 1.0 - VMR) and MF (DXVA 2.0 - EVR).

More interesting are dxva log. I can force dxva enable for WMV decoder, but log said me that dxva2 Never is used in other player than WMP, however i sure i have hardware acceleration in WMV.
The WMV decoder only uses DXVA 2.0 in Media Foundation with EVR. No other player (that I'm aware of) besides WMP in Vista uses Media Foundation and EVR for playback. They could - but nobody has done it yet.

[hdboy]

@zambelli:

I'm using a new MPC (media player classic) build with EVR support. It works on XP with .NET 3 installed. For me, the big advantage of EVR over VMR9 renderless is no tearing at 1080. I have a nvidia 7600GT card.

however, I lose DXVA with MS VC1 decoder (for ex). From what you say, it appears I will never get DXVA (1 or 2) under XP if I use EVR. Is this correct?

[zambelli]

however, I lose DXVA with MS VC1 decoder (for ex). From what you say, it appears I will never get DXVA (1 or 2) under XP if I use EVR. Is this correct?
Correct. EVR only supports DXVA 2.0, and DXVA 2.0 only exists on Vista.

[KoD]

Hey someone correct me if I'm wrong but as far as I knew NVIDIA H.264 decoding was done through a custom API or hooks into their own driver & not exposed through DXVA 1.x under XP.

Companies like Nero, Cyberlink etc had to sign agreements to get access to the hooks in NVIDIA's drivers for H.264 support which is why it was limited to their players.


That is correct. I could have sworn I said this myself quite a couple of times last year as well as this year on this forum.

[hdboy]

That is correct. I could have sworn I said this myself quite a couple of times last year as well as this year on this forum.

I wonder what kind of money nvidia wrangles from cyberlink, etc. It seems really shoddy practice. They should release their own DS filter, like the Purevideo decoder, to take advantage of all features their cards support, sell it for cheap, or even give it away for free. Or, gasp, make it open source! But hey, that would actually be beneficial to their customers. Can't have that!

[Ronin-7]

I wonder what kind of money nvidia wrangles from cyberlink, etc. It seems really shoddy practice. They should release their own DS filter, like the Purevideo decoder, to take advantage of all features their cards support, sell it for cheap, or even give it away for free. Or, gasp, make it open source! But hey, that would actually be beneficial to their customers. Can't have that!

Well I agree it would be nice if NVIDIA did release their own Purevideo H.264 decoder but probably unlikely as they don't want to do the work when others will. The Purevideo DVD decoder hasn't even been updated to work properly on Windows Vista so NVIDIA can be pretty slow going sometimes on software development & fixing bugs.

I doubt that much money changes hands as NVIDIA want the software players to support their hardware but do not want to publicly open their drivers to all & sundry as they are extremely important to them. It's really more of making sure that whatever access those companies get to NVIDIA's driver/hardware stays secret.

So the commercial software players get access to the hardware through NVIDIA's own custom interface under XP but under Windows Vista with DXVA 2 which supports H.264 they wont have to use the custom interface so as long as anyone taps into DXVA 2 they can make use of GPU acceleration.

[audyovydeo]

Well I agree it would be nice if NVIDIA did release their own Purevideo H.264 decoder but probably unlikely as they don't want to do the work when others will. The Purevideo DVD decoder hasn't even been updated to work properly on Windows Vista so NVIDIA can be pretty slow going sometimes on software development & fixing bugs.

I doubt that much money changes hands as NVIDIA want the software players to support their hardware but do not want to publicly open their drivers to all & sundry as they are extremely important to them. It's really more of making sure that whatever access those companies get to NVIDIA's driver/hardware stays secret.

So the commercial software players get access to the hardware through NVIDIA's own custom interface under XP but under Windows Vista with DXVA 2 which supports H.264 they wont have to use the custom interface so as long as anyone taps into DXVA 2 they can make use of GPU acceleration.

If I surmise the discussion correctly, all we gotta do is cross fingers and hope that videolan's developers are reading this thread, and add DXVA 1/2 integration into VLC ....

(and whatever other GPU vendor's specs, since NVidia's but one on the list.)

audyovydeo

[chros]

...all we gotta do is cross fingers and hope that videolan's developers are reading this thread, and add DXVA 1/2 integration into VLC ....
I think it won't be tomorrow (or even never), because they don't program for Windows, but VLC has a Windows port. (and that's true for mplayer, ffdshow (ffmpeg)).
Of course, they can make OS specific changes, but ... :)

[Sirber]

VLC already use Direct 3D on windows. But, they are porting their code to QT4, so not sure they will play with DXVA soon :)

[JohnnyFu]

@zambelli:

I'm using a new MPC (media player classic) build with EVR support. It works on XP with .NET 3 installed. For me, the big advantage of EVR over VMR9 renderless is no tearing at 1080. I have a nvidia 7600GT card.

however, I lose DXVA with MS VC1 decoder (for ex). From what you say, it appears I will never get DXVA (1 or 2) under XP if I use EVR. Is this correct?

