video performances - Touch HD General

Video benchmarks on coreplayer 1.25, default options.
Video 1 - Simpsons chapter
Video: XVID 512x384 25.00fps 756Kbps [Video 0]
Audio: MPEG Audio Layer 3 48000Hz stereo 131Kbps [Audio 1]
Average speed: 93%
Video 2 - Friends chapter
Video: XVID 512x384 23.98fps 845Kbps [Video 0]
Audio: MPEG Audio Layer 3 48000Hz stereo 130Kbps [Audio 1]
Average speed: 99%
Video 3 - Futurama chapter
Video: DivX 5 640x480 25.00fps 2097Kbps [Video 0]
Audio: MPEG Audio Layer 3 48000Hz stereo 120Kbps [Audio 1]
Average speed: 73%
Video 4 - Heroes.S03E08.HDTV.XviD-LOL 400mb
Video: XVID 624x352 23.98fps 1147Kbps [Video 0]
Audio: MPEG Audio Layer 3 48000Hz stereo 122Kbps [Audio 1]
Average speed: 90.11%
Video 5 - Californication.S02E07.HDTV.XviD-0TV 250mb
Video: XVID 624x352 23.98fps 1082Kbps [Video 0]
Audio: MPEG Audio Layer 3 48000Hz stereo 128Kbps [Audio 1]
Average speed: 95.57%
Video 6 - Simpsons chapter
Video: DivX 5 720x576 25.00fps 1111Kbps [Video 0]
Audio: MPEG Audio Layer 3 48000Hz stereo 128Kbps [Audio 1]
Average speed: 58%
Videos of the test: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=2M95ZHD4
No 100% on ANY video, but close. Acceptable? Maybe in coreplayer 1.3.
For me, this is a total crap and a big failure of HTC again. BUY THE STUPID ATI DRIVERS F**K, ILL PAY 50$ FOR THEM

disappointment
Yes, I second that,
The poor video performance is a big downer and a very noticable thing watching your favourite smallville episode skipping frames all the time.

and the game of the ball is sloooooow and like playing a 10fps game.

I have to say I'm amazed by this. I remember when the whole Tytn II video debacle broke, we had these silly statements from HTC trying to justify the poor performance by saying it was a business phone, and didn't have video acceleration built in (which was a lie), but that future HTC devices might be "multimedia-centric" or words to that effect... well, surely the Touch HD is exactly such a multimedia device, advertised and sold as just that, so why are we still discussing lacklustre performance?
Is this gross stupidity or carelessness on the part of HTC, or is there something seriously wrong with these Qualcomm chips?
Let's just revisit the blurb on HTC's own website for a moment (before they start rewording it, as they did with the Tytn II) -
HTC said:
Enjoy music videos, films and streaming like you never thought possible on a mobile device. Experience internet browsing so exhilarating... it feels like you never left your laptop at home...
...3.8-inch wide, WVGA (480 X 800 pixel) display offering a cinema experience on the go
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm.

I find this quite dissapointing. I was hoping that due to the large screen they would have made sure it can play basic video files. Those sorts of file are exactly what i would be looking to play on it too.
Hmm The more I read the more i am sawying towards an iPhone which i fine frustrating

Guys try playing those files in WMP and you will see that it will play them perfectly thanks to the hardware acceleration which unfortunately still isn't fully used in CP! Wait till CC will crack the software part of the HW acceleration and you then you will be able to watch all those movies without demuxing on Touch HD.
To those who want to know how to make .mp4 from .avi/.mkv without converting PM and I will tell how to do it in 10 minutes and not 1 hour.

How we can play this files on a program that doesnt read that codecs?

xvid/divx are all the same it is simply mpeg4 video. If you take it out of the .avi file and mux it into .mp4 it will be recognised as mpeg4 video file. Its the same with h264/x264 if you take it out from .avi and mux it into .mp4 it will be recognised as h264 video unfortunately wmp only supports baseline profile which is rarely used at all.
Remember that .avi/.mp4/.mkv are all containers that can contain the same type of video or audio stream only .mkv is special cause it can easily contain subtitles stream of different format and almost every audio format which unfortunately isn't the case with .avi and .mp4 that is why .mkv is the most popular container for all those HD rips cause you can put almost every kind of thing.

update !

I hear the sound of a deal breaking....while this is a disappointment for sure the real crunch for me would be if the video suffered in ordinary performance as my polaris did (eg low screen rewrites pretty obvious in TT7).

I am not into benchmarks, just one of those "business users" that likes to have some multimedia on my device. Just watching ep 7 of se 4 of The Unit on Coreplayer 1.2.5 in fullscreen landscape from Divx 624x352, and find it plays really well, with no lag or performance problems. So for the occasional user like me the HD is doing just fine.

