Latest ads
-
Power Lifting Lever Belt- SkullVamp
- Updated:
-
port.lk Domain for sale
- Lankan-Tech
- Updated:
-
Colombo Kaduwela - Two Storey House for Sale- dilrasan
- Updated:
-
Wechat qr verification
- Pawan2005
- Updated:
-
🚀 GOOGLE AI PRO 18 MONTHS ACTIVATION 🚀- sayuru bandara
- Updated:
what is your current graphics card generation
- Thread starter fallenzeraphine
- Start date
Manual O/Cing tunerHIVOLTAG3 said:Mokakda e tuner 1k wage kalla...
ekath bndl 1katama hambawenawadooo.....
Another reason to love ATi : (apart from those girls 
)
Don't count on NVIDIA or Intel for BluRay, says AMD
Dan Warne12 May 2008
Unless you like movies played back "slideshow" style rather than moving video style, you should avoid buying Intel or NVIDIA graphics chipsets, alleges AMD.
Playing back a BluRay disc on Nvidia or Intel-based machines could result in ‘slideshow’ style playback rather than moving video, warns AMD.
Chipmaker AMD has demonstrated what it calls the “wheel of fortune” effect of playing DVDs on NVidia or Intel chipsets. It’s called “wheel of fortune” because every time you buy a BluRay disc, you’re taking a gamble on whether the video has been encoded using the H.264 CODEC or the VC-1 CODEC.
AMD says its graphics chips are the only ones on the market capable of doing GPU-based decoding of VC-1 encoded discs. Consequently, if you try to play a high definition BluRay movie encoded with VC-1 on a PC using Intel or NVIDIA graphics hardware, CPU usage will shoot up – possibly to 100% of both cores, especially if you have other software running on the machine at the time.
At a technology update event in Singapore, AMD demonstrated to APC the difference between a Radeon-based PC and a PC using another manufacturer’s graphics chipset. Playing a VC-1 DVD on the Radeon PC was completely smooth, while on the competing manufacturer’s PC, rendering frame rate of the video dropped to about one frame per second.
About one in four BluRay DVDs uses VC-1 encoding, according to AMD – and most do not state on the box what encoding standard the video uses.
VC-1 is a video CODEC initially designed by Microsoft and is the arch-competitor of the H.264/AVC CODEC. It’s the official video format for the Xbox360, which is no great surprise – ATI designed the graphics processor for the 360 before its acquisition by AMD, and evidently this technology has been migrated into the company’s PC GPUs as well.
Dan Warne attended AMD Technology Update Singapore as a guest of AMD.
)Don't count on NVIDIA or Intel for BluRay, says AMD
Dan Warne12 May 2008
Unless you like movies played back "slideshow" style rather than moving video style, you should avoid buying Intel or NVIDIA graphics chipsets, alleges AMD.
Playing back a BluRay disc on Nvidia or Intel-based machines could result in ‘slideshow’ style playback rather than moving video, warns AMD.
Chipmaker AMD has demonstrated what it calls the “wheel of fortune” effect of playing DVDs on NVidia or Intel chipsets. It’s called “wheel of fortune” because every time you buy a BluRay disc, you’re taking a gamble on whether the video has been encoded using the H.264 CODEC or the VC-1 CODEC.
AMD says its graphics chips are the only ones on the market capable of doing GPU-based decoding of VC-1 encoded discs. Consequently, if you try to play a high definition BluRay movie encoded with VC-1 on a PC using Intel or NVIDIA graphics hardware, CPU usage will shoot up – possibly to 100% of both cores, especially if you have other software running on the machine at the time.
At a technology update event in Singapore, AMD demonstrated to APC the difference between a Radeon-based PC and a PC using another manufacturer’s graphics chipset. Playing a VC-1 DVD on the Radeon PC was completely smooth, while on the competing manufacturer’s PC, rendering frame rate of the video dropped to about one frame per second.
About one in four BluRay DVDs uses VC-1 encoding, according to AMD – and most do not state on the box what encoding standard the video uses.
VC-1 is a video CODEC initially designed by Microsoft and is the arch-competitor of the H.264/AVC CODEC. It’s the official video format for the Xbox360, which is no great surprise – ATI designed the graphics processor for the 360 before its acquisition by AMD, and evidently this technology has been migrated into the company’s PC GPUs as well.
