|
Juriko posted:It really is "why doesn't MCE know how to communicate with my microwave to pop my popcorn and it beems music to my Smartphone" I couldn't watch it at first from the way he was obviously biased. The way he kept on going on about network shares made me want to ask him had he ever heard of mapping network drives to a letter, or why would I pay $120 for a gyro mouse when a $20 remote is adequate. Or the biggest peeve, not every user is going to want to change the color of their subtitle fonts on the fly from the UI. Why else would they pack 20 different options out in the open like that? Guys like that are the reason why the average person wont even consider linux, the fanboys always over complicate the simplest thing.
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2007 14:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 09:13 |
|
|
Sam Fujiyama posted:Well, get excited/depressed, because rumour has it that Mediaportal, MeediOS and EMC are due to merge/co-operate. Talks are in progress right now. They need to get together. Mediaportal as a front in frankly blows, but the TV part is starting to come up to speed. meediOS is the opposite. it would save a bunch of time to merge the two.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2007 21:24
|
|
|
Strict 9 posted:Why do think Mediaportal blows?? I've used about a dozen front ends and Mediaportal is the best. Its slow and it crashes often. Its gotten better, but it still drags under certain conditions on reasonably powerful hardware (x700, A64). They also are just fine with being a clone of MCE. Meedio had a high learning curve but once you got it you could do just about anything you wanted with it. MeediOS is shaping up to be just like Meedio in that aspect.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2007 17:52
|
|
|
Yep, Im not saying that its completely unusable and I have said several times that it has come a long way, but personally I still think it needs a bit more work before I can start to rely on it. I try it every six months or so, the last being around a month ago, its almost there but I'll still stick with sage.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2007 23:23
|
|
|
You may want to ask at the meedios forums. https://www.meedios.com I haven't messed with it in over a year, but If I recall, you have to make sure you have .avi listed as a filetype to read, and make sure you have the screen set as a media screen, browse wont do it. I'm not going to lie, that part of Meedio was hard to use, but stick with it for a bit. Once you get how to do things in it its actually is a pretty powerful program.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2007 05:23
|
|
|
EC posted:I'm having some weirdness playing back 720p content. I'm using CoreAVC, and the audio seems to start way, way before the video does, which makes it out of sync. I have a P4 1.8, 512mb RAM, ATI 9600. Not top of the line, but I figured I could at least get 720p out of it. I've tried a couple of different media players and all do the same thing. I have DefilerPak installed, but I disabled it from handling x264 content. Is there something I might be missing somewhere? That processor is just plainly not going to be able to handle that in AVC. I ran a similar outfit a few months back, except it was an 9600XT and a Athlon XP 2800+. Mpeg-2 up to 1080i only in overlay and AVC was a no go. Personally I've never had any success on it with anything less than a x700 and a Athlon 64 no slower than 3200+ BTW, the same thing applys, 1080i only in overlay, but 720p AVC is fine.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2007 03:28
|
|
|
JohnnyBravo posted:It looks good. The only thing I'd change is the hard drives. I'm not sure how much I trust Samsung hard drives. I work in IT and I didn't know they even had a line of them. I also don't see any information about them having a warranty. If you wanted to save a tiny bit of money and lose a bit of space you could get a couple 400 GB Seagates for $99 which come with 5 year warrantys. They are decent drives. Not the fastest on the block but typically are among the quietest, and they mostly sell in OEM deals. The warranty is three years. Look up some reviews on some sites and you'll see they are pretty decent drives, just hard to find. I know my experience isn't much but I've used them for the past five years on several machines without issues.
