Latest-ish MPC-HC ported for XP

[Saxon]

12 hours ago, ED_Sln said:

the dawn of the BD era, I've seen a lot of BD disks,

The dawn of the BD era would be MPEG2, not VC-1, and I've seen a lot of BD disks, too. The trend to use AVC started when they were re-releasing the old films over and over again, "remastered" bloated with fake grain, etc.

XP era hardware would have a hard time playing those bloated AVC streams at 50mbps,

[user57]

seems its a tryhard for that LAV engine what is vista or win10 ish 

but nobody seems to know so exactly where LAV placed its hardware acceleration, also the information in web around rather says it use direct11, on dx10 or dx9 it get messy "like nobody knows this so exactly"

but to say it clear DX is already a engine and LAV is too - so it goes through at least 2 engines and dx use different modules when somewhat later (after it made a walkaround the dx modules) it enters ring0 - where also some the things dont happen so directly 

 

but that very well describes todays problem you run through at least 5 engines before you get to run something 

 

lets say LAV just wont work what then ? (ok sure there was not enough testing yet) 

there certainly some others, some want money 

 

well MPEG and even H266 have their inheritance somehow, AV1 VP9 are splits too from that h.265 

new tricks have been added 

what is certainly right that at the same bitrate h.265 did success, im not sure about that h.266 yet - you would have to set it to its peak performance not medium vs slower 

 

there are some h265 decoders out there but it hasnt to be LAV or x265 for example that strongene h265 decoder but it seems they want money or at least when a company is involved 

[Saxon]

D3D11 video acceleration (don't confuse with gaming D3D11) is only available in Win8.

[Saxon]

D3D11 video acceleration and DXVA/DXVA2 video acceleration are independent techniques, please don't bring confusion,

In XP, only DXVA is available, which is of course not suited for anything higher than MPEG, MPEG2, H264 and VC-1.

 

[Saxon]

Regarding sound, only DD5.1, but nor DDP5.1 is available.

DTS on XP is limited to the core component (just the simple, compressed DTS at the max. bitrate of 1509), DTS_HD MA and un-compressed DTS_HD lossless are not available.

[user57]

interesting point so the LAV is a engine to simplify the dx11 video engine ? there are such engines for GDI, they really made a lot of engines rather then using GDI directly, same goes for dx , its getting "upscriped" and slower

[ED_Sln]

Continuing my hardware acceleration tests on the GTX950. I have now installed Windows XP x64, LAVFilters-0.70.2-x64, the latest officially supporting XP, video driver 368.81, MPC-BE 1.7.3 x64, the new MPC-HC x64 I couldn't make work, and there are no other x64 ports, so I'm using version 1.7.13 x64. Hardware acceleration seems to work better in x64, there is no problem with h265 the first time, everything works, but the h265-10 bit doesn't work either. VP9 also works, but for some reason very low fps, only 10-14 frames, although neither CPU nor GPU are heavily loaded.

[Saxon]

13 hours ago, ED_Sln said:

Continuing my hardware acceleration tests on the GTX950. I have now installed Windows XP x64, LAVFilters-0.70.2-x64, the latest officially supporting XP, video driver 368.81, MPC-BE 1.7.3 x64, the new MPC-HC x64 I couldn't make work, and there are no other x64 ports, so I'm using version 1.7.13 x64. Hardware acceleration seems to work better in x64, there is no problem with h265 the first time, everything works, but the h265-10 bit doesn't work either. VP9 also works, but for some reason very low fps, only 10-14 frames, although neither CPU nor GPU are heavily loaded.

Not clear, is this using only the native DXVA? Or Cuvid only? Or DXVA mixed with CUVID? No screenshots, either.

[ED_Sln]

1 hour ago, Saxon said:

Not clear, is this using only the native DXVA? Or Cuvid only? Or DXVA mixed with CUVID? No screenshots, either.

I didn't take screenshots because everything is the same as in the previous test, acceleration with Cuvid. DXVA as in XP-32 does not support h265 at all.

[user57]

12 hours ago, ED_Sln said:

Continuing my hardware acceleration tests on the GTX950. I have now installed Windows XP x64, LAVFilters-0.70.2-x64, the latest officially supporting XP, video driver 368.81, MPC-BE 1.7.3 x64, the new MPC-HC x64 I couldn't make work, and there are no other x64 ports, so I'm using version 1.7.13 x64. Hardware acceleration seems to work better in x64, there is no problem with h265 the first time, everything works, but the h265-10 bit doesn't work either. VP9 also works, but for some reason very low fps, only 10-14 frames, although neither CPU nor GPU are heavily loaded.

