NVIDIA AVC 264 accell in drivers - any beta/rumors for 7800GTX??? [Archive] - Page 4

Ronin-7

9th March 2006, 12:12

It has been working for me though the gains are variable it is almost as good as CoreAVC for CPU usage in some clips but not as good in others (trailers from Nero & Apple's sites).

Athlon 64 X2 4400
7800 GTX + ForceWare 84.12
Nero Showtime 2.1.0.15
PureVideo Decoder 1.02-196
WMP10 build 3990

lexor

9th March 2006, 14:39

yeah I stand by my previous statement, with the patches above installed, PureVideo in WMP is still less CPU efficient (by 2-6% in TaskManager) than built in decoder of MPC.

Stebs

9th March 2006, 18:29

Then why you dont use Nvidia PureVideo within MPC?
MPC with PureVideo is definitely faster than buildin MPC mpeg2 decoder.

lexor

9th March 2006, 20:16

Then why you dont use Nvidia PureVideo within MPC?
MPC with PureVideo is definitely faster than buildin MPC mpeg2 decoder.
I'm gonna sound like a n00b, but I don't know how to set that up :o

GmorG McRoth

9th March 2006, 20:39

it just works in MPC here.

for Transport stream mpeg2 with ac3 audio (HDTV 1080p)
it takes from 10% to 20%, in overlay mixer mode and 19% to 30% in VMR9 mode. MPC internal decoder spikes with CPU usage making video skippy.

(pentium4 prescott 3.0GHz (set in single threeded mode) and GeForce FX 5700

in HT mode:
9%-15% for VMR9 and 8%-12% for overlay mixer

Stebs

9th March 2006, 20:42

Very simple: in MPC, under Options, Internal Filters, disable Mpeg2-Video under Transform Filters. That disables MPCs internal mpeg2 Codec. Now, if PureVideo is correctly installed, when you play an mpeg2 file there should be appearing the Nvidia Logo in the Systray on the bottom right...

dragongodz

10th March 2006, 00:06

i think it should also be noted and made clear that from my understanding the latest purevideo does not do wmv or h264 decoding yet. for that you need either the nero mentioned above or powerdvd with mentioned plugin.

i actually see nero have also released a newer version 7 ,in their normal section, with a higher version number. however it says nothing about supporting nvidia decoding. so you may have to make sure you get that specific version above.

lexor

10th March 2006, 02:43

oh yeah, I was talking about current mpeg2 PureVidoe acceleration, and enabling it in MPC gave me another 3-5% CPU load reduction :) nice.

Stebs

10th March 2006, 12:47

Also try some complex HD mpeg2 files. Normal SD files mostly show no great difference (in Performance, but still in Image Quality).
Got one HD mpeg2 DVB-S file (.tp) that reaches 100% CPU with my XP3200+ and only 35-40% with PureVideo...

iwod

10th March 2006, 17:26

so i gather ATI AVAIO is free while Purevideo wont be?

Am i correct?

FFWD

10th March 2006, 17:38

Only PureVideo support for WMV/VC-1 is free.

bond

10th March 2006, 19:11

Only PureVideo support for WMV/VC-1 is free.as i understand it the purevideo specs are freely available
so i guess someone could implement it for libavcodec and purevideo would be free (except buying the nvidia card :D )

ToS_Maverick

11th March 2006, 00:17

i discovered an interesting phenomenon:

after installing the new 84.20 driver and the nvidia mpeg2 decoder, my VMR9 played videos without the brightness gain. all videos look just right. it's as if i play everything through ffdshow with high quality RGB output to VMR9.

right now i use the last free available CoreAVC test version and MPC, but ffdshow in YV12 mode also looks right with VMR9.

Oline 61

11th March 2006, 00:51

Yes, a lot of people have noticed this. The older drivers output the 16-235 video at 0-255 with no scaling, resulting in blacks being clipped to a dark grey. The new drivers do a proper 16-235 to 0-255 conversion the same as overlay and other renderers do.

lexor

11th March 2006, 15:08

as i understand it the purevideo specs are freely available
so i guess someone could implement it for libavcodec and purevideo would be free (except buying the nvidia card :D )
don't you mean DirectX VA is a freely available API infrastructure? So any one can write an app that works like PureVideo?

bond

11th March 2006, 15:16

don't you mean DirectX VA is a freely available API infrastructure? So any one can write an app that works like PureVideo?afaik there is no h.264 support in dxva meaning nvidia and atis avc support isnt real dxva but own stuff

Mei

13th March 2006, 18:15

afaik there is no h.264 support in dxva meaning nvidia and atis avc support isnt real dxva but own stuff
DXVA 2.0 will supports H264.

