by jubuttib » Mon Apr 16, 2012 4:08 am
One thing you might want to look at is also buying CoreAVC codec (I think the license costs something like $12), which will greatly improve playback on lower powered machines. I've tried it on my ASUS EEE PC 1005P netbook, which basically hits none of the required specs for running HD video (a very sucky single core 1.6GHz CPU, 1 GB of slow DDR2-667 RAM, a lowly Intel graphics chip that's basically good for nothing, and only has 64 MB of memory at it's disposal). It ran 720p material perfectly fluidly, very rarely dropping frames when the memory tried to do other stuff (I was multitasking at the time). With more RAM it'd probably be even better. And while it can't run 1080p at a constant rate of 24 fps the clip was encoded at, it did manage a consistent 20 fps speed. Not enough to actually watch the video but implies that you don't need that much more power to do it. And without CoreAVC I think I got maybe 8-10 fps tops.
So basically any computer more powerful than a two/three year old low end netbook should be enough when using CoreAVC to decode H.264 or x264 video. Especially since the newer versions support graphics card acceleration in the form of CUDA for nVidia cars and DXVA for ATi cards. For the record the Intel chip in mine does absolutely nothing to help with decoding the video, the 20 fps was just on the grunt of the CPU. If you're really adamant about going as low as you can go, at least make sure you get a computer that has a graphics chip that can handle CUDA (basically any GeForce) or DXVA (basically any Radeon and most Geforces too), has an HDMI port and then buy CoreAVC. It should help with driving the necessary specs down.
Parks wrote:If the posts on this forum are any indication, the PD is like a Teebird with sunshine coming out of its butthole so hard that it flies faster.
Anode|ION|JOKERi|MD2|FD|TD|PD|LEGENDa