7 hours ago, ED_Sln said:

I didn't take screenshots because everything is the same as in the previous test, acceleration with Cuvid. DXVA as in XP-32 does not support h265 at all.

 

its nice to have something like that but also that depents on a grafic card, it dont give normal xp users what might have a 4 core cpu or maybe a fast 2 core cpu a way to look this

 

it raise the question why certain LAV engines can do this and certain can not , it raise questions how they activate that or set the right parameters - it would be good to know, also if you want to use a different LAV version where it dont work

 

to the second answer DXVA in XP-32 dont work at all - that sounds like a dead beef - that engine cant be used for XP - sorry not a big fan of the x64 version of XP, it had a lot less support therefore it is often a bit buggy. also you can set the compiler to compile a x32 program and then both works 32 and 64, but if you set 64 bit then 32 bit dont work

then there is the 4 gb question we have talked about that and yes XP/or 32 bit can use more thats because PTE PDE are entrys to physical pages , its more then just a 32 bit wide offset - a ramdisc proofed that in 32 bit 

 

are im really the only person that could write out a h265 decoder with normal opcodes up to XMM (what are 64 bit by the way, running on 32 bit - later even 128 and 256 bit wide - and yes for 32 bit)? 

 

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/44299401/difference-between-mmx-and-xmm-register

[Saxon]

22 hours ago, ED_Sln said:

I didn't take screenshots because everything is the same as in the previous test, acceleration with Cuvid. DXVA as in XP-32 does not support h265 at all.

Thanks, actually H265 acceleration with Cuvid suppossed to work in conjunction with DXVA on older OS, did you try the "hybrid" mode?

 

[ED_Sln]

5 hours ago, user57 said:

its nice to have something like that but also that depents on a grafic card, it dont give normal xp users what might have a 4 core cpu or maybe a fast 2 core cpu a way to look this

Yes, especially since there aren't many suitable graphics cards, which further reduces the number of suitable systems.

5 hours ago, user57 said:

sorry not a big fan of the x64 version of XP, it had a lot less support therefore it is often a bit buggy

XP x64 itself is a stable system, after all it is made on the basis of Server 2003, but there are problems with drivers, so the stability depends on the hardware, on one computer it can constantly glitch, and on another will work more stable and faster than XP x32.

1 hour ago, Saxon said:

Thanks, actually H265 acceleration with Cuvid suppossed to work in conjunction with DXVA on older OS, did you try the "hybrid" mode?

If you set the "Enable CUVID DXVA processing" checkbox, nothing changes in LAV 0.70, I don't know if anything is enabled at all, because although this version officially supports XP, it doesn't have DXVA1, only DXVA2.

In LAV 0.79, enabling CUVID DXVA breaks every video into artifacts.

[user57]

im not certain but controlment to a device in windows is very simple

you open a handle to that device, and after that you can stream your data either as input or output

the text field "hardware device to use" would be a indicator to have it that way

 

that raise questions again , why we cant give that "device" it´s right I/O control code

that is also done with the famous deviceiocontrol function (read write and control)

 

then it should be doable

[ED_Sln]

9 hours ago, user57 said:

you open a handle to that device, and after that you can stream your data either as input or output

It is necessary that the device knows how to use the received data, hardware codec is not much different from software codec. If a software codec doesn't support the format, there is no way to make it support it, except updating. If you make the data to be processed so that the device understands this format, but this is already a software decoder, and the conversion will be done by the CPU.

[user57]

 

On 9/14/2024 at 8:03 PM, ED_Sln said:

It is necessary that the device knows how to use the received data, hardware codec is not much different from software codec. If a software codec doesn't support the format, there is no way to make it support it, except updating. If you make the data to be processed so that the device understands this format, but this is already a software decoder, and the conversion will be done by the CPU.

it would maybe have exactly this in parameter "dwIoControlCode"

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/ioapiset/nf-ioapiset-deviceiocontrol

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/devio/device-input-and-output-control-ioctl-l

 

the hardware itself has a control bus for this, a data and a address bus

 

that goes back why every cpu and hardware (such as a hdd drive) use a buffer/cache 

and thats also how the CPU can skip 32 bit commands and use for example a quadpumped stream, then rather is limited to the BUS/device speed

it longly dispatched the just "tick 32" tick/cycle

 

to also say this that the FPU in the past already was 64 bit wide (while running on a 32 bit cpu), then mmx and the others apeared extending this up to 128, 256 and 512 (avx512) - that not include the cache tricks nor the logical hardware units