Currently DXVA supports H261/H263/WMV.

Sharktooth

13th March 2006, 18:46

DXVA 2.0 will be for WinVista only...

Mei

13th March 2006, 22:56

DXVA 2.0 will be with DX10 ... so yes with Vista only is the rumors becomes true.

In fact, when H264 HD will be avaiable, Vista will be the new OS that the common user will use.

Mei

13th March 2006, 22:57

DXVA 2.0 will be with DX10 ... so yes with Vista only is the rumors becomes true.

In fact, when H264 HD will be avaiable, Vista will be the new OS that the common user will use.

Sharktooth

13th March 2006, 23:19

There will be no DX 10.
The new graphic framework will be Windows Graphics Foundation 1.0 and 2.0.
Where 1.0 is supported by the actual generation video cards...and 2.0 will be supported by the next generation video cards.

Deinorius

13th March 2006, 23:37

That's wrong.

The correct name (at the end :rolleyes: ) ist Direct3D10, what we understand for the Graphics-API. Could it be, that the whole DirectX API will be called WGF?
But I don't know, if they want to continue using the name WGF 1.0 for the newer DX9c?
That's all very stupid.

Sharktooth

14th March 2006, 00:57

Dx 9c is Dx 9c...WGF 1.0 will be the new graphic framework in WinVista and will be supported by the actual video cards and will provide partial acceleration for the Vista UI.
WGF 2.0 will be supported by future generations of video cards and will provide full acceleration for the Vista UI.
However, as i said, i never heard of DX 10...

Deinorius

14th March 2006, 01:55

WGF 1.0 is DirectX 9c. It's just another name with another function for WinVista.
It won't be called DirectX 10 but Direct3D 10.
I searched for the news (http://www.3dcenter.org/news/2006/woche06.php) (sorry, it's just german) and the name WGF won't be used anymore.
DirectX (without any number) ist the combination of DirectX 9c, Direct3D 10 and the other DirectX Components.
That's the way it is.
I know, M$ needed a long time only to find the perfect name für the new API and they chose the old name. :devil:

Airw0lf

19th March 2006, 01:49

Yeah.. CoreAVC pretty much pwns the house.

I tried out the apple HD gallery the other day by remuxing the mov to mkv and forcing coreavc. 30% cpu utalization for 1080p at full speed playback whereas quicktime could not even play 15fps.

awesome. im buying it :)

Just been trying out CoreAVC on an Apple HD trailer (1080i). Performance isn't all that stellar for me (P4 3.4GHz, 1GB RAM, XPSP2). Video plays nice enough for a few secs, then drops some frames, then plays nicely, drops frames...Basically I am not seeing any real improvement from the latest version of QuickTime. QT plays slowly at ~20 fps but doesn't skip out huge chunks of frames.

I am using Media Player Classic, CoreAVC, CoreAAC as well. I basically renamed the .mov to .mp4 and used Haali's media splitter.

So I am interested to know why you remuxed to mkv? Did you just put the video/audio in a new matroska container, or did you actually transcode as well?

Airw0lf

19th March 2006, 01:58

the advantage of Nero 6 was it was split in bundles so you didnt have to download everything if you didnt want it. as such i havent even bothered to look at the trial version for 7 since its a 108mb download.

I agree. I am interested in trying their showtime 2, but I don't want any of their other useless junk. They are so obsessed with making people pay for/use all of their products that they miss out on people who want a specific thing.

NVidia did the right thing with their PureVideo MPEG decoder - it's not bundled with any bloated "player" or "media center". You just get the codecs, you are free to use them in whatever player you wish. A Nice user manual is also included so that you know how to configure it. That's all you need.

BetaBoy

19th March 2006, 03:10

Just been trying out CoreAVC on an Apple HD trailer (1080i). Performance isn't all that stellar for me (P4 3.4GHz, 1GB RAM, XPSP2).

What kind of video card? 1080i with even the old 0.04 CoreAVC should rock with your PC specs and a good GPU.

Sharktooth

19th March 2006, 03:16

I am using Media Player Classic, CoreAVC, CoreAAC as well. I basically renamed the .mov to .mp4 and used Haali's media splitter.

mov is not mp4 and you should NEVER rename .mov to .mp4.
demux the streams and remux them with the appropriate tools instead.

HookedOnTV

19th March 2006, 04:48

1080i...CoreAVC... I thought interlaced wasn't supported yet?

BetaBoy

19th March 2006, 05:19

/me notes me bad... thought he had 1080p... and yes interlaced is complete.