Wishmaster89 said:
xvid/divx are all the same it is simply mpeg4 video. If you take it out of the .avi file and mux it into .mp4 it will be recognised as mpeg4 video file. Its the same with h264/x264 if you take it out from .avi and mux it into .mp4 it will be recognised as h264 video unfortunately wmp only supports baseline profile which is rarely used at all.
Remember that .avi/.mp4/.mkv are all containers that can contain the same type of video or audio stream only .mkv is special cause it can easily contain subtitles stream of different format and almost every audio format which unfortunately isn't the case with .avi and .mp4 that is why .mkv is the most popular container for all those HD rips cause you can put almost every kind of thing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what???
xvid and divx are codecs, not simply videos, if you mux a xvid/divx video in one container, it will be a mpeg4 container with xvid/divx video, and windows media player will not play it until you convert the video to another codec with loss of quality, bigger size and loss of time, so is not that easy and for us, say that "use windows media player" is a useless comment.

I uploaded the videos with that I made the benchmarks
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=2M95ZHD4

Just tried Heroes Episode 8 on my i780, and here are the results:
GDI - 181,36%
Raw Framebuffer - 206,13%
Intel xScale - 213,59%
Direct Draw - 182,2%
However taking into account the difference in resolution from the older models and the Touch HD i think this could justify the difference in performance.
Also, maybe Core Player is not using effectively the architecture of the Touch HD.
But... this is a new machine and as such it should be ready to play acceptably the videos.

On the Omnia I can play a 700 MB AVI file almost perfectly smoothly without any conversion at all. I can simple place the original high-quality video AVI onto the Omnia and play it.
Is this the same case for the Touch HD? Can you do the same thing and it will play (even if you need to use WMP)? Or do you have to convert it down to a lower quality first like on previous phones?

The Omnia included by default a DivX player, this is not the case of the Blackstone, however with Core Player or the free TCMP you can watch virtually any movie without converting it.

The Omnia is also based around a different processor, not made by Qualcomm. I suspect that helps as well.

this is so disappointing...
my only wish is that CorePlayer 1.2.5 actually doesn't use the hardware acceleration of the touch hd as it should.
because if this is the actual performance of the hardware then, at least me, i wont spent 700 euro on this device which promises to be multimedia device but actually isn't.
can someone convert a file that is playable with the built-in video player or WMP but this file should be of relatively high resolution say 720x400 (wmv, mp4 whatever) and then see how's the performance?
maybe this is just a coreplayer poor performance issue here are we're just blaming the device for nothing...
ps. I had the omnia for couple of weeks, the video performance of IntelXScale is absolutely amazing even on high resolution videos, also I don't think the 240x400 resolution of the omnia plays a big factor here, i suppose that even if the omnia had 480x800 resolution, the performance would be the same (maybe bit slower, but definitely more than 100%)

Hi, I've just tryied this video: http://downloads.gamezone.com/demos/d24115.htm which is infact an 800x480 wmv file. Coreplayer 1.2.5 benchmarked at 46% with QTv, even less with other methods. Windows Media Player however managed to play it much much better, even if with some dropped frames.. definitely not a smooth playback but at least was not a slideshow like in CorePlayer...
downloading a 640x480 wmv video.. I'll report back with results..
Edit: the second video is this one: http://www.casadolcecasa.com/gallery/video/Natale2004_hig.wmv
WMP: watchable, first part kinda sluggish, then goes better (supposedly because most of the img is dark -> easier to decode)
CP1.2.5: unwatchable, frames slideshow.. 56% with QTv

mkMoSs said:
ps. I had the omnia for couple of weeks, the video performance of IntelXScale is absolutely amazing even on high resolution videos, also I don't think the 240x400 resolution of the omnia plays a big factor here, i suppose that even if the omnia had 480x800 resolution, the performance would be the same (maybe bit slower, but definitely more than 100%)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
and on what facts do you base this opinion? nobody know how fast it would play. the HD resolution has to display 4 times more pixel than the omnia

Related

Best DivX/XviD player?

Can anyone recommend a good DivX/XviD player, that supports VGA?
I've tried a few so far, and they've been...... crap to say the least!
Thanks
try TCPMP.
YES TCPMP IS THE BEST PLAYER I HAVE SUCCESSFULLY ENCODED A DIVX MOVIE
VIDEO 500 KBPS
SOUND 90 KBPS
AT 25 FPS
I USED THE NEW 2005 UPSCALER TO ACHIEVE THE EXTRA FRAME RATE LOOKS AND WORKS FLAWLESSLY AT 640*480
SIMPLY AMAZING
I can get video to run @ just over 2Mbps almost flawlessly !! the quality is stunning, infact from a pixels per inch Sq aspect it is much better than any HD TV on the market !!!
May I ask what your setup is? Such as ROM version, TCPMP version, TCPMP driver used, original DivX file and what framerates you managed to get?
I tried playing DivX (that I've downloaded from the web) on my Dopod 900. Using TCPMP 0.71. DivX are playing, but there are some jerky frames every 3 seconds or so. I'm already using the RAW FrameBuffer driver.
Any idea why I'm having such an issue?
cn the universal play full screen video encoded at 320*240?

