Doom9's Forum - View Single Post - H.264 CPU/DXVA codec comparison

pirlouy · 1st April 2011, 12:10

Ok. For me DXVA is dangerous, because too much dependant of Nvidia or ATI or Intel development. And I rather trust ffmpeg coding than those 3.
I've tried DXVA (through MPC-HC, ffdshow and another decoder), but was not really convinced, because it was sometimes jerky.

Like I don't use laptop, power is not something to consider (even for Earth, since I don't watch HD videos all day). I prefer using GPU to upscale only (madVR renderer).

Like I don't do any post-processing stuff, and from your results, it confirms that it's better (in my case) to use CPU to decode.

Thanks for your tests.

1st April 2011, 12:10	#15 \| Link
pirlouy _ Join Date: May 2008 Location: France Posts: 692	Ok. For me DXVA is dangerous, because too much dependant of Nvidia or ATI or Intel development. And I rather trust ffmpeg coding than those 3. I've tried DXVA (through MPC-HC, ffdshow and another decoder), but was not really convinced, because it was sometimes jerky. Like I don't use laptop, power is not something to consider (even for Earth, since I don't watch HD videos all day). I prefer using GPU to upscale only (madVR renderer). Like I don't do any post-processing stuff, and from your results, it confirms that it's better (in my case) to use CPU to decode. Thanks for your tests.