Reply With QuoteSo how again can intel provide accelerated h264 support with open drivers but when it comes to AMD it becomes a "legal issue"? w00t 5k posts!
Phoronix News Bot
Intel Is Still Working On G45 VA-API Video Acceleration
Phoronix: Intel Is Still Working On G45 VA-API Video Acceleration
While there is Intel VA-API video acceleration support under Linux for Clarkdale/Arrandale hardware and the newest Sandy Bridge CPUs (assuming you are running the very latest code), there is no video playback acceleration support for the Intel G45 / GMA 4500M HD hardware. It was previously promised by Intel engineers with a target delivery date of Q2'2010, but that has long since passed without any further information from Intel...
http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=OTEyNw
Moderator
So how again can intel provide accelerated h264 support with open drivers but when it comes to AMD it becomes a "legal issue"? w00t 5k posts!
Phoronix Member
AMD doesn't provide any open-source driver...
Moderator
lol, where have you been for the last few years?Originally Posted by rafirafi
Senior Member
I think rafirafi is right. Remember, the ATI driver is not *officially* supported, however ridiculous it is.
Moderator
*officially* supported does not equal provide.
Moderator
Also for that matter intel does not *officially* support linux as well. Their driver is provided "as is".
http://intellinuxgraphics.org/license.htmlNO WARRANTY
11. BECAUSE THE PROGRAM IS LICENSED FREE OF CHARGE, THERE IS NO WARRANTY FOR THE PROGRAM, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW. EXCEPT WHEN OTHERWISE STATED IN WRITING THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND/OR OTHER PARTIES PROVIDE THE PROGRAM "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR CORRECTION.
Senior Member
Bah... you already know the answer. It's the usual old story UVD vs shader based approach.
Moderator
AFIK the intel does not use a shader based approach and UVD only uses shaders for post-processing.
X.Org ATI Driver Developer
As has been mentioned before ad nauseam, the issue with UVD is exposing the programming information without putting our DRM (Digital Rights Management) implementation at risk on other OSes. At the hardware level the decode and DRM are somewhat intertwined with UVD. Intel's decoder may be less intertwined with DRM, or maybe it is and they are still trying to work out how to enable it while still protecting their DRM implementation on other OSes.
Shaders can be used as an alternate means to decode video. They are more flexible than a fixed function block like UVD, but can't be used for certain aspects of the decode pipeline that are not easily done in parallel. They can be used to add decode support for newer video formats (like vp8) that can't be added to fixed function blocks.