Coreplayer/TCPMP Bliss...

That's right, blissful viewing on your VGA Athena. How?
Don't expect to run it in a full screen window, that's how. The CPU (powerful as it is) cannot handle native VGA 640x480 full screen encodes. Probably due to the many other things it has to do simultaneously.
For full screen 640x480, we need the ATI Imageon chip acceleration support, which as we all know is not yet available and ATI/AMD have not been forthcoming in helping CoreCodec in revealing the nature of their hard/software embedded implementation. Nuff said.
320x240 resolution with extremely high bitrates won't give you the sharpness a QVGA device can playing the same resolution.
On the Hermes with the ATI chip, they finally got a resolution/fix as there seemed to be some buffering issues regarding Audio (not entirely sure if these reports were accurate), so I've been playing with Audio codecs and lower bit-rates, to some benefit....but not enough.
The best 'in-between' results I have found till we get a fix for our Imageon hardware (if ever) is as follows.
P.S. I've tried playing with H264, X264, DivX 6.xxupwards, Mpeg 4 etc and various encoders from Virtual Dub and Guardian ... to DVDx and too many to mention to be honest (over 20-30 encoders over the last few years).
For movie clips or entire movies to look really good on a VGA screen IMHO and experience, you have to encode higher than QVGA but less than VGA unless like the Dell's you have a accelerator that actually work with TCPMP or Coreplayer. Our only works with the ATI software renderer, which is still miles better than any other option open to us.
So I now encode at:
Video: 480x320 at 850kbps
Audio: AAC @ 44100hz and 128kbps (if music video)
Audio:AAC @ 22050hz and 64kbps (for everything else)
I can only yield benchmark results of around 118% but
I've successfully played over 72500 frames with only 45 frames dropped!
Trust me..that is really good. 0 frames would be nice and very possible by encoding at 320x240 but the video looks to soft whereas at 480x320 it actually looks quite sharp indeed.
If you encode a genuine High def clip or movie at this resolution, the end result will look like the original HD clip or worst way, like a super-bit DVD.
1% frame 'droppage' = 725
45 frames dropped out of 72500 = less than 1/16th of 1% which = Bliss
You do the maths.
Depending on the source video, if it is full screen, so will the encoded video, but if it is in wide screen format, so will your encodes be.
For DVD conversion I got best results vs speed using (freeware) Handbrake v2.25 and Mpeg 4 decoder.
http://handbrake.m0k.org/
For individual files (VOB files), I use Any Video Converter (yeah, that's the name of the application). Same results.
For all other video files I love Smartmovie with the same setup as outlined above, except for the encoder..I use Xvid in Smartmovie.
I'll try to upload a sample video to rapidshare or something if anyone wants to view the quality and performance...but my time is somewhat limited at the moment.
P.S. The above mentioned apps are dummy proof and not too complex for noobs, so why not try it out and let us know how you get on.
Last but not least, in Coreplayer v1.1.1 or even TCPMP , if you suffer from lipsync problems, try adjusting
Menu/Tools/Preferences/Select Page/Advanced...scroll down and adjust the 'Manual A/V offset'. Mine is currently at:
-0.200 but depending on other videos I might have to adjust to -0.600...it works wonderfully (menu navigation in TCPMP might be slightly different to Coreplayer, but the option is still there).
Good luck and if you have better results than these, please post back and share your findings. Thanks
I found that the DiVx converter from DiVx works brilliantly if you set it to 'mobile'... I dont get any of these issues that everyone else seems to have - I use the official DiVx player on the Ameo and its great full screen.
adamelphick said:
I found that the DiVx converter from DiVx works brilliantly if you set it to 'mobile'... I dont get any of these issues that everyone else seems to have - I use the official DiVx player on the Ameo and its great full screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I had tried that some months ago and wasn't that impressed, but maybe they have improved it. What version are you using?
mackaby007 said:
That's right, blissful viewing on your VGA Athena. How?
Don't expect to run it in a full screen window, that's how. The CPU (powerful as it is) cannot handle native VGA 640x480 full screen encodes. Probably due to the many other things it has to do simultaneously.
For full screen 640x480, we need the ATI Imageon chip acceleration support, which as we all know is not yet available and ATI/AMD have not been forthcoming in helping CoreCodec in revealing the nature of their hard/software embedded implementation. Nuff said.
320x240 resolution with extremely high bitrates won't give you the sharpness a QVGA device can playing the same resolution.