Just found a post how to use EVR on XP, sounds good.
Where did you get that MPC (EVR) build from ? I would like to test that version. I have a 7600GT as well.

[zambelli]

I think it won't be tomorrow (or even never), because they don't program for Windows, but VLC has a Windows port. (and that's true for mplayer, ffdshow (ffmpeg)). Of course, they can make OS specific changes, but ... :)
DXVA support needs to be implemented in the DirectShow layer of the decoder lib, so it'd probably be up to the Ffdshow team to implement DXVA support for MPEG-2/VC-1/H.264 decoding with ffmpeg/libavcodec.

[chros]

Just found a post how to use EVR on XP, sounds good.
Where did you get that MPC (EVR) build from ? I would like to test that version. I have a 7600GT as well.
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=999753#post999753

[JohnnyFu]

Looks like there will never be DXVA support for H.264 decoding in XP and DXVA 1.0. That doesn't mean there can't be HW acceleration for H.264 in XP - it just can't be done with any public DirectX APIs.


Do you think it is possible for Nvidia to reach the same h264 decode acceleration performance (Vista) (http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2977&p=4), wich is in all probability realized using DXVA 2.0, under XP using "custom API hooks" ?

[Thunderbolt8]

coreavc should care about better PQ, since more and more people get faster cpus. as soon as people can play h264 with ffdshpow smoothly, PQ wise coreavc can be dumped, no matter if gpu or not

[Sirber]

GPU acceleration is nice! Accelerated, 1080p use 10-20% CPU on my 3800+X2 (8600 GTS, vista), while unaccelerated (ffdshow) one core goes to 50% and I get almost only frameskips.

[Theliel]

Good news, VLC and FFmpeg are working for EVR and dxva support :)

[audyovydeo]

GPU acceleration is nice! Accelerated, 1080p use 10-20% CPU on my 3800+X2 (8600 GTS, vista), while unaccelerated (ffdshow) one core goes to 50% and I get almost only frameskips.

I'd like to know what format is the film you're viewing, and with what player you're watching it.
My hidden question, cos I *still* havent figured out, is : can the players that support PureVideo :
1. decode an x264-encoded video
2. using GPU acceleration ?

I've read this thread, but I dont think the answer's been pinpointed.

As far as I can tell, the only players that make use of PureVideo are :

"CyberLink PowerDVD Ultra
Version 7.3 build 2911 or higher required for GeForce 8500 & 8600 series.

InterVideo WinDVD 8 Platinum
Special version for GeForce 8500 & 8600 Series available soon."


Also, PureVideo support is not only a GeForce 8xxx thing :
http://www.nvidia.com/page/purevideo_support.html
http://www.nvidia.com/object/purevideo_geforcego_comparison.html
and I notice NVidia makes a distinction between PureVideo and PureVideo HD :

http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_pvhd_faq.html#Q2

thanks
audyovydeo

[Theliel]

exactly. PowerDVD 7.3 2911 are nedded for 8500/8600, because for the rest of all 7x00 or 8x00 family work fine. Intervideo i don't know if work fine, but i can try later.

WMP work fine too, but only for VC-1

you can use other playres too, but you will need the proper filters, and a player with support for EVR. For example Zoomplayer, MPC EVR, bsplayer...

Decoding x264 video use GPU acceleration too :)

Of course, serie 8x00 not only nvidia cards, all serie 7x00 and the most of all serie 6x00 have hardware acceleration for h264/avc and work fine, but only 8500//8600 give us the best result in hardware decoding, because use the newer VP2

[Sirber]

@audyovydeo

I used the latest PowerDVD with h264/ac3 content.
You can also use a sprcial build of MPC with EVR enabled and Cyberlink h264 decoder.

[DrNein]

CyberLink is indeed the best AVC decoder but I have not heard of anyone having functional DxVA for x264 encodes with either Nvidia 7000 or ATI X1000.

Theliel, what software and hardware specificially are you using for DxVA of x264 encodes?

