D Richard Felker III
dalias at aerifal.cx
Sun Feb 16 22:48:34 CET 2003
On Sun, Feb 16, 2003 at 02:38:32PM -0800, Brian Craft wrote:
> [Automatic answer: RTFM (read DOCS, FAQ), also read DOCS/bugreports.html]
> On Sun, Feb 16, 2003 at 03:48:39PM -0500, D Richard Felker III wrote:
> > and the other is idle. So this guy probably just has a really slow cpu
> > (Celeron 333 or something? ;)
> Close. ;) Dual 300A's running at 450. Playback is plenty fast enough (uses
> about 40% of one cpu), now that I've figured out the labyrinthine performance
> options. Most post-processing filters, however, will cause frames to drop.
> Then it's a bit irritating seeing the 2nd cpu sit mostly idle.
> Smooth pans also look pretty horrible, because they're so choppy in mplayer.
> >From the previous discussions of XP, it looks like threading might solve that
> as well.
> xine isn't really a viable alternative. Looks like I'll have to try XP.
> Has anyone tried doing off-line post-processing, using a very large hard drive
> as a staging area for playback? Drive space is cheap. Seems like it should be
> possible to decode and post-process the frames, put them through a lossless
> compression, and write them to hard drive. Then play back from hard drive. The
You can certainly do it. However, you'd better have a VERY FAST hard
drive. Uncompressed DVD resolution video is 20 megs per second.
Lossless compression will help, but you may still have troubles.
> goal here would be to avoid the $20k dedicated hardware that does this sort of
> thing in real time, for displaying on, say, a digital projector with an 8ft
> wide screen.
$20k?!?! A $300 duron can do realtime postproc just fine...
More information about the MPlayer-users