On the Hermes with the ATI chip, they finally got a resolution/fix as there seemed to be some buffering issues regarding Audio (not entirely sure if these reports were accurate), so I've been playing with Audio codecs and lower bit-rates, to some benefit....but not enough.
The best 'in-between' results I have found till we get a fix for our Imageon hardware (if ever) is as follows.
P.S. I've tried playing with H264, X264, DivX 6.xxupwards, Mpeg 4 etc and various encoders from Virtual Dub and Guardian ... to DVDx and too many to mention to be honest (over 20-30 encoders over the last few years).
For movie clips or entire movies to look really good on a VGA screen IMHO and experience, you have to encode higher than QVGA but less than VGA unless like the Dell's you have a accelerator that actually work with TCPMP or Coreplayer. Our only works with the ATI software renderer, which is still miles better than any other option open to us.
So I now encode at:
Video: 480x320 at 850kbps
Audio: AAC @ 44100hz and 128kbps (if music video)
Audio:AAC @ 22050hz and 64kbps (for everything else)
I can only yield benchmark results of around 118% but
I've successfully played over 72500 frames with only 45 frames dropped!
Trust me..that is really good. 0 frames would be nice and very possible by encoding at 320x240 but the video looks to soft whereas at 480x320 it actually looks quite sharp indeed.
If you encode a genuine High def clip or movie at this resolution, the end result will look like the original HD clip or worst way, like a super-bit DVD.
1% frame 'droppage' = 725
45 frames dropped out of 72500 = less than 1/16th of 1% which = Bliss
You do the maths.
Depending on the source video, if it is full screen, so will the encoded video, but if it is in wide screen format, so will your encodes be.
For DVD conversion I got best results vs speed using (freeware) Handbrake v2.25 and Mpeg 4 decoder.
http://handbrake.m0k.org/
For individual files (VOB files), I use Any Video Converter (yeah, that's the name of the application). Same results.
For all other video files I love Smartmovie with the same setup as outlined above, except for the encoder..I use Xvid in Smartmovie.
I'll try to upload a sample video to rapidshare or something if anyone wants to view the quality and performance...but my time is somewhat limited at the moment.
P.S. The above mentioned apps are dummy proof and not too complex for noobs, so why not try it out and let us know how you get on.
Last but not least, in Coreplayer v1.1.1 or even TCPMP , if you suffer from lipsync problems, try adjusting
Menu/Tools/Preferences/Select Page/Advanced...scroll down and adjust the 'Manual A/V offset'. Mine is currently at:
-0.200 but depending on other videos I might have to adjust to -0.600...it works wonderfully (menu navigation in TCPMP might be slightly different to Coreplayer, but the option is still there).
Good luck and if you have better results than these, please post back and share your findings. Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey Mark,
A couple of things that might work...try running your video's with your advantage plugged in..
another thing...if you have 16:9 video convert it into 532x300
that consistently gives me good result...
and last but not the least...try splitting your video into smaller files...none larger than 600mb
The player on my Ameo is version 0.88 andthe DivX converter is version 6. Hope that helps.
It rips straight from DVD to my Ameo SD card too.... quite quick. Although I am having problems with no subtitles at the mo the rest is fine.
fallenczar said:
Hey Mark,
A couple of things that might work...try running your video's with your advantage plugged in..
another thing...if you have 16:9 video convert it into 532x300
that consistently gives me good result...
and last but not the least...try splitting your video into smaller files...none larger than 600mb
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks my friend. I'll try those suggestions and let you know.
adamelphick said:
The player on my Ameo is version 0.88 andthe DivX converter is version 6. Hope that helps.
It rips straight from DVD to my Ameo SD card too.... quite quick. Although I am having problems with no subtitles at the mo the rest is fine.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cheers for that mate, Just downloading it now, will try it soon.
I stand by my findings...
1) Divx Converter Using Divx 6.6
1) adamelphick's Divx Encoder
80% Benchmark Result
Resolution 592x448 (original was lower than default VGA 640x480 Portable Profile - so kept orig. Resolution of 592x448)
over 350 frames dropped
Only 20.xxx fps vs mine @ 23.79 out of 23.975 Original
2) I Used Any Video Converter with fallenczar's recommended resolution for widescreen movies for full screen viewing
Benchmark Result 131.28% Excellent.
Resolution 532x300 (slightly vertically stretched, but very viewable)
only 9 frames dropped out of 3842! Excellent!
Superb fps playback of 23.920 out of 23.976
3)I Used Any Video Converter xvid codec!
125.11% Benchmark Result
Resolution 480x320
only 4 frames dropped out of 5690!
Superb fps playback of 23.959 out of 23.976