[CruNcher]

@DrNein
For some functions as the Motion Adaptive Per Pixel Deinterlacer it's better to use official WHQL certified Nvidia Drivers and also those that are for your Series as the internals of the 9x series and 1xx series have changed (change between Geforce 7/8 and Vista stuff) and are incompatible PureVideo wise @ the moment.

The "best" Visual Quality can be reached with the 97.94,97.98 and 97.95 (Windows XP) Forceware, but be aware the Per Pixel Deinterlacer is so good that for Realtime HD you need a very fast Geforce 7 card (cards like the 7600 GS are to slow with those Drivers and HD Deinterlacing is not possible SD is but you might even encounter framedrops their with it for Interlaced content). The currently official released 94.24 passes 2 of 3 HQV diagonal angles starting with the 97.94 and up to the 97.95 it passes all angles (on the Geforce 7 architecture) no Software Deinterlacer neither YADIF nor TDEINT are able to pass all 3 of them currently.

And btw it's not so easy to get PowerDVD to work with Nvidias Per Pixel Motion Adaptive Deinterlacer (setting PureVideo accelleration alone doesn't work for the Geforce 7 you have to also set the guid of it in the advanced options as render mode or it won't be active it's a little tricky ;)

CyberLink is indeed the best AVC decoder but I have not heard of anyone having functional DxVA for x264 encodes with either Nvidia 7000 or ATI X1000.

Theliel, what software and hardware specificially are you using for DxVA of x264 encodes?

I'm not quiet sure about this as the newest Cyberlink Decoder seems to have some problems (also a Problem that wasn't existant in older versions) with certain X264 streams.
In terms of compatibility and Quality Mainconcept/Elecards DXVA enabled Decoder seems to be the better solution here (works with every X264 Stream in my test (Cyberlink doesn't @ the moment), Deblocking works (Cyberlink doesn't @ the moment) and it has the best Visualy Quality with it's Chroma Upsampler.

More information about the current found Cyberlink Decoder "Problems" with X264 streams can be found in this thread http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=124945

[G_M_C]

@DrNein
[...]The currently official released 94.24 passes 2 of 3 HQV diagonal angles starting with the 97.94 and up to the 97.95 it passes all angles (on the Geforce 7 architecture) no Software Deinterlacer neither YADIF nor TDEINT are able to pass all 3 of them currently.

And btw it's not so easy to get PowerDVD to work with Nvidias Per Pixel Motion Adaptive Deinterlacer (setting PureVideo accelleration alone doesn't work for the Geforce 7 you have to also set the guid of it in the advanced options as render mode or it won't be active it's a little tricky ;)
[...]

Could you point us to a comprehensable guide on "How to get it all working" (or maybe make one for/as a sticky here @ this thread ?). Cause i've got a GF7900GT, and i cant seem to get it working properly atm ....

[CruNcher]

@G_M_C
i hope this can help you :)
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1006960

[G_M_C]

@G_M_C
i hope this can help you :)
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1006960

:thanks:

[Jay Bee]

In terms of compatibility and Quality Mainconcept/Elecards DXVA enabled Decoder seems to be the better solution here (works with every X264 Stream in my test (Cyberlink doesn't @ the moment), Deblocking works (Cyberlink doesn't @ the moment) and it has the best Visualy Quality with it's Chroma Upsampler.[/url]

Where can I get this from? I understand that I need an older version as DXVA doesn't work in the newer ones.

[arfster]

Deblocking works fine with the 8500/8600 with dxva.

[Drsss]

@cruncher: where did you find those newer drivers? the most recent version I can find is 94.24?

[orbitlee]

I downloaded evaluation version of Elecard MPEG player and Elecard AVC plugin, I can see Mainconcept H.264 decoder, with hardware accelaration option. But on my XPSP2, 7600GS with 93.71 driver , the DXVA is not activated at all. Maybe DXVA is disabled in evaluation version?

[Theliel]

the most newer version from Mainconcept, 3.0.7299, never worked for me with dxva. some pple said time ago that was a bug. T

[CruNcher]

@Drsss
arround the web for example here www.guru3d.com

@Jay Bee and Theliel
to find them is problematic as they are very old, before the Mainconcept/Elecard merger and are actually still Elecard Decoders you can see wich builds are working with DXVA and wich doesn't here http://www.elecard.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1793 i discussed this DXVA problematic with a Elecard Developer wich is also on this forum quiet a long time ago but it seems he didn't understand what i meant with "DXVA isn't working anymore in my E-mails" and so that discussion wasn't very sucessfull and seems Elecard/Mainconcept didn't found a solution to the Problem yet or don't wan't to support DXVA 1.0 anymore just 2.0 would make sense in some way, so this working DXVA 1.0 builds would be a rare thing then ;)

I downloaded evaluation version of Elecard MPEG player and Elecard AVC plugin, I can see Mainconcept H.264 decoder, with hardware accelaration option. But on my XPSP2, 7600GS with 93.71 driver , the DXVA is not activated at all. Maybe DXVA is disabled in evaluation version?

