Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="kiwijunglist" data-source="post: 1031209" data-attributes="member: 76888">LAV should be fine for all situations.&nbsp; I would recommend people try other h264 codecs if they don't have hardware acceleration on the video card.&nbsp; Historically CoreAVC was what was recommended for users who had crappy hardware as it used to be the least cpu intensive h264 codec for users who couldn't use dxva/cuda.&nbsp; (It wasn't recommended because it had higher quality).&nbsp; Not sure if it is still the least cpu intensive.&nbsp; If money was no object then I would add a HD7750 to your system.The main difference in quality is with deinterlacing, however most sources (apart from some DVB-T channels) are not interlaced.&nbsp; I believe the best commonly available de-interlacing method is vector adaptive.&nbsp; I think a more important step to achieving higher quality playback is to ensure, vertical sync is on (no tearing) source fps + refresh hz matching is correct, and colour is calibrated without any colour clipping.&nbsp; All explained in further detail in my sig.I am not sure which h264 codec gives the best quality, but I think that differences would be way less that the factors listed above.&nbsp; The other main difference is the source, eg. if you are downloading movies go for the 20+ gb rips.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="kiwijunglist, post: 1031209, member: 76888"] LAV should be fine for all situations. I would recommend people try other h264 codecs if they don't have hardware acceleration on the video card. Historically CoreAVC was what was recommended for users who had crappy hardware as it used to be the least cpu intensive h264 codec for users who couldn't use dxva/cuda. (It wasn't recommended because it had higher quality). Not sure if it is still the least cpu intensive. If money was no object then I would add a HD7750 to your system. The main difference in quality is with deinterlacing, however most sources (apart from some DVB-T channels) are not interlaced. I believe the best commonly available de-interlacing method is vector adaptive. I think a more important step to achieving higher quality playback is to ensure, vertical sync is on (no tearing) source fps + refresh hz matching is correct, and colour is calibrated without any colour clipping. All explained in further detail in my sig. I am not sure which h264 codec gives the best quality, but I think that differences would be way less that the factors listed above. The other main difference is the source, eg. if you are downloading movies go for the 20+ gb rips. [/QUOTE]

Verification