Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: HD3200 and UVD2 clarification

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    67

    Default

    > there are really about 5 different revisions of UVD

    > the official line between UVD1 and UVD2

    Interesting. Obviously we should be using floating point
    to describe this. UVD1.998 vs. UVD2.002 :-)

    But the real question is when will we be able to decode
    video using some variety of UVD and FLOSS-only software
    (binary-only blobs are not acceptable)? A solution that
    only supports UVD 3.x and newer is probably ok. Mpeg2
    is sufficient, I don't need every obscure codec in the book.

    The day I read about this working is the day I start
    shopping for an ATI GPU.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Have a good day.
    Posts
    678

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dieter View Post
    But the real question is when will we be able to decode
    video using some variety of UVD and FLOSS-only software
    (binary-only blobs are not acceptable)? A solution that
    only supports UVD 3.x and newer is probably ok. Mpeg2
    is sufficient, I don't need every obscure codec in the book.
    In principle never, unless somehow somebody manages to decouple the DRM protected bits from the rest--if I'm not mistaken. On top of that, apparently the OSS developers are not particularly interested on this area, be it because there isn't any monetary incentive, because of codec patents (go figure), and because you know, the majority of linux users only watch pirated movies anyway.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dieter View Post
    > there are really about 5 different revisions of UVD

    > the official line between UVD1 and UVD2

    Interesting. Obviously we should be using floating point
    to describe this. UVD1.998 vs. UVD2.002 :-)

    But the real question is when will we be able to decode
    video using some variety of UVD and FLOSS-only software
    (binary-only blobs are not acceptable)? A solution that
    only supports UVD 3.x and newer is probably ok. Mpeg2
    is sufficient, I don't need every obscure codec in the book.

    The day I read about this working is the day I start
    shopping for an ATI GPU.
    2 points

    first point Buy a R900 based card in the end of 2011! R900 will have opensource support for the viedeo acceleration unit...

    second point the opensource driver for r600+/r800 will never use the UVD2 unit NEVER! but there will be a pure shader based viedeoacceleration.
    This version will save you 50% of the needed cpu "power" (uvd2 can reduce the cpu usage up to 95%)

    "The day I read about this working is the day I start
    shopping for an ATI GPU."

    really? Buy it now! the shader based version will come to the opensource driver be sure!

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    20

    Default

    Thank you all for the useful posts esp Bridgman. I will wait for the shady er shader business to complete. When is the ETA for this? Can we expect this in Ubuntu 9.0,4 final?

    TIA
    Regards

Posting Permissions

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