Could also be a possibility but why didn't the Elecard Engineer told me that in the discussion about the Problem, so nope i don't think it has something todo with the evaluation status of the filter.

[Crisidelm]

No, it doesn't work even if registered

[Crisidelm]

The old Elecard AVC codec version 1.0.27.60705 that Cruncher reports with DXVA working can be found at Elecard's public ftp, here: http://www.elecard.com/ftp/pub/mpeg/h264/
It's in the Elecard_AVC_Decoder_Pack_Demo.zip

[Jay Bee]

Thx, just gave it a test and enabling DXVA doesn't seem to have any effect.

EDIT: forgot to mention x1950 pro GPU used.

[Crisidelm]

Tried it with my 7600GT and 94.24 driver and on my system turning DXVA on makes it stutter a lot, while with DXVA off runs smoothly (E6400 overclocked to 2.6GHz), much like the latest Mainconcept codec.

[Sergey A. Sablin]

Tried it with my 7600GT and 94.24 driver and on my system turning DXVA on makes it stutter a lot, while with DXVA off runs smoothly (E6400 overclocked to 2.6GHz), much like the latest Mainconcept codec.

Ok, here I am again. for those who can't still understand:
DXVA is just an interface to decode video - and the performance of DXVA also depends on it's implementation (weird isn't it?)
At the moment I spoke with Cruncher DXVA implementaion was very slow - in particular deblocking filter was far slower than in software mode. Could you believe me? and that's the reason why some decoders (probably you know what I mean) always disable deblocking filter in DXVA mode - that's the reason why our decoder had better quality in DXVA mode than Ciberlink for example at that time. And this also the reason why our decoder was slower than Cyberlink at that time.
And finally could you believe me after that - DXVA is working, BUT the performance of decoder is absolutely same as in software mode because of very poor deblocking filter implementation on video chipset.

To those who are able to check something with a graphedit application - make a graph with AVC and select DXVA on in decoder. After that please check video renderer input media type. And forget about MPEG-2 DXVA mediatypes which are shown as DXVA_Mode_X - there is no such registered media types yet in DirectShow, the media type you'll see is just a GUID and subtype is NV12. If you see that then decoder operates in DXVA mode. If you'll see YV12 or YUY2 or anything else, then this is software decoding.


After all I would say that this is not decoder issue that it operates in DXVA mode not faster than in software mode - it is driver/videocard issue which implements some parts of decoding not efficiently.

PS. That was that time and I didn't checked newest drivers so I can't tell you what's the current situation.

[Jay Bee]

YUY2 here.

[G_M_C]

On the level of hardware assisted AVC decoding; Dont set your hopes on Ati's UVD yet. Seems they made wrongfull claims about the 2900XT having the UVD-engine on-board.

Quote from the article;
The ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT lacks AMD’s highly touted UVD hardware video processing engine, a feature highlighted in reviewer guides and roadmaps. Not only that, AMD continues to tout its entire ATI Radeon HD 2000-series as having UVD, when in fact it is only the 65nm HD 2600 and HD 2400 series that possess the hardware decoding capabilities.

The 2900XT is the only new-gen Ati board available atm. The others will come in the following months. So anyone that has bought himself one of the 2900XT's, and hopes to use that board for AVC decoding, might (for now) be out of luck ....

Read te full article on dailytech;
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=7447

[Sergey A. Sablin]

YUY2 here.

then decoder fails to connect to video renderer on dxva mediatype. it hardware acceleration option applied? I mean when you switch it to 'on' mode and push the 'apply' button it was still 'on'?

[Crisidelm]

Tried as you said Sablin: I get
Format NV12
But I do say that it runs much worse like this than in Software (which uses Format YUY2 of course). I understand it's because the GPU is suffering by executing deblocking, but the perfomance is even worse than in software mode.

[Jay Bee]

then decoder fails to connect to video renderer on dxva mediatype. it hardware acceleration option applied? I mean when you switch it to 'on' mode and push the 'apply' button it was still 'on'?

Yes, I rechecked the option during playback and it was still on.

[KoD]

On the level of hardware assisted AVC decoding; Dont set your hopes on Ati's UVD yet. Seems they made wrongfull claims about the 2900XT having the UVD-engine on-board.