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2007 01:18
|
|
|
Kinison Khan posted:Nah, not even MS Media Player will play it back. I installed the CoreAVC, which is supposed to be some super efficient h264 codec. Still nothing. Matroska is a container. Media player classic can play it as it natively understands the container. You can find filters to read the format here. http://www.matroska.org/downloads/windows.html I personally recommend haali's splitter as its updated frequently (it says last october there, but its been updated at least 5 times since then. The link is to the latest however)
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2007 02:30
|
|
|
http://www.silentpcreview.com/article29-page1.html A good link for reference of quiet drives. Personally I've had good luck with Samsung drives when it comes to quietness. You can also go in with their testing software to enable silent acoustic mode to make them a little more quieter at the expense of a little more latency. Not really a big problem for an htpc.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2008 18:26
|
|
|
My old htpc was a Opteron 170 with 1.5gigs of memory and it handled it just fine. Hell when I ran XP on it It ran fine with 1gig of memory. You need the memory if you are going to do side jobs like edit video or serve files but for playback the 2gigs you have now are just fine. I would get a better video card. You'll be surprised how much it will make a difference, at least if you are trying to watch video in a vmr mode. If you don't care, then see if your software can run in overlay which basically any card should be able to handle. In my experience, a Geforce 6600GT was fine with 720p but unusable at resolutions after that. an 8500GT was good for progressive material only and a 9600GT had zero problems. If you do replace the mainboard, an 8300 is fine too, although its not as smooth as the 9600GT was in 1080i content, but it is watchable.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2008 16:53
|
|
|
Maybe your tuner and the case, but everything else will likely need to be replaced nowadays. Vista Premium is the one with MCE btw, not basic. Most onboard video is good enough for HD video nowadays, so look for 780g, Nvidia 8200/9300 and P45 mainboards as a reference. Most people will say to skimp on the processor, but personally I feel that you should get something that will handle HD on its own just in case it can't be accelerated by your video card. Either way you can still get by with a cheap processor like a 5200+ or some Pentium Ds (although its recommended if you go with a 780g you get a Phenom for better post processing.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2008 22:05
|
|
|
Unless the card based 8300s are just like the 8300s built into mainboards, I would strongly go with something 8600gt based or better. While my 8300 mainboard is fine with 1080p, a similar system with an 8500gt struggled with deinterlacing content unless it was SD content. I had to resort to using ffdshow to force software deinterlacing, which drove processor usage through the roof. I later moved up to a 9600gt and it was golden, but a 8600gt should be just as good. If you are looking for quiet, an 8300 mainboard, any X2 processor should be good. I have a Phenom 8650 in mines and its complete overkill. The only time you need a phenom in a htpc is if you are going to use a 780g based board as it provides better post processing support due to a bigger ht bus.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2008 17:50
|
|
|
TheScott2K posted:
Yep. if all you are planning on doing is mpeg-2 then basically anything is good thats somewhat recent nowadays. If you are having trouble with it, look at your codec or your video card first. And even then your video card probably isn't a issue unless you are trying to use a VMR or EVR mode and trying to play at 720p or 1080p resolution.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2008 13:44
|
|
|
dfn_doe posted:The very fact that it may work for some people and it may be what they want does actually make it a viable option. Since you seem to be the only one who is being so vocal about discounting it as an option maybe you should just not use it instead of trying to tell others what they are looking for... I'm not quite sure why you are being such a jerk about it, but I can't say that I really care. I think the bigger issue is that both of you haven't really gone into what it is mostly reliable in getting. Local channels only. Some of us may live in a area where you can get more, and some of us like me can get 2 of the 4 big locals but all of the public access channels. It is what it is. Nice if it works for you, but not really reliable for content or access.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2008 18:34
|
|
|
Actually GPU acceleration has been promised in CoreAVC for ages and hasn't been delivered as they say that both ATI and Nvidia are pretty vague in providing information to allow it. As a side note, if you don't have the funds right now, it is worth trying the mt builds of ffdshow tryouts if you have a multicore processor. The only thing multicore about it at the moment is h264 and mpeg-2 but at least in the h264 bit It's just slightly behind Core in speed. It's worth keeping an eye on.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2008 05:59
