frd1963
Wanted to let everyone know that MPEG files work much better in VDJ than DiVX encoded avi files.
I was actually kinda depressed in seeing that my computer was extrememly slow at displaying video files through VDJ. I was looking for a new computer and was asking all kinds of hardware related questions on this forum for advice on what to buy. I was never given a knowledgeable answer; everyone just says to max out the RAM or get a better 3D video accelerator. Luckily, I did some research and found that the bottleneck was in the decompression of the DiVX files. Regardless of CPU speed and RAM, I would get the same frame rate (comparing a PIII 1.2Ghz laptop with 256MB RAM and a 1.7Ghz Centrino with 1GB RAM) and had to hope that a high power media center laptop would be sufficient.
Apparently MPEG decompression and frame serving is MUCH easier on a system. Mixing between 2 .mpg's, I was able to get close to full frame rate (almost no jumpiness) even on my PIII 1.2Ghz.
The moral of this story: It is cheaper to buy the extra storage space needed for MPEG encoded video files than to buy a new laptop with the power needed to play DiVX files at an acceptable quality.
Learn from my mistakes,
-Frd
I was actually kinda depressed in seeing that my computer was extrememly slow at displaying video files through VDJ. I was looking for a new computer and was asking all kinds of hardware related questions on this forum for advice on what to buy. I was never given a knowledgeable answer; everyone just says to max out the RAM or get a better 3D video accelerator. Luckily, I did some research and found that the bottleneck was in the decompression of the DiVX files. Regardless of CPU speed and RAM, I would get the same frame rate (comparing a PIII 1.2Ghz laptop with 256MB RAM and a 1.7Ghz Centrino with 1GB RAM) and had to hope that a high power media center laptop would be sufficient.
Apparently MPEG decompression and frame serving is MUCH easier on a system. Mixing between 2 .mpg's, I was able to get close to full frame rate (almost no jumpiness) even on my PIII 1.2Ghz.
The moral of this story: It is cheaper to buy the extra storage space needed for MPEG encoded video files than to buy a new laptop with the power needed to play DiVX files at an acceptable quality.
Learn from my mistakes,
-Frd
Posted Mon 23 May 05 @ 8:31 pm
mp3jrick
Amen to that.
Frequently get into the discussion over 1,2,3,4/avi.
Hands down it's 1 for ease of use and size of the files.
I think people forget that a 10-14' screen can cause us to compare to monitor dvd quality, but it also can make them look pretty good.
I sometimes look back at the dvds only to find that they also have blimishes that could be misconstrued as data loss from ripping.
Some of the older 70's and even 80's tracks look like shit no matter what codec or format, garbage in garbage out.
A 300G drive holds a boatload of mpeg 1 files.
Frequently get into the discussion over 1,2,3,4/avi.
Hands down it's 1 for ease of use and size of the files.
I think people forget that a 10-14' screen can cause us to compare to monitor dvd quality, but it also can make them look pretty good.
I sometimes look back at the dvds only to find that they also have blimishes that could be misconstrued as data loss from ripping.
Some of the older 70's and even 80's tracks look like shit no matter what codec or format, garbage in garbage out.
A 300G drive holds a boatload of mpeg 1 files.
Posted Mon 23 May 05 @ 9:01 pm
acw_dj
Frd,
Did you use de DivX 5.2.1 ?
I use this version and I don't have any problems.
Another thing, It will be better a notebook with a Pentium 500 Series than 700 Series. The 700 Series (Pentium M) are capable to run on batteries 4 to 6 hr. But with less speed. The 500 Series (530 is a 3.0GHz with 1MB in L2 Cache) are capable to run on batteries 1:30 to 2 hr . But runs faster than Pentium M and are cheaper than Pentium M.
Did you use de DivX 5.2.1 ?
I use this version and I don't have any problems.
Another thing, It will be better a notebook with a Pentium 500 Series than 700 Series. The 700 Series (Pentium M) are capable to run on batteries 4 to 6 hr. But with less speed. The 500 Series (530 is a 3.0GHz with 1MB in L2 Cache) are capable to run on batteries 1:30 to 2 hr . But runs faster than Pentium M and are cheaper than Pentium M.
Posted Mon 23 May 05 @ 10:13 pm
frd1963
ACW,
Yes, I do use DivX 5.2.1. In fact, I actually purchased the pro version of that codec a little while back thinking that it would be my best bet, and was worth the $20.
Also, I agree that the mobile processors are not as powerful as the non-mobile. For my use, I don't even really care about battery life, as long as it gets me through the occasional kicked-out plug or short-lived blackouts. I am always plugged-in while doing a gig.
Thanks for the input!
-Frd
Yes, I do use DivX 5.2.1. In fact, I actually purchased the pro version of that codec a little while back thinking that it would be my best bet, and was worth the $20.
Also, I agree that the mobile processors are not as powerful as the non-mobile. For my use, I don't even really care about battery life, as long as it gets me through the occasional kicked-out plug or short-lived blackouts. I am always plugged-in while doing a gig.
Thanks for the input!
-Frd
Posted Mon 23 May 05 @ 11:06 pm
lopez453
check the postprocessing settings (not sure where to find it in divx directly but ffdshow has many options)
postprocessing could EAT looooot of CPU clocks ;-)
postprocessing could EAT looooot of CPU clocks ;-)
Posted Tue 24 May 05 @ 12:58 pm