Quote from the article;


The 2900XT is the only new-gen Ati board available atm. The others will come in the following months. So anyone that has bought himself one of the 2900XT's, and hopes to use that board for AVC decoding, might (for now) be out of luck ....

Read te full article on dailytech;
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=7447

Only the 2600 and 2400 have a dedicated video chip (the mobile versions will have it as well). For the 2900 everything is done using the shader units, no additional chip will be used. Take everything that websites say with a grain of salt.

[Theliel]

the same here, same test and YUY2.

[Ronin-7]

The 2900 definitely doesn't have UVD instead it has the same level of GPU acceleration as the previous X1K line (now branded as Avivo HD).

Unfortunately for AMD they really dropped the ball on their marketing materials as the fact that the 2900 did not support UVD was tucked away on another slide in the HD 2900 series presentation whereas other slides gave the impression it was present on all 2xxx series GPU's & to make matters worse some 2900XT's shipped with the wrong packaging advertising UVD support before the corrected labels where shipped to their partners.

AMD's own tech rep on Beyond3D & the Tech Report have confirmed that the 2900XT does not support UVD.

As for anyone wondering why well transistor budgets and the fact that the majority of people who would end up buying a 2900XT would have a fairly beefy CPU to begin so UVD is not as badly needed. Pretty much the same deal with the 8800GTX and Purevideo VP2 only on the 8600/8500 lines though NVIDIA didn't shoot themselves in the foot unlike AMD when it came to marketing.

[mariner]

Hi Sergey,

Greetings and thank you for gracing the forum again.

Tested the MainConcept H.264 Decoder v3.0.7299 and Cyberlink H264 Decoder v2.0.0.1709 with 6600GT/93.71.
The MainConcept decoder only managed half the frame rate of Cyberlink enen with deblocking turned off. How can the performance be improved?

Thanks and best regards.

[Jay Bee]

I see GPU manufacturers are living up to their reputation of lying to their customers and internet "tech" websites are living up to their reputation of not having a clue about anything but gaming.

[Crisidelm]

Elecard DXVA on (http://www.crisidelm.it/images/ElecardAVC_1.gif)
Output format with DXVA on (http://www.crisidelm.it/images/ElecardAVC_2.gif)
Elecard DXVA off (http://www.crisidelm.it/images/ElecardAVC_3.gif)
Output format with DXVA off (http://www.crisidelm.it/images/ElecardAVC_4.gif)

[Sergey A. Sablin]

Elecard DXVA on (http://www.crisidelm.it/images/ElecardAVC_1.gif)
Output format with DXVA on (http://www.crisidelm.it/images/ElecardAVC_2.gif)
Elecard DXVA off (http://www.crisidelm.it/images/ElecardAVC_3.gif)
Output format with DXVA off (http://www.crisidelm.it/images/ElecardAVC_4.gif)

1. try to use latest drivers
2. try to disable deblock (set it to Off) and compare performance in software mode and in DXVA mode

[KoD]

Off topic:

I see GPU manufacturers are living up to their reputation of lying to their customers

It's not lying, it's called "marketing".

Like shampoo ads that promise "your hair will be 60% stronger and it will shine twice as more".

But obviously nobody is going to test the fake claims of a shampoo ad.

However, when you get a video card and use a bechmark suite and see the real results are not what they advertised, one gets angry.

Lesson to be learned: the marketing strategy for products that consumers take pride in testing the claims and show off on the internet should be a little different than for products consumers don't.

Disclaimer: please don't throw rotten tomatoes at me ! ^^


P.S. : well, to be honest I think I remember in the UK there are laws that allow one to sue a company for such fake claims and I believe at least L'Oreal was convicted once for a shampoo ad. They did the mistake to say "scientific experiments proved that L'Oreal xxx shampoo makes your hair yyy% stronger .. and I don't know what else". But when it came the moment to show in court evidence of such tests being performed by an independent testing facility, they had nothing to show as they did none. Still, many people don't go that far and many ads don't make the mistake of claiming "scientific experiments have been done".

[CruNcher]

Off topic:
It's not lying, it's called "marketing".


Yes and No the definition of marketing isn't lying at all but it more and more becomes that, someone that studies marketing will tell you the same it's more a tool to show the consumer what a product can do and what not and especialy to advertise features that other products don't have on the market, but when you missuse marketing in my eyes it's lying to the consumer and especialy lying to yourself as a marketing guy, but hey that's the american way of life lying to yourself every day ;-)

[Crisidelm]

By the way, I can see that with the latest Mainconcept H.264 codec when switching DXVA on the output format is NV12.

