Page 25 of 29 FirstFirst ... 152324252627 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 250 of 283

Thread: AMD Releases Open-Source UVD Video Support

  1. #241
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    966

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nille View Post
    catalyst. (10 Chars)
    Thanks!

    So why then you suggest
    Quote Originally Posted by Nille View Post
    No, to both questions.
    when the original question was about radeon(uvd), not catalyst(uvd)?
    Isnīt it possible to implement uvd+OpenCL(shaders) now for all codecs on radeon driver?

  2. #242
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    4,993

    Default

    It's simply not useful or even possible to do OpenCL/shaders for some codecs. They are not parallelizable.

  3. #243
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    625

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brosis View Post
    when the original question was about radeon(uvd), not catalyst(uvd)?
    Both are using the same Hardware an Firmware. 10bit is not possible with catalyst so i doubt that its possible with the radeon UVD code. The Hardware is not an FPGA with what you can map all possible codecs.

    Quote Originally Posted by brosis View Post
    Isnīt it possible to implement uvd+OpenCL(shaders) now for all codecs on radeon driver?
    Not maybe impossible but ineffective (a 50$ CPU can handle 1080p high10). Bridgman and Christian König has said something about this Topic in the past.

  4. #244
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    966

    Default

    @Nille, curaga:
    So its possible, but developers consider its efficiency to be inadequate.
    Which is pretty much blind-sighted, because CPU could do something else. The whole video acceleration is about "offloading". You canīt easily add another "50$" CPU into the system, but you CAN put another GPU into PCIe.

    OP should look into HSA, maybe.

  5. #245
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    625

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brosis View Post
    You canīt easily add another "50$" CPU into the system, but you CAN put another GPU into PCIe.
    And maybe its need an 200$ GPU only for Play an 1080p Stream and consumes 150W/h. Its easier and cheaper to replace the CPU or re-encode the video the asic in the gpu like quiksync or nvidias cuda encoder ( that has nothing todo with cuda its use only the name for marketing and use like everyone else an hardware chip for this )

    AMD is for encoding the worst case btw. its impossible for an normal user or developer to get the SDK for use the Hardware encoder in the radeon products.

  6. #246
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    966

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nille View Post
    And maybe its need an 200$ GPU only for Play an 1080p Stream and consumes 150W/h. Its easier and cheaper to replace the CPU or re-encode the video the asic in the gpu like quiksync or nvidias cuda encoder ( that has nothing todo with cuda its use only the name for marketing and use like everyone else an hardware chip for this )

    AMD is for encoding the worst case btw. its impossible for an normal user or developer to get the SDK for use the Hardware encoder in the radeon products.
    Hardware encoder is only in recent HD7xxx series AFAIK.
    Used 57xx+ cost around 50$ now. If PM were right, they would use minimal wattage and there is already OpenCL work done.
    I am pretty sure one could easily implement video decode backend for OpenCL stack by replacing existant codecs codepaths and optimizing them.
    IMHO its all possible, but I donī t claim anyone is interested in that yet.

  7. #247
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,607

    Default

    That's completely wrong. Better look at:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Video_Decoder

    It was never emulated via OpenCL. You can do that maybe for very simple codes but that would be never a good idea. xvba crashed very hard in the beginning with my hd 3450, then i got rid of it and got a hd 4550. the hd 5670 has basically a similar uvd part. Only hd 6000+ has got UVD 3.

  8. #248
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    625

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brosis View Post
    Used 57xx+ cost around 50$ now.
    And why you think its has enough compute capability do decode h264 complete with the ALUs?

    Quote Originally Posted by brosis View Post
    If PM were right, they would use minimal wattage and there is already OpenCL work done.
    This cards need around 100W/h under Full Hardware usage. And node that UVD is an special ASIC for decoding and has nothing todo with an decoding an video on the ALUs.

    Quote Originally Posted by brosis View Post
    I am pretty sure one could easily implement video decode backend for OpenCL stack by replacing existant codecs codepaths and optimizing them.
    IMHO its all possible, but I donī t claim anyone is interested in that yet.
    Look at VP8 there was an Project that try to Decode VP8 with OpenCL. There is no result.
    Last edited by Nille; 04-16-2013 at 12:36 PM.

  9. #249
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    4,993

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brosis View Post
    @Nille, curaga:
    So its possible, but developers consider its efficiency to be inadequate.
    Which is pretty much blind-sighted, because CPU could do something else. The whole video acceleration is about "offloading". You canīt easily add another "50$" CPU into the system, but you CAN put another GPU into PCIe.
    If the codec is not parallelizable (= most of them), the GPU will use its full power and still be _slower_ than your CPU. Would you consider that a worthy offload?

  10. #250
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,442

    Default

    This 10-bit stuff was a dumb idea from the get-go.

Posting Permissions

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