4)I Used Any Video Converter Mpeg4 codec. Visually not quite as good as xvid, but still very good.
123.06% Benchmark Result but the audio sounded extremely slowed down! ?!??!?
Resolution 480x320
only 5 frames dropped out of 5938!
Superb fps playback of 24.979 out of 25.000 Mpeg4 codec would not allow me to keep NTSC format & I was forced to use 25fps.
Sorry if all that info above is a bit confusing, so here's the bottom line.
I've tested the Divx Encoder and Divx Mobile Player.....sorry, but it's still seriously lacking compared to Coreplayer or TCPMP. Handheld profile encodes at low resolution unfit for VGA device if you're a quality freak.
Portable Profile seriously looks good. No doubt about it and so it should as its native resolution for encoding is VGA (640x480), but then you hit the performance issues related to non accelerated Vids on VGA devices.
Verdict? No good for Athena but probably excellent for quick encodes using QVGA devices. The Player is also only capable of handling AVI vids and the encoding specs had better match its Players ability else it won't play the file.
For Fallenczar's recommended Resolution for widescreen vids, I can only say..Nice & Thanks for the tip.
If you don't mind the original Video/movie being slightly elongated, you won't notice a performance hit at all. You'll even get slightly Benchmark results than by using my method. But the benchmark results is not the sum of its parts and should only be used as an indicator, not a 'actual playback' performance gauge.
Verdict? Great tip! I'm definitely keeping this in mind for future encodes of wide screen movies & Vids. Thanks again.
Lastly I used an application called 'Any Video Converter', but in all honesty, there are many others that can do the job as well and better if you don't mind the complexity of some of the more advanced apps. But as a quick solution, you'll be hard pushed to beat this for casual and quick video files conversion. For DVD encoding I'd definitely stick with Handbrake...it's bloody fast too and uses MSDOS and no fancy GUI for viewing the video as it encodes, hence it encodes a 90 minute movie in a third of the time of the entire movie. i.e. 90 min video encoded in just under 30mins.
As the results show in no 3 & 4, even though my benchmark results are slightly lower than with fallenczars resolution for widescreen format vids, it's hard to beat how little frames are dropped whilst retaing a visually HQ video/movie.
Verdict? I absolutely stand by my findings until someone finds a way of encoding videos at native VGA at HQ with virtually no hit on performance.
I want HQ with great performance. Don't get me wrong people, we can easily achieve benchmarks in excess of 500 - 600kbps but the quality of sound and video isn't worthy of such high end PPC's. We paid a lot of dough for these devices and I'll be damned if I can't get slick HQ video on the Athena. I refuse to get a dell or Archos or whatever just to accelerate video and games....if that was my priority I'd buy a PSP and a get myself another compact HTC Hermes.
Just wait till we get some support for our Imageon devices. Let the good times roll.
P.S. Divx Encoder can't encode whatever you throw at it, mostly AVI files. Any Video Converter and quite a few others can handle most formats including high def files.
mackaby007 said:
1) Divx Converter Using Divx 6.6
1) adamelphick's Divx Encoder
80% Benchmark Result
Resolution 592x448 (original was lower than default VGA 640x480 Portable Profile - so kept orig. Resolution of 592x448)
over 350 frames dropped
Only 20.xxx fps vs mine @ 23.79 out of 23.975 Original
2) I Used Any Video Converter with fallenczar's recommended resolution for widescreen movies for full screen viewing
Benchmark Result 131.28% Excellent.
Resolution 532x300 (slightly vertically stretched, but very viewable)
only 9 frames dropped out of 3842! Excellent!
Superb fps playback of 23.920 out of 23.976
3)I Used Any Video Converter xvid codec!
125.11% Benchmark Result
Resolution 480x320
only 4 frames dropped out of 5690!
Superb fps playback of 23.959 out of 23.976
4)I Used Any Video Converter Mpeg4 codec. Visually not quite as good as xvid, but still very good.
123.06% Benchmark Result but the audio sounded extremely slowed down! ?!??!?
Resolution 480x320
only 5 frames dropped out of 5938!
Superb fps playback of 24.979 out of 25.000 Mpeg4 codec would not allow me to keep NTSC format & I was forced to use 25fps.
Sorry if all that info above is a bit confusing, so here's the bottom line.
I've tested the Divx Encoder and Divx Mobile Player.....sorry, but it's still seriously lacking compared to Coreplayer or TCPMP. Handheld profile encodes at low resolution unfit for VGA device if you're a quality freak.
Portable Profile seriously looks good. No doubt about it and so it should as its native resolution for encoding is VGA (640x480), but then you hit the performance issues related to non accelerated Vids on VGA devices.
Verdict? No good for Athena but probably excellent for quick encodes using QVGA devices. The Player is also only capable of handling AVI vids and the encoding specs had better match its Players ability else it won't play the file.