[Theliel]

version?

[Crisidelm]

3.0.7299
When installing the aforementioned elecard H.264 codec, the Mainconcept H.264 codec disappears (as if it was automatically deregistered from the OS). When I re-register the Mainconcept H.264 codec, the elecard gets automatically unregistered. But it looks like the DXVA works (with the same problems of deblocking that you can experience with the Elecard as Sablin said already) now.

[pankov]

Guys, does anybody know if I can profit from the hardware acceleration of the 8500/8600 series in the following scenario
1. one MSI 8600GTS (fanless) in my primary PEG slot (16xPCI-E)
2. one (NV 7xxx) in my secondary PEG slot (16xPCI-E slot with 4x interface on P965 mobo)
3. TV/PJ connected to the 7xxx card so I can use PowerStrip
4. and of course PowerDVD 7.3.xxxx on Vista 32-bit
Does video acceleration work only when playing the video stream on the 8500/8600 card or it's there for the decoder to use it despite the fact that it's not using the same card for output.

[addit]

Pankov, i'm in the process of building a HTPC and i'm wondering the same thing. It would make life so much easier outputing through HDMI on one card and having a 8600 sitting there to accelerate the video :cool: Does anyone wether this is possible?

[hdboy]

i would think it'd be easier just to get a 8600 card with hdmi

[Xin-Hong]

Hi Sergey,

Greetings and thank you for gracing the forum again.

Tested the MainConcept H.264 Decoder v3.0.7299 and Cyberlink H264 Decoder v2.0.0.1709 with 6600GT/93.71.
The MainConcept decoder only managed half the frame rate of Cyberlink enen with deblocking turned off. How can the performance be improved?

Thanks and best regards.

I have a 6600GT too under Vista, does the 6600GT with dxva reduce the %CPU in H.264 movies ? and how much ?

Thanks :)

Edit : I tried with some HD Trailers and I am always in YUY2 so the 6600GT does'nt do anything, i tried in VMR and EVR.

http://pix.nofrag.com/d8/70/1cefdc487e16128b2096d38e2cfd.jpg

[NanoBot]

Hi,

I would like to report that full h.264 decoding in the GPU with NVidia 8500/8600 based graphics cards is already possible under Windows XP, but it is still beta. You need

Cyberlinks newest h.264 decoder filter ( cl264dec.ax ) version 2.0.0.1709, which is part of PowerDVD 7.3 Ultra, build 2911

and

NVidias beta driver "Forceware 165.01" for Windows XP. Since this driver is not listed on the official site, you have to google for it, try "165.01 XP" and you will find it.

I tested this codec/driver combination on an Asus 8500GT card with DVBViewerPro, AltDVB 2.2 und Casimirs media player classic mod and got CPU loads between 8% and 25% on an AMD64 x2 3800+. When using the overlay renderer the peak CPU load of course was a little bit lower then VMR9. But even with VMR9 and subtitles activated, I never saw CPU loads above 25% peak.

But remember, the driver is beta and is far away from working without problems. So do not be surprised to see freezes during playback or a completly freezed system from time to time :-)

C.U. NanoBot

P.S.: The video material tested is h.264 video with a resolution of 1920 x 1080i, the bitrate is 17MBit/s - 20MBit/s.

[Sirber]

On card and CPU that you have, if it was GPU accelerated CPU load would be bellow 5%.
DXVA2 don't work in overlay or in VRM9, only work in EVR.

[NanoBot]

Hi Sirber,

I forgot to say that the CPU load measured with DVBViewerPro and AltDVB includes the load of a special plugin ;-)
And yes, it is not DXVA2 what is used here, since this is not available under Windows XP. Cyberlink uses "internal" API-Calls from NVIDIA to make hardware decoding work under XP. Therefore under XP it works with both the overlay renderer and VMR9.

When playing back already decoded transport streams the CPU load is lower than stated above. What I found is that the CPU load using vmr9 is significantly higher than with overlay.

Does anybody know a program which is able to do a screenshot even when using overlay ? Then I could make a screenshot where you can see the CPU load during playback by yourself.

C.U. NanoBot

[KoD]

"CPU load using vmr9 is significantly higher than with overlay"

Amazing... you only found that when playing transport streams. Did it ever occure to you VMR9 is always slower than Overlay, no matter what video file you play ?

[NanoBot]

Hi KoD,

of course I know that the vmr9 renderer is eating more CPU power than the overlay renderer. My other graphic card is a 7900GT, and there I was used to see CPU loads about 50% - 70 % with and 70% - 90% without GPU support. In relation to the CPU load caused by the h.264 decoding process itself, the difference between vmr9 and overlay seems not to be so significant.