Dan Warne attended AMD Technology Update Singapore as a guest of AMD.
There is no such problem as far as this review is concerned:buddhikamh said:Another reason to love ATi : (apart from those girls
Don't count on NVIDIA or Intel for BluRay, says AMD
Dan Warne12 May 2008
Unless you like movies played back "slideshow" style rather than moving video style, you should avoid buying Intel or NVIDIA graphics chipsets, alleges AMD.
Playing back a BluRay disc on Nvidia or Intel-based machines could result in ‘slideshow’ style playback rather than moving video, warns AMD.
Chipmaker AMD has demonstrated what it calls the “wheel of fortune” effect of playing DVDs on NVidia or Intel chipsets. It’s called “wheel of fortune” because every time you buy a BluRay disc, you’re taking a gamble on whether the video has been encoded using the H.264 CODEC or the VC-1 CODEC.
AMD says its graphics chips are the only ones on the market capable of doing GPU-based decoding of VC-1 encoded discs. Consequently, if you try to play a high definition BluRay movie encoded with VC-1 on a PC using Intel or NVIDIA graphics hardware, CPU usage will shoot up – possibly to 100% of both cores, especially if you have other software running on the machine at the time.
At a technology update event in Singapore, AMD demonstrated to APC the difference between a Radeon-based PC and a PC using another manufacturer’s graphics chipset. Playing a VC-1 DVD on the Radeon PC was completely smooth, while on the competing manufacturer’s PC, rendering frame rate of the video dropped to about one frame per second.
About one in four BluRay DVDs uses VC-1 encoding, according to AMD – and most do not state on the box what encoding standard the video uses.
VC-1 is a video CODEC initially designed by Microsoft and is the arch-competitor of the H.264/AVC CODEC. It’s the official video format for the Xbox360, which is no great surprise – ATI designed the graphics processor for the 360 before its acquisition by AMD, and evidently this technology has been migrated into the company’s PC GPUs as well.
Dan Warne attended AMD Technology Update Singapore as a guest of AMD.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/pos...u-usage-during-hd-playback-ati-vs-nvidia.html
Edit: I mean, it is true that ATI does all the processing in hardware, but the performance hit of not doing Bit stream processing/entropy encode decode in hardware isn't much. And nVidia does a better job when decoding HD 1080i.
Last edited:
Anusha said:
Ya it seems both has there own advantages, and difference isnt much significant.
anyway thanks for the update.
BTW it seems as always ATi let themselves down by there own drivers, see that 2400XT perfomance differenec in drivers ne, its very sad. They came up a with good driver only after a new genaration of their own GPUs. Pathetic.
That is the same with nVidia as well. In fact, people all over the world believe the driver department of ATI is better than nVidia. To be honest, it is the nVidia users who moaned when Vista performance was poor compared to XP's. ATI got it right from the beginning and there was only a small performance deficit in the first few months. Moving to Vista didn't worry me at all. (Should not deviate from the original topic, I supposebuddhikamh said:Ya it seems both has there own advantages, and difference isnt much significant.
anyway thanks for the update.
BTW it seems as always ATi let themselves down by there own drivers, see that 2400XT perfomance differenec in drivers ne, its very sad. They came up a with good driver only after a new genaration of their own GPUs. Pathetic.
)Anyway, talking about the 2400XT, you are not supposed to install that card in a gaming rig. Not even the 2600XT. Those are for mediocre gaming, and more importantly for OEMs (who ask for hefty prices for their brand name than performance) and for HTPCs. They concentrated on video decoding performance and power consumption with those cards. That's exactly ATI's point in not giving the proper video decoding features in their flagship VGA at that time, the 2900XT. Their point was, if you are rich enough to buy a 2900XT, you should be rich enough to buy a highend CPU as well, which negates the reason for offloading the CPU from "software" video processing. (tbh, that's a stupid excuse!)
Last edited:
A 6 lackh Sony Viao comes with Adobe CS3 photoshop,premiere,illustrator,Norton 360 and Vista Ultimate 32bit.It includes a 8600M GT ,17",webcam,DVD/RW RAID 0 160GB and things.So a bit for the name I guess coz of the software value.Anusha said:
