home
products
contribute
download
documentation
forum
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
All posts
Latest activity
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
Donate
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
MediaPortal 1
MediaPortal 1 Plugins
new plugin for changing channels (DirecTV w/serial port)
Contact us
RSS
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="mm1352000" data-source="post: 769029" data-attributes="member: 82144"><p>Hi again Dave</p><p></p><p>Right, understood. The deal with that is that the Colossus re-encodes analog inputs with a hardware h.264 encoder. Both encoding and decoding h.264 *is* processor intensive. In other words, watching recordings from the Colossus would require a decent CPU and/or a decent GPU to enable the h.264 to be decoded smoothly. Note that I said "and/or". Most modern GPUs have dedicated hardware for accelerating the decoding h.264, and this dramatically reduces the load on the CPU.</p><p></p><p>Probably the best way to explain this is to use my own system as an example:</p><p>Intel Core 2 e6600 2.4 GHz (dual core) CPU</p><p>Sapphire HD 4670 512 MB video card</p><p>4 GB RAM</p><p>XP Pro SP3</p><p></p><p>Okay, so my video card supports decoding h.264 with hardware (AKA DxVA). When I view 1080i HD content (which is similar to what the Colossus would produce - 10-15 Mbps), I usually use a codec that enables that dedicated hardware to be used. My CPU usage sits at less than 10% the entire time. My GPU on the other hand is working at around 33%. If I use a codec that *doesn't* support DxVA, my CPU usage sits at around 40% and my GPU sits at around 20%. Note that I have a 24" 1920x1200 screen and these tests are only running at 1/4 resolution (meaning the numbers are lower that they would normally be) - I'm sorry I can't do any better because I can't view CPU and GPU usage while MP is full screen.</p><p></p><p>Anyhow, hopefully that gives you some idea. Older Pentium 4 or Pentium D dual cores would probably need to run at at least 2.8 or 3 GHz, but a Core 2 is much more efficient. Hauppauge have to (1) be conservative so they don't get customers that complain because they bought the bare minimum and it didn't work, and (2) be vague about the technical details because most people wouldn't know the difference between a Pentium 4 era dual core and a Core 2/i7 era dual core - they're more likely to base things on a Pentium 4 as a lowest common denominator.</p><p></p><p>mm</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="mm1352000, post: 769029, member: 82144"] Hi again Dave Right, understood. The deal with that is that the Colossus re-encodes analog inputs with a hardware h.264 encoder. Both encoding and decoding h.264 *is* processor intensive. In other words, watching recordings from the Colossus would require a decent CPU and/or a decent GPU to enable the h.264 to be decoded smoothly. Note that I said "and/or". Most modern GPUs have dedicated hardware for accelerating the decoding h.264, and this dramatically reduces the load on the CPU. Probably the best way to explain this is to use my own system as an example: Intel Core 2 e6600 2.4 GHz (dual core) CPU Sapphire HD 4670 512 MB video card 4 GB RAM XP Pro SP3 Okay, so my video card supports decoding h.264 with hardware (AKA DxVA). When I view 1080i HD content (which is similar to what the Colossus would produce - 10-15 Mbps), I usually use a codec that enables that dedicated hardware to be used. My CPU usage sits at less than 10% the entire time. My GPU on the other hand is working at around 33%. If I use a codec that *doesn't* support DxVA, my CPU usage sits at around 40% and my GPU sits at around 20%. Note that I have a 24" 1920x1200 screen and these tests are only running at 1/4 resolution (meaning the numbers are lower that they would normally be) - I'm sorry I can't do any better because I can't view CPU and GPU usage while MP is full screen. Anyhow, hopefully that gives you some idea. Older Pentium 4 or Pentium D dual cores would probably need to run at at least 2.8 or 3 GHz, but a Core 2 is much more efficient. Hauppauge have to (1) be conservative so they don't get customers that complain because they bought the bare minimum and it didn't work, and (2) be vague about the technical details because most people wouldn't know the difference between a Pentium 4 era dual core and a Core 2/i7 era dual core - they're more likely to base things on a Pentium 4 as a lowest common denominator. mm [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
MediaPortal 1
MediaPortal 1 Plugins
new plugin for changing channels (DirecTV w/serial port)
Contact us
RSS
Top
Bottom