|
|
|
r0ck0 posted:I just got a samsung A950 LCD and plugged it into my nvidia 8800 with the latest drivers, 180. And in the nvidia control panel they have two settings for 24hz. One for the Monitor/TV refresh rate and one for the HDTV transmission. I set the TV to 23hz and the HDTV transmission to 24hz. My TV says its running at 24hz. I don't know why I had to set it to 23hz but it had to be for the HDTV setting to switch to 24hz. If you haven't already, go into the TV's properties and make sure that you have the hdmi connection labled as a PC. I don't have the 950, but on my 550, choosing PC disables some of the set's post processing which was causing a noticeable blur on some content. As for the 24hz thing, I know there are several threads on it at avs forums. Most had to try a different driver.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2008 17:30
|
|
|
No one has probably noticed but Divx 7 was released today, which is notable here as its brings h264 support along with mkv to a more mainstream audience. It seems to be pretty quick as well, and is a great alternative to using CoreAVC or ffdshow.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2009 05:56
|
|
|
TheScott2K posted:Do updates to the Divx codec get pushed to XBox360s running NXE, or am I displaying too much audacity of hope? There's no need for it, since its just another implementation of H264. Its just like how Divx can play Xvid and vice versa, its the same standard in the end. monkeybounce posted:I've, personally, got a Hauppauge HVR-1600 and run my Set-Top Box through the NTSC coax and get OTA HD through the ATSC jack. The caveat to it, however, is that it's only 1 tuner, so only 1 can be utilized at a time--either the STB or the OTA HD. Unless its some limitation in the software you are using, you can use both tuners at the same time. Its just like the PVR-500 in that aspect.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2009 23:18
|
|
|
Kreez posted:MPC-HC comes with a DXVA H.264 filter that works quite nicely and is free. I've never a file not work with it. DXVA requires a clear path between the renderer and the codec, and does not tolerate any other codecs inserted into the path. Thus, this prevents ffdshow from doing post processing, or vsfilter from being added to the path. MPC-HC addes the subtitles on top of the renderer to get around it, and it requires EVR or VMR9 to work. Keep in mind that to use EVR and acceleration you need Vista. EVR can exist in XP via the .net framework 3, but isn't accelerated.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2009 20:08
|
|
|
Neither cccp or ffdshow support dxva. If you want a free solution, then get the media player classic stand alone filters. http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=170561. Be warned that you may still need to go into the codec properties to enable it. use your player's properties or graphedit to do it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2009 19:02
|
|
|
A note for those who like CoreAVC that the 1.90 version has been released with CUDA support (hardware acceleration for Nvidia cards) Beta drivers (182.05) are needed, and it currently does not work for interlaced content.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2009 19:28
|
|
|
el_caballo posted:I'll probably step up to a HDTV once I get my tax return in a month or so but I'm wondering if I'll need an upgrade on HTPC to do 720p. (Right now the plan is to get a Samsung LN32A450 that can only do 720p.) Yes. its going to be pretty tough with what you have. Try overlay and verify that coreAVC is what's running, See if you can get it stable in media player classic or similar first before moving to mediaportal to make sure its nothing there holding it back.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2009 19:32
|
|
|
I wish that they would drop the Codec Pack part of cccp as it really is just a custom build of ffdshow tryouts with a few extra splitters and filters. FFdshow-Tryouts = Good CCCP = Good Defiler = Good (but getting old at this point) NIMO, KLite and a host of others = Potentially bad, or devastating if you install every single bit of the pack. A fair amount of them also use cracked or older buggy versions of codecs if you care about that as well.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2009 23:36
|
|
|
inignot posted:I've got an existing HTPC that has problems playing large (over 10G) 1080p avi/mkv files. Video playback will lag, skip, become distorted, etc. Smaller files play fine. I've used both vlc and smplayer. Smplayer has less problems then vlc, but it still can't play large 1080p files without issue. Yes, the 8500GT is probably the weakest link. Bad performance in XP, and while its better in Vista it still struggles on 1080i material by either dropping frames or becoming a blocky mess. The only time the 8500GT is good in a HTPC is if you have a 8200/8300 and use it in SLI, then its close to a 8600GT in performance.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2009 17:26
|
|
|