Airw0lf

19th March 2006, 11:16

What kind of video card? 1080i with even the old 0.04 CoreAVC should rock with your PC specs and a good GPU.

Geforce 6800 PCI-X.

mov is not mp4 and you should NEVER rename .mov to .mp4.
demux the streams and remux them with the appropriate tools instead.

Yes I was just reading about that. I got 'mkvmerge gui' and remuxed my mov file. I am still losing frames for an average frame rate of about 19-20.

1080i...CoreAVC... I thought interlaced wasn't supported yet?

I *think* my clip is 1080i. It is the V for Vendetta trailer, 1920 x 1080 resolution. Do I need to find a progressive clip? Could someone just tell me a good clip to test with. At this point all I care about is verifying that it's all working.

Also, I only have v0.0.0.4 of CoreAVC, so it's possible that it's not the latest version.

Update:
I just tried out the "Magnificent Desolation" clip, which is called "imax-desolation_m1080p2.mov". I assume this means it is a progressive clip. Remuxed to mkv and it did play fine. CPU usage got to over 40% on a couple of occasions, but no frames dropped.

Avish

19th March 2006, 15:53

What kind of video card? 1080i with even the old 0.04 CoreAVC should rock with your PC specs and a good GPU.
"old 0.04 CoreAVC"? Is there any newer version available?

Eretria-chan

19th March 2006, 16:00

Yeah... but not public. Some testers with SMP systems recieved a private beta version with smp and interlace support.

xkodi

21st March 2006, 12:37

http://www.nero.com/nero7/eng/Nero_ShowTime_2_Release_Notes.html

Nero ShowTime - Release Notes

Version Number: 2.1.0.17

Release Date: March 06, 2006
New features

* NVidia hardware acceleration support for H.264 decoding

but it still doesn't work for me and i get only 15fps using Nero ShowTime 2.1.0.17 and ForceWare 84.21, i have GF6600 made by Asus, for example when i use CoreAVC i get 24fps and i have only an old AthlonXP 3200+, so is my GF6600 broken or nvidia h264 acceleration is just a marketing trick

hwti

21st March 2006, 12:58

with my 6800GS, nero showtime 2.1.0.17 and 84.21

When I enable hardware acceleration, CPU use increase, and for 1080p30 I have image corruption (green squares) with 100% CPU

xkodi

21st March 2006, 14:25

with my 6800GS, nero showtime 2.1.0.17 and 84.21

When I enable hardware acceleration, CPU use increase, and for 1080p30 I have image corruption (green squares) with 100% CPU

same here, so i am not alone and i really start to think that nvidia lies to us about the h264 acceleration or if i am not right nvidia should tell us why there is no improvement in performance with our cards

slavickas

21st March 2006, 16:23

with my 6800GS, nero showtime 2.1.0.17 and 84.21

When I enable hardware acceleration, CPU use increase, and for 1080p30 I have image corruption (green squares) with 100% CPU
agp or pci-e? as agp version uses older chip which dont support h.264

hwti

21st March 2006, 16:45

It's a PCI-E version.
May be it's a Nero bug and not nvidia one, but I can't test since powerdvd demo doesn't have acceleration.

xkodi

21st March 2006, 17:51

It's a PCI-E version.
May be it's a Nero bug and not nvidia one, but I can't test since powerdvd demo doesn't have acceleration.

is WMV HD acceleration works for you, because for me it also doesn't work, that's why at least in my case i believe is not a software issue

Stebs

21st March 2006, 23:16

For wmv HD acceleration, you need a patch from Microsoft.
This Patch is NOT distributed through Windows Update (ask Microsoft why).
With that Patch, acceleration definitely works.

Dont know about h.264 not working, but it may well be a Problem with the Nero-Software.

dragongodz

22nd March 2006, 00:26

Stebs

22nd March 2006, 01:28

hmm seems nvidia is saying no 6800 agp card will do not only no do wmv but also no h264 decoding aswell.
http://www.nvidia.com/page/purevideo_support.html
this is very strange since the only thing not working in the early chips was reportadly wmv. also with the pci-e versions only the 6800 ultra and 6800gt are the ones unable to decode wmv and h264..
:confused:
This ist not strange, this is very very strange!
This must have been changed very lately, I could swear that before, on this list AGP GeForce 6800, 6800GS and 6800XT could do AT LEAST wmv accel.
for example 1 guy gets acceleration with a 6200 and great picture while on his other pc, with 6600gt, he gets a corrupt picture when playing with WMP10 ,even with fresh install. this is using powerdvd plus h264 pack.Had an AGP 6600GT for a short time, and HD wmv accel. with the Patch did work very well (albeit only with Windows Media Player, not with MPC).
The "famous" file Step_into_Liquid_1080p.wmv was at 100% CPU and Audio not in snync after some time with my XP3200+ without accel. and with accel. only about 40% CPU!
Now I have AGP 6800GT without wmv+h.264 accel., but I knew that before... (mpeg2 accel. works fine though with Purevideo).