But now, with the much lower CPU loads due to full GPU support, I notice that difference much more than before.

C.U. NanoBot

[mariner]

Tested the H264 decoder from nero v 4.10.5.0 with DXVA turned on and no post processing. Frame rate achieved is again only half of Cyberlink's decoder.

Below is the list of subtypes supported by the three decoders. With my 6600GT/93.71 running under XP, the subtype used is always {70174349-D888-408A-BB1D-9E18075E5A5A}. Does anyone know the difference among the various DXVA/NV12 subtypes?

Thanks and best regards.


nero v4.10.5.0
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: {70174349-D888-408A-BB1D-9E18075E5A5A} - Format: DXVA 1920x1088, 0 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 1920x1088,
Interlace format: Interleaved Bob Only
rcSrc=(0,0,1920,1088)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
CtrlFlags=00000000
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: {839DC727-010F-441D-957C-A3C1CB15D950} - Format: DXVA 1920x1088, 0 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 1920x1088,
Interlace format: Interleaved Bob Only
rcSrc=(0,0,1920,1088)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
CtrlFlags=00000000
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: {5CD11EE4-DAC9-4449-A017-440B36C0DE3D} - Format: DXVA 1920x1088, 0 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 1920x1088,
Interlace format: Interleaved Bob Only
rcSrc=(0,0,1920,1088)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
CtrlFlags=00000000
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: {5CD11EE1-DAC9-4449-A017-440B36C0DE3D} - Format: DXVA 1920x1088, 0 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 1920x1088,
Interlace format: Interleaved Bob Only
rcSrc=(0,0,1920,1088)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
CtrlFlags=00000000
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: YV12 - Format: YV12 1920x1088, 12 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 1920x1088,
Interlace format: Interleaved Bob Only
rcSrc=(0,0,1920,1088)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
CtrlFlags=00000000
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: YUY2 - Format: YUY2 1920x1088, 16 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 1920x1088,
Interlace format: Interleaved Bob Only
rcSrc=(0,0,1920,1088)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
CtrlFlags=00000000
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: RGB32 - Format: RGB 1920x1088, 32 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 1920x1088,
Interlace format: Interleaved Bob Only
rcSrc=(0,0,1920,1088)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
CtrlFlags=00000000

mainconcept v3.0.7299
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: {70174349-D888-408A-BB1D-9E18075E5A5A} - Format: NV12 1920x1088, 12 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 4x3,
Interlace format: Weave Only
rcSrc=(0,0,1920,1088)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
CtrlFlags=00000000
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: {5CD11EE4-DAC9-4449-A017-440B36C0DE3D} - Format: NV12 1920x1088, 12 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 4x3,
Interlace format: Weave Only
rcSrc=(0,0,1920,1088)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
CtrlFlags=00000000
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: YUY2 - Format: YUY2 1920x1088, 16 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 4x3,
Interlace format: Weave Only
rcSrc=(0,0,1920,1088)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
CtrlFlags=00000000
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: UYVY - Format: UYVY 1920x1088, 16 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 4x3,
Interlace format: Weave Only
rcSrc=(0,0,1920,1088)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
CtrlFlags=00000000
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: RGB32 - Format: RGB 1920x1088, 32 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 4x3,
Interlace format: Weave Only
rcSrc=(0,0,1920,1088)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
CtrlFlags=00000000
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: RGB24 - Format: RGB 1920x1088, 24 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 4x3,
Interlace format: Weave Only
rcSrc=(0,0,1920,1088)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
CtrlFlags=00000000
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: RGB565 - Format: RGB 1920x1088, 16 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 4x3,
Interlace format: Weave Only
rcSrc=(0,0,1920,1088)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
CtrlFlags=00000000
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: RGB555 - Format: RGB 1920x1088, 16 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 4x3,
Interlace format: Weave Only
rcSrc=(0,0,1920,1088)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
CtrlFlags=00000000
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: YUY2 - Format: YUY2 1920x1088, 16 bits
rcSrc=(0,0,1920,1088)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: UYVY - Format: UYVY 1920x1088, 16 bits
rcSrc=(0,0,1920,1088)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: RGB32 - Format: RGB 1920x1088, 32 bits
rcSrc=(0,0,1920,1088)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: RGB24 - Format: RGB 1920x1088, 24 bits
rcSrc=(0,0,1920,1088