Killa Sample is very much a worse case scenario however. It has massive bitrate spikes and every option was set to max, something you won't find even on a blu-ray disc. It's like the Crysis of video, there is likely nothing currently available that will play it correctly without it being complete overkill.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2009 14:28
|
|
|
Sell it. Depending on the unit, its a PowerPC or MIPS processor, and the only one with a little bit of backbone is the series 3 (barely) Really not worth the time.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2009 18:18
|
|
|
So what exactly are you asking for, what tuner you should use? I do not know about its support in mediaportal, but I would suggest an Hauppauge HVR-2250. Supports two streams, analog or digital and is half height. Its 1x PCI Express however.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2009 02:02
|
|
|
weaaddar posted:Every review I've read of ION devices have said that it can handle bluray's flawlessly which is nearly always 1080p h264/mpeg2/vc1. It may not have been in this thread, but I know I've mentioned here before that Blu-Ray on Atom is very dependent on what what type of graphics you are using. Using a system that the video card can't assist it can barely do 720p in most cases. With a card that can assist (and items that encoded to a compatible profile) then it can handle 1080p. However there's one gotcha that most reviews are missing. Most reviews are just playing back ripped content, which results in the 60% or less cpu usage is generally when CUDA or DXVA acceleration is in use. Add in the additional overhead needed to play a Blu-Ray movie strait and its closer to 80 to 90% Still playable but you definitely don't want to do anything else while it running. Oh and since someone brought up killasample earlier, don't use it as a benchmark. Nothing can play that file right as it follows no set standard and has bandwidth peaks in it that aren't even possible on a Bly-Ray disc. It's just a piece of a corrupt file that someone noticed was still playable but brought anything to its knees.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2009 00:32
|
|
|
Nocheez posted:OK, since no one has bit on my post, what's the most cost-effective, small form factor PC to build that does 1080p? I don't mind doing a full PC with video and sound cards if that's the best route. Look for mainboards with at least a 780g/8200 on the AMD side, or a 9400 on the intel side if you want something all in one. If you want better quality HD then a good choice to supplement the above is a 4670 or better.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2009 13:13
|
|
|
Get a higher end ATI card like the 4670 I suggested earlier. Some of them have HDMI audio, and support more channels than what your mainboard can.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2009 10:09
|
|
|
weaaddar posted:Unfortunately, if you try something like the killa sample which is slightly higher then 40mbps video, ATI's UVD will not kickin. You also need to use Vista or 7 RC1, as ATI's xp drivers are pretty lovely apparently. Some parts of it are over 60mbps. More than what is possible on Blu-Ray. Again, don't use it as a benchmark, its not a proper file and no one will ever make anything that way.
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2009 19:58
|
|
|
Jensen posted:It is a good benchmark in the sense that if you can run it you should be able to run anything. It doesn't really matter to me whether it's "realistic" or not. Even I7 based machines can't play it right. And if they manage to play it without dropping frames all they have done is introduced a ton of judder instead which is just as bad. Its not able to be accelerated by any video card on any os and isn't playable in set top boxes. In the end it prompts people to make overkill systems for something they will never encounter in the wild. I admit its a good stress test, but way too many people try to use it as a benchmark to shoot for.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2009 17:41
|
|
|
Jook posted:I've been wanting to build/buy an HTPC for months now but I'm horrible at pulling the trigger. I strongly recommend that you at least go with a dual core processor for cases where you want to play something that can't be accelerated. And 45w dual core processors do exist, and even the 55 and 65w ones won't increase the power or heat that much either. I personally would go for a better video card as well. Even a 780g based mainboard would be a better choice
|
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2009 13:23
|
|
|
Bigsteve posted:Ive had spotty playback using the CUDA. Makes the screen flash slightly. To be fair its probably the shiity onboard 8200. Will probably ditch it for a normal card in the future but eveything plays with the new CPU so there is no real rush. Yes the 8200 is really not all that good. it struggles on 1080i content or post processing on SD content due to lack of pixel shaders. Most people supplement it with a 9500 on their HTPC if they want to stick with CUDA. Really, the only reason people love it so much is because it can do 7.1 audio, and it really isn't a big deal as people like to make it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2009 10:24
