[MPlayer-users] IS SMP support for X264 decoding possible

[Ivan Kowalenko]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On Sep 19, 2006, at 14.27, Vladimir Mosgalin wrote:

> Hi Rich Felker!
>
>  On 2006.09.19 at 12:57:59 -0400, Rich Felker wrote next:
>
>>>>>>> I have some test 1080i h264 files that currently flatline a  
>>>>>>> single
>>>>>>> cpu, but should decode well if I could use all of a dual core.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> x264 doesn't decode at all. ffh264 is the decoder, and no it
>>>>>> doesn't support SMP.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, there's no reason that MPlayer still can't take advantage of
>>>>> some SMP stuff. For example: decoding audio on the second core, or
>>>>> applying any filters using the second core.
>>>>
>>>> The reason is that it's slower except on SMP, impossible to  
>>>> debug, and
>>>> just ugly.
>>>
>>> Well, dual-core cpus rock modern desktops, and soon four-core  
>>> desktops
>>> cpus will come both from intel and amd... /me thinks argument about
>>> beeing "faster" without threads doesn't apply anymore..
>>
>> And I think you're full of it. Unlike idiot windows gamer kiddies, we
>> do not assume everyone buys a new computer every year or even  
>> every 10
>> years. 366 mhz is the baseline system for playing dvd now and, the
>
> Sure, but everyone buys new computer because it needs one. Not  
> everyone
> has computer right now, you know. And 366 mhz may be enough for  
> playing
> dvd, but not for other tasks. If you just want to play dvds, sell your
> computer, buy a dvd player and spend the rest of money ;)
> Of course I don't think anyone would upgrade computer solely for  
> playing
> movies at better resolution - but there are a lot of reasons for
> upgrading it. Both for performance purposes (even if user just  
> wants to
> have cpu-hungry background tasks not to mess up his movie) and for
> features. Like wanting component HDTV output when there are no video
> cards supporting it that would fit into your computer, or using /
> developing an application that uses more memory than your computer can
> handle, or having reasons for 64-bit system, or wanting gigabit lan  
> for
> accessing your remote storage (aka silent hard drive-less system) etc.

Oh lord, I sense a flamewar coming on. Let's see what we can do to  
diffuse it.

Whether or not we like Dual Cores, or whether or not they're a good  
idea, here's the facts.

Dual Cores are new. "Dual Core" is a buzzword. Intel and AMD are  
pushing multi-cores. Their prevalent use is inevitable. People and  
companies <3 buzzwords. Dual Cores are the future, and we have to  
suck it up.

Now, can we please stop and get back on topic, and remain civil?  
Whether or not people are full of something is besides the point,  
because we're all probably going to have multi-core systems at this  
rate.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFFEF/Uh/R/wkI6oPQRAqDLAJ4sOgH6E/htEbZBmkBPcifQsC91DACeNHWm
obp+/AtaXS9QfOTG+u5vMOo=
=1aCS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----