cyberlink v2.0.0.1709
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: {1B81BE68-A0C7-11D3-B984-00C04F2E73C5} - Format: dxva 1920x1088, 12 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 4x3,
Interlace format: Interleaved Bob Only
rcSrc=(0,0,0,0)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
CtrlFlags=00000000
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: {1B81BE69-A0C7-11D3-B984-00C04F2E73C5} - Format: dxva 1920x1088, 12 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 4x3,
Interlace format: Interleaved Bob Only
rcSrc=(0,0,0,0)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
CtrlFlags=00000000
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: {70174349-D888-408A-BB1D-9E18075E5A5A} - Format: DXVA 1920x1088, 12 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 4x3,
Interlace format: Interleaved Bob Only
rcSrc=(0,0,0,0)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
CtrlFlags=00000000
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: NV12 - Format: DXVA 1920x1088, 12 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 4x3,
Interlace format: Interleaved Bob Only
rcSrc=(0,0,0,0)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
CtrlFlags=00000000
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: {5CD11EE4-DAC9-4449-A017-440B36C0DE3D} - Format: DxVA 1920x1088, 12 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 4x3,
Interlace format: Interleaved Bob Only
rcSrc=(0,0,0,0)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
CtrlFlags=00000000
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: {BF22AD00-03EA-4690-8077-473346209B7E} - Format: DXvA 1920x1088, 12 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 4x3,
Interlace format: Interleaved Bob Only
rcSrc=(0,0,0,0)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
CtrlFlags=00000000
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: YUY2 - Format: YUY2 1920x1088, 16 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 4x3,
Interlace format: Interleaved Bob Only
rcSrc=(0,0,0,0)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
CtrlFlags=00000000
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: YV12 - Format: YV12 1920x1088, 12 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 4x3,
Interlace format: Interleaved Bob Only
rcSrc=(0,0,0,0)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
CtrlFlags=00000000
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: YVYU - Format: YVYU 1920x1088, 16 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 4x3,
Interlace format: Interleaved Bob Only
rcSrc=(0,0,0,0)
rcDst=(0,0,1920,1088)
CtrlFlags=00000000
Major Type: Video - Sub Type: RGB24 - Format: RGB 1920x1088, 24 bits,
Aspect Ratio: 4x3,
Interlace format: Interleaved Bob O

[Sirber]

Four 4:2:0 12-bpp formats are recommended, with the following FOURCC codes:

* IMC2
* IMC4
* YV12
* NV12

In all of these formats, the chroma channels are subsampled by a factor of two in both the horizontal and vertical dimensions.

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms867704.aspx

[KoD]

As usual, Beyond3D is the place for from the source info on graphic cards. Here is what they say about the Radeon 2400XT and 2600XT and video decoding acceleration (among other things): article (http://www.beyond3d.com/content/reviews/28/1).

In another article, it is said that the 2900 should support all that the UVD does using its shader units, but this will have to wait for driver support.

[mariner]

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms867704.aspx

Hi Sirber, thanks for the link.

I was not able to find anything on deciphering the following DXVA subtypes. Any help is most appreciated.

{1B81BE68-A0C7-11D3-B984-00C04F2E73C5}
{1B81BE69-A0C7-11D3-B984-00C04F2E73C5}
{70174349-D888-408A-BB1D-9E18075E5A5A}
{5CD11EE4-DAC9-4449-A017-440B36C0DE3D}
{BF22AD00-03EA-4690-8077-473346209B7E}
{1B81BEA0-A0C7-11D3-B984-00C04F2E73C5}
{1B81BEA1-A0C7-11D3-B984-00C04F2E73C5}
{1B81BEA2-A0C7-11D3-B984-00C04F2E73C5}

Best regards.

[bnz]

Having a new HD2600pro card running with Vista, can anybody give me an explanation why dxva hardware acceleration (using the cyberlink decoder) does not work with rendering modes such as VMR9 when it seems to work with XP? It doesn't make sense to me...

[doctorcilantro]

Same here! Just upped from an AGP 2600xt and XP with DXVA working, and now my 3850 PCI-E system with Vista x64 won't accelerate the same files the XP system could....wtf?

DC

[arfster]

VMR9 acceleration works fine for mpeg2/vc1, but you need to use EVR for h264 (Vista doesn't support dxva1>dxva2 translation for it).

Of course, AGP acceleration is extremely troublesome so your problem could be drivers, and Vista64 creates even more issues. Frankly I'd be impressed if you get that combo to work.

[doctorcilantro]

I need to try 7.7 on Vista x64 and see if it works.

I switched to XP and the 3750 (PCI-E) now does DXVA on the same files the 2600xt (AGP) would.

DC