|
|
|
vanilla slimfast posted:
The link for that card is kind of misleading in the way it reads. It's basically is two tuners on a chip, so you can do two analog, two digital, or analog/digital at the same time, not that it can handle all four simultaneously. Anyhow, a valid reason of going with say a 1600/1800 is cost. 2250s are still in the $120 range while you can occasionally find 1600s nowadays under $60. And for what its worth, unless you are capturing QAM you are going to be stuck either doing all digital or analog depending on the input since there's just one lead on the card. On the other hand, in the 2250s defense, analog is going to become more and more useless as cable converts to digital over the next couple of years so at least you won't have multiple tuners just sitting there idle after a while.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2009 19:02
|
|
|
8500GT barely cuts it for 1080i content. If you can change it, I would go with at least a 9500gt Anyhow, cablelabs just dropped a bomb. They are dropping the OEM requirement for cablecard tuners! http://www.engadgethd.com/2009/09/09/media-center-cablecards-freed-from-oem-requirement/
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2009 01:30
|
|
|
creamyhorror posted:Is that for playback? Why would an 8500GT not cut it? I use a G98 core 8400GS and it works just fine for DXVA or CoreAVC CUDA playback at 1080p. Surely the 8500GT wouldn't be much worse, if not better? It can't handle deinterlacing of 1080i mpeg-2 or VC1 content and it tends to struggle on inverse telecine as well. It can do 1080p but no post processing. Basically it's barely acceptable for blu-ray content, and not really acceptable if you watch a lot of 1080i content like off of CBS or NBC.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2009 04:48
|
|
|
TheScott2K posted:I can buy VC-1 but I have a hard time believing any machine built in the last few years has any trouble with MPEG-2, especially at broadcast bitrates. It's not the machine, its the card and the way it does hardware acceleration. All I'm stating is the limitations I saw when I had the card, and what I found on the web at the time. I later replaced it with a 8300 mainboard and while it still had problems, it was still better video performance then the 8500GT was. Anyhow links. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10468272#post10468272 Old but still pretty much applys with newer drivers. quote:"Enabling inverse telecine results in an increase in dropped frames on http://www.missingremote.com/index.php?option=com_smf&Itemid=198&topic=1364.msg8903#msg8903 quote:What I wrote is correct. Acceleration means that GPU will offload decoding of the HD video. However any post-processing on HD sources such as NVIDIA's advanced motion-adaptive deinterlacing, 3:2 reversal, and noise reduction is not working in XP. This means that 1080i deinterlacing is broken. Film sources are not recognized as such (3:2 cadence detection) and thus 1/2 the fields are simply thrown away. Video deinterlacing isn't much better right now, it is deinterlaced brute force and thus bobbed when a motion adaptive bob and weave algorithim should be used for best image resolution. In Vista these are all working. And I'll add that even though it works in Vista it still is inferior performance to other cards like an 8600 or a 9500. http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3047&p=3 quote:We excluded tests of NVIDIA's 8500 series, as their video drivers have not yet been optimized for their low end hardware. Even so, we have been given indications not to expect the level of performance we see from the 8600 series. Pretty much everyone buying something like this want the hardware acceleration so they can use a cooler processor, so the idea of just running it in software isn't really acceptable.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2009 15:45
|
|
|
blankooie posted:Where the hell is AMD/ATI in all this? These are obviously selling like hotcakes selling hotcakes, why haven't they released a low power platform yet, or announced plans to? Actually they have. Congo platform and Vision branding. http://news.softpedia.com/news/AMD-Unveils-Tigris-and-Congo-Platforms-New-VISION-Branding-121306.shtml Basically its not an exact clone of a netbook but somewhere between netbook and a notebook.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2009 19:13
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 09:13 |
|
|
evilalien posted:No, it isn't under development or in SVN as far as I know. Hardware acceleration is only supported under Linux in XBMC and it works just fine. There are plans to have it on Windows, but no work has been done on it as of yet. Work is being done, but it still is experimental, not by the main team and unsupported/unstable If he really wants it now then he needs to get a build that supports an external player. as it's bound to work a lot better. http://www.xbmc.org/forum/showthread.php?t=35452 unsupported builds link. Look for DX builds if you are adventurous.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2009 15:51
|
|