i believe its hotfix windowsmedia10-kb888656-x86-global-enu.exe ,dont have the link handy sorry.Yes, thats it! Sometimes you also need that patch before: WindowsMedia-KB891122-x86.exe -It must be in the right language Version (unlike the other patch).
Dont have links either, otherwise would have posted them.

dragongodz

22nd March 2006, 02:20

This must have been changed very lately, I could swear that before, on this list AGP GeForce 6800, 6800GS and 6800XT could do AT LEAST wmv accel.
yes i remember that ages ago it was only the ultra and gt for agp that couldnt do wmv same as their pci-e parts. to now not only say no 6800 agp,especially newer models, can not only not do wmv but also not h264 is bewildering. the 6600 and 6200 agp's have been out for much longer than things like the 6800gs agp and yet they can do h264 and wmv while the 6800gs cant ? nvidia needs to explain that one.

Stebs

22nd March 2006, 03:19

The 6800 (not Ultra or GT) for AGP was the first part that was not the old flawed chip with 16 pipelines. It was smaller with 12 Pipelines and therefore they changed the chip and - as everybody thought until now - also fixed the accel. Bug. Same thing with the GS and XT that came later.
Perhaps there are a small number of old 6800gt/ultra chips out there that were relabeled to 6800 ,GS or XT -so now they can no more say ALL 6800 , GS and XT can do accel. ?
Or simply a mistake on the Site?
We will see...

xkodi

22nd March 2006, 05:23

i have 6600 AGP and hwti have 6800GS PCI-E and according to http://www.nvidia.com/page/purevideo_support.html both supports h264 and WMV HD acceleration, and if we assume current version of Nero Showtime have problems with h264 acceleration

why then WMV HD also doesn't work for me - without the patches from MS i get 15-18fps and with patched WMP10 only 5-8fps when playing "Step into Liquid 1080p", not only the patches i am using are the same mentioned above, but i am sure they are correct and works, because i also have access to laptop with ATI X700 and on the laptop after patching WMP10, CPU usage drops to under 50% when playing "Step into Liquid 1080p", i also try the same 6600 AGP with another PC and there is no difference in results, so it looks like my 6600 AGP is completely uncapable to do WMV HD

slavickas

22nd March 2006, 10:47

yes i remember that ages ago it was only the ultra and gt for agp that couldnt do wmv same as their pci-e parts. to now not only say no 6800 agp,especially newer models, can not only not do wmv but also not h264 is bewildering. the 6600 and 6200 agp's have been out for much longer than things like the 6800gs agp and yet they can do h264 and wmv while the 6800gs cant ? nvidia needs to explain that one.

GeForce 6800 Ultra NV40/NV45 130 нм AGP/PCI-E
GeForce 6800 GT NV40/NV45 130 нм AGP/PCI-E
GeForce 6800 GS NV42 110 нм PCI-E
GeForce 6800 GS NV40 130 нм AGP
GeForce 6800 NV40 130 нм AGP

IIRC NV40 and NV45 were buggy ones

Sharktooth

22nd March 2006, 15:16

yeah... older 6800 chips (nv40/nv45) were the buggy ones.

Danj

22nd March 2006, 22:54

This whole PureVideo thing confuses me. Do you have to get one of these third party programs like WinDVD or Nero Showtime to be able to have H.264 acceleration on nVidia cards, or can you just get PureVideo? If you can just get PureVideo, how do you enable it or use it or whatever?

Deinorius

23rd March 2006, 00:08

Forget Purevideo!
Look at this pdf (http://www.alphamoose.de/h264.pdf). CoreAVC is still more efficient than anything else. German Thread here (http://www.computerbase.de/forum/showthread.php?t=190147).
He tested with perfmon of WinXP on an Athlon 64 X2 4200+.

Stebs

23rd March 2006, 00:22

PureVideo is great for high Quality mpeg2, but I agree that CoreAVC is simply amazing for h.264 decoding.
Take the Apple Quicktime movs with AVC and simply laugh at the very, very disappointing 10 fp with Quicktime for Windows.
Take MPC and ffdshow and be amazed to see those same movies running without hicks at 80% CPU usage.
THEN, take CoreAVC and be blown away when those same movies only use 40% CPU...
Now compare Quicktime again with CoreAVC ;)