For Fallenczar's recommended Resolution for widescreen vids, I can only say..Nice & Thanks for the tip.
If you don't mind the original Video/movie being slightly elongated, you won't notice a performance hit at all. You'll even get slightly Benchmark results than by using my method. But the benchmark results is not the sum of its parts and should only be used as an indicator, not a 'actual playback' performance gauge.
Verdict? Great tip! I'm definitely keeping this in mind for future encodes of wide screen movies & Vids. Thanks again.
Lastly I used an application called 'Any Video Converter', but in all honesty, there are many others that can do the job as well and better if you don't mind the complexity of some of the more advanced apps. But as a quick solution, you'll be hard pushed to beat this for casual and quick video files conversion. For DVD encoding I'd definitely stick with Handbrake...it's bloody fast too and uses MSDOS and no fancy GUI for viewing the video as it encodes, hence it encodes a 90 minute movie in a third of the time of the entire movie. i.e. 90 min video encoded in just under 30mins.
As the results show in no 3 & 4, even though my benchmark results are slightly lower than with fallenczars resolution for widescreen format vids, it's hard to beat how little frames are dropped whilst retaing a visually HQ video/movie.
Verdict? I absolutely stand by my findings until someone finds a way of encoding videos at native VGA at HQ with virtually no hit on performance.
I want HQ with great performance. Don't get me wrong people, we can easily achieve benchmarks in excess of 500 - 600kbps but the quality of sound and video isn't worthy of such high end PPC's. We paid a lot of dough for these devices and I'll be damned if I can't get slick HQ video on the Athena. I refuse to get a dell or Archos or whatever just to accelerate video and games....if that was my priority I'd buy a PSP and a get myself another compact HTC Hermes.
Just wait till we get some support for our Imageon devices. Let the good times roll.
P.S. Divx Encoder can't encode whatever you throw at it, mostly AVI files. Any Video Converter and quite a few others can handle most formats including high def files.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey Mark!
Since you seem to have loads of free time why don't you try converting your video to .mov, try it with a small 20-40 mb movie clip first..
if my memory serves me right then you should be able to get better results with it...though converion to mov if time consuming
fallenczar said:
Hey Mark!
Since you seem to have loads of free time why don't you try converting your video to .mov, try it with a small 20-40 mb movie clip first..
if my memory serves me right then you should be able to get better results with it...though converion to mov if time consuming
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Blimey, I haven't used that format for years, except for downloads from Apple.com...thanks for the tip. I'll look into it once I get some more free time.
Test Clip for download...
Just in case you can't be bothered or have the time to test these settings, just download this test video and see what you think...it's about 8.5 MB in size:
DownloadLink: http://rapidshare.com/files/50811286/10000_BC_HD_xvid.avi
Will the Advantage play a 640x480 .wmv in Windows Media Player?
mackaby007 said:
That's right, blissful viewing on your VGA Athena. How?
Don't expect to run it in a full screen window, that's how. The CPU (powerful as it is) cannot handle native VGA 640x480 full screen encodes. Probably due to the many other things it has to do simultaneously.
For full screen 640x480, we need the ATI Imageon chip acceleration support, which as we all know is not yet available and ATI/AMD have not been forthcoming in helping CoreCodec in revealing the nature of their hard/software embedded implementation. Nuff said.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I discovered that TCPMP can not play full screen. As I have installed SmartMovie which can play full screen movie beautifully, therefore I do not bother to try run TCPMP to play movies, just use TCPMP to play music with enlarged lyrics appearing at the same time along with the pace of music. That is a joy forever.
juiceppc said:
Will the Advantage play a 640x480 .wmv in Windows Media Player?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Possibly, if the encoding specs match that of the ones outlined in the Athena Handbook, but I believe you will get better performance from using MP4 under WMP as it will use the Imageon Hardware decoder that Coreplayer cannot use.
However from my experience, WMP is far too restrictive, hence TCPMP/Coreplayer is the best on the market. .wmv is pretty crap for PPC playback IMHO compared other formats. .wmv is fine on Full blown PC though.
panvita said:
I discovered that TCPMP can not play full screen. As I have installed SmartMovie which can play full screen movie beautifully, therefore I do not bother to try run TCPMP to play movies, just use TCPMP to play music with enlarged lyrics appearing at the same time along with the pace of music. That is a joy forever.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No disrespect panvita, but you obviously have no idea what I've been talking about. Take any of those movies that you say is full screen in Smart Movie and run some test with it,(I use the latest version) and the Smartmovie converter cannot even encode at full VGA 640x480 by default and the PPC SmartMovie player doesn't like most videos encoded by other encoders (its limited).
What I'm trying to say is SmartMovie Player on the PPC is inferior by far to TCPMP and Coreplayer. Check the options in SmartMovie player to show framerate whilst a movie is playing and check the actual resolution too. I think you'll find that it is more often than not, Not real VGA res and when it is, your frame-rate will be terribly slow.
Then run the same movie file in TCPMP or Coreplayer and check your property settings after playing your movie file and you'll see again the frame rate achieved and how many frames were dropped.
Don't mean to sound arrogant or like a Mr Know-it-all, but it is pretty much common knowledge that Coreplayer and TCPMP is far superior to all other PPC based Video players on the market to date, even though 'It' still has its shortcomings.
mackaby007 said:
Possibly, if the encoding specs match that of the ones outlined in the Athena Handbook, but I believe you will get better performance from using MP4 under WMP as it will use the Imageon Hardware decoder that Coreplayer cannot use.
However from my experience, WMP is far too restrictive, hence TCPMP/Coreplayer is the best on the market. .wmv is pretty crap for PPC playback IMHO compared other formats. .wmv is fine on Full blown PC though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Core is good but if my main objective is to watch my movies(of which all are .wmv) full screen with no hiccups then why not just use WMP to do that. I like .wmv for it's simplicity. But that's just me.
juiceppc said:
Core is good but if my main objective is to watch my movies(of which all are .wmv) full screen with no hiccups then why not just use WMP to do that. I like .wmv for it's simplicity. But that's just me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can't argue with that at all. Coreplayer is crap for WMV but that is exactly the format WMP likes to play.
TCPMP on x7501
I am using the TCPMP player on my new Advantage x7501 & it works perfectly!
I advise to use DirectDraw as an output! it's really better than that sucker ATI IMAGEON! Take a look at the configs and Benchmarks! (Configs in both benmarks are the same)
-Video
Video Output: DirectDraw
Video Quality: High
Smooth zoom: ON
Dither: • (on)
Accleration: ◘ (off)
-Buffering
Turned on to Micro Drive mode
Buffer Size: 32000kb
Start at: 2944
-Benchmark Using DirectDraw(File Size: 138 mb)
Average Speed: 183,86 % (!)
Video Frames: 8821
Audio Samples: 15598708
Amount of Data: 14443 KB
Codec: DivX
*PLZ PAY ATTENTION TO ANOTHER BENCHMARK USING ATI IMAGEON AS VIDEO OUTPUT*
-Benchmark Using ATI IMAGEON(File Size: 138 mb)
Average Speed: 58,71%
Video Frames: 8776
Audio Samples: 15488972
Amount of Data: 14354 KB
HOW IS IT MARK????
Try different settings...somethings wrong with yours.
hirad_sabaghian said:
I advise to use DirectDraw as an output! it's really better than that sucker ATI IMAGEON! Take a look at the configs and Benchmarks! (Configs in both benmarks are the same)
-Video
Video Output: DirectDraw
Video Quality: High
Smooth zoom: ON
Dither: • (on)
Accleration: ◘ (off)
-Buffering
Turned on to Micro Drive mode
Buffer Size: 32000kb
Start at: 2944
-Benchmark Using DirectDraw(File Size: 138 mb)
Average Speed: 183,86 % (!)
Video Frames: 8821
Audio Samples: 15598708
Amount of Data: 14443 KB
Codec: DivX
*PLZ PAY ATTENTION TO ANOTHER BENCHMARK USING ATI IMAGEON AS VIDEO OUTPUT*
-Benchmark Using ATI IMAGEON(File Size: 138 mb)
Average Speed: 58,71%
Video Frames: 8776
Audio Samples: 15488972
Amount of Data: 14354 KB
HOW IS IT MARK????
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ooh do I detect a tone of anger or possibly sarcasm in that last statement/question? hehe
OK, the reason is probably that when you use Coreplayer or TCPMP, you have the Imageon Decoder activated...No good, NOT fixed to work with Coreplayer or TCPMP as yet.
Coreplayer: Under your video settings, ensure you have the following settings checked or enabled:
Video Output: ATI IMAGEON
Video quality: High
Smooth Zoom: On
Dither: Ticked
Acceleration: UNticked (else you'll be using the hardware decoder - no good)
Under Preferences select Direct Draw options page and select the following:
Overlay with colorkey - Ticked
Use blitting instead of overlay - Blank
Use device stretching for blitting - Blank
Overlay format - YV12
There you have it. Last but not least, don't encode videos much beyond 480x320 otherwise the Athena cannot handle it.
Try that my friend.
Same set-up for TCPMP:

Playing 1080p H.264

As a proud owner of both a HD2 and a GoPro Hero HD helmet cam, I was wondering whether there's a WM video player that can handle 1080p H.264 encoded mp4 files.
I'm not asking for fluid playback, obviously, just a stuttering preview of picture quality while I'm away from a real computer.
Coreplayer has a 1008p limit hardcoded into it, from what I understand, so that's not an option. TCPMP didn't work either when I tried.
Any thoughts?
Forget it straight away. Even a 1.2GHz core 2 duo (which is already easily 10 times more powerful, if any comparison is possible) can't even play 1080p h264 at half speed...
The HD2 can barely play DVD res MPEG2.
1080 on HD2? useless... nonsense
as kilrah said... forget it
but one point is not true u can run 1080p X264 movies smooth on a pc with 1.2Ghz Dual Core.. now comes the point! IF... u have a graficcard that supports VDPAU. so even a loosy GeForce 9400 can do that.
XBMC installing as OS. turn VPDAU on.. e voila. smooth HD movies.
on my mom's AsRock ION330 (Atom CPU) with ION GPU (Equal to GeForce 9400M). 1080p movie with x264 in MKV container run's smooth.
and CPU usage is at 12-40% depends on.
have fun
Have you try the "Remote Desktop Mobile" feature....? Which is not "directly" playing on HD2...
I'm not sure if you fully read my original question:
I don't want smooth playback, I know I can't have that,
but simply a way to view stills out of a large h.264 file.
I don't care if rendering one frame takes several seconds.
Have you try the "Remote Desktop Mobile" feature....? Which is not "directly" playing on HD2...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since the video files are on my phone, I don't see how Remote
Desktop Mobile is going to help me. Or did I misunderstand
what you are saying?
Yes we did fully read... But do you really think a developer would spend time making a WM program to open and decode a format that no existing device could play?
It's actually something the WM port of vlc could do, if it hadn't been discontinued in 2006 before it could play h264... It had the same capabilities as on other platforms.
@jisin: Of course if you cheat with hardware acceleration But my example was meant to put things on the same level, as the HD2 has none.
Nobody is talking about a seperate program - at least I wasn't. I would think
any player capable of decoding h.264 should handle 1080p, at least in theory.
For example, I don't understand why CorePlayer has a limit at such an arbitrary
number built into it, otherwise it would probably work just fine for my purposes.
TCPMP is witchcraft, as far as I'm concerned, so I don't readily know why it
won't play HD videos.
AFAIK the profiles used to encode HD h.264 are different from the simple ones used for SD videos, and thus need explicit support. The difference between AVC and AVCHD.
For example in VLC, support for HD h.264 has only come last year, long after SD one. Before that, trying to read one would just give you a couple of crippled frames and crash the player.
Just to clarify, AVC and H.264 are the same, or rather AVC is part of H.264.
AVCHD is an extension of H.264/AVC. That's what you meant, right?
In any case, my videos are AVC and not AVCHD encoded.
I really don't see how decoding a higher definition variant of a video codec can
be any different from standard definition, other than the stress on the hardware
of course.
If not coreplayer, then I think nothing.
bayowar said:
As a proud owner of both a HD2 and a GoPro Hero HD helmet cam, I was wondering whether there's a WM video player that can handle 1080p H.264 encoded mp4 files.
I'm not asking for fluid playback, obviously, just a stuttering preview of picture quality while I'm away from a real computer.
Coreplayer has a 1008p limit hardcoded into it, from what I understand, so that's not an option. TCPMP didn't work either when I tried.
Any thoughts?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Coreplayer's limit is 1008 horizontal pixels, I think, so it can't even play 720p, let alone anything higher.
I have a 720p video clip on my phone which will play in HTCAlbum or Pocket Media Player. It's jerky as hell and completely unwatchable, but it does play. You might find a 1080p clip would play in it too, I don't know. But it wouldn't give you any kind of meaningful preview.
I dont understand why you would want to try and view the image quality of a 1080p file on a 800 x 480 screen? It's never going to look any better than a similarly encoded 480p file. I would agree that it's handier to not have to re-encode files, but most 1080p files are downloaded as mkv anyway, which means that you would need to reencode into MP4. You may aswell reduce the resolution to 800 x 480 and save loads of memory while your at it.
Ad-james said:
which means that you would need to reencode into MP4. You may aswell reduce the resolution to 800 x 480 and save loads of memory while your at it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You didn't get the point. He has a camcorder that doesn't have a screen. He wants to put its memory card in the HD2 and have a glimpse of what he just shot could have been like.
But yes, it would only allow checking framing if it took several seconds to load each frame, not much more...
WMP plays the sound, not the video, HTC Album came up with an error I think.
And yes, kilrah, that's exactly it. Should have mentioned that the camcorder
doesn't have a screen.
Shasarak said:
Coreplayer's limit is 1008 horizontal pixels, I think, so it can't even play 720p, let alone anything higher.
I have a 720p video clip on my phone which will play in HTCAlbum or Pocket Media Player. It's jerky as hell and completely unwatchable, but it does play. You might find a 1080p clip would play in it too, I don't know. But it wouldn't give you any kind of meaningful preview.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i think the main problem is the lake of drivers in windows mobile 6 series as hd2 processor is mentiond to support 720p videos at 30 frame /sec
kilrah said:
Forget it straight away. Even a 1.2GHz core 2 duo (which is already easily 10 times more powerful, if any comparison is possible) can't even play 1080p h264 at half speed...
The HD2 can barely play DVD res MPEG2.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i think it depends on the codec and bitrate... i can run 1080p h.264 fine on my 1ghz athlon using coreavc
Is there any codec which make possible to view h.264 stream in windows media player?
I can get stream from my internet aceess box which are very smooