Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: A NVIDIA VDPAU Back-End For Intel's VA-API

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,816

    Default A NVIDIA VDPAU Back-End For Intel's VA-API

    Phoronix: A NVIDIA VDPAU Back-End For Intel's VA-API

    Just over a month ago we shared that patches had emerged to support Intel's VA-API in MPlayer and FFmpeg. VA-API supports popular video formats such as MPEG-4 and VC-1 and is able to accelerate IDCT, Motion Compensation, LVC, bit-stream processing, and other functions, but this video API has not picked up much speed yet. The only display driver to have implemented support for VA-API in the hardware is Intel's closed-source driver (the one that's a bloody mess) for the Poulsbo chipset, which is found in a few select netbooks/nettops. However, it is now possible to use Intel's VA-API with NVIDIA hardware (the GeForce 8 series and later) and soon will be possible to use this video API on ATI/AMD hardware too.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=13460

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    14

    Default

    Well, I am just hoping Nvidia will make some changes to their driver so cards with only 128MB VRam + turbocache can play HD video.
    My Quadro FX 570M (128MB) can play non-HD videos without a problem, but it always gives error 23 (insufficient vram) when I try to play video with 720p or higher resolutions. nvidia-settings does show that this card has 512MB vram(128MB onboard vram + 384MB turbocache, i guess), but it seems the driver doesn't make use of the turbocache.
    Last edited by dickeywang; 02-03-2009 at 06:02 AM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,791

    Default

    128MB is more than plenty for all kinds of video. I guess there's some other problem and this is just a misleading error message.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,631

    Default

    Maybe compiz need lots of vram too the same time.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    99

    Default

    128MB isn't really that much when dealing with all of the reference frames you need to maintain for some H264 streams. For example, an unrestricted (i.e. not Level 4.1) 1920x1088 stream with 15 reference frames would use over 60MB just for the reference surfaces (and that's assuming 4:2:2 YUV surfaces -- if they are stored in RGB, it's over 90MB).

    What I'm wondering is if VDPAU and/or VA-API support accelerating discrete steps in the video decoding process (rather than full bitstream processing), so that they can be adapted to accelerate Theora and VC-1 on non-VC-1-capable GPUs (plus even my 3GHz dual core can't play a 1080p Theora stream while it can play most 1080p H264 streams).

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    178

    Default

    Do I understand it correctly that Nvidia is now actively developing and providing support for all three HD video acceleration interfaces (VDPAU, VA-API & XvBA?), even their competitor's, whereas the fglrx team is mainly farting around trying to fix one more bug than they introduce in each release?

    bridgman's support and involvement around here and the potential of the Free radeon drivers are really the only reasons why a sane person should at all consider getting an ATI card, or perhaps one needs to be a little insane to go ATI at this point by the looks of it. I dunno anymore.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,458

    Default

    Don't think so. This is a third party developer layering VA-API over other video APIs so their higher level code only needs to support a single API. Nothing to do with NVidia.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Germany/NRW
    Posts
    510

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by korpenkraxar View Post
    Do I understand it correctly that Nvidia is now actively developing and providing support for all three HD video acceleration interfaces (VDPAU, VA-API & XvBA?), even their competitor's, whereas the fglrx team is mainly farting around trying to fix one more bug than they introduce in each release?
    You got that totaly wrong. ATi (fglrx) only provides XvBA, nVidia (nvidia) only provides VDPAU and the FOSS-drivers (at some point will) provide only VA-API.

    This is realy just as bridgman said a developer (who probably isn't involved with any of these) who wrote/will write a backend that translates VA-API-calls into VDPAU-/XvBA-calls.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    178

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhick View Post
    You got that totaly wrong. ATi (fglrx) only provides XvBA, nVidia (nvidia) only provides VDPAU and the FOSS-drivers (at some point will) provide only VA-API.
    Aha, ok I see. My bad. So what is the difference from the user perspective provided that the back-end implementation works?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,105

    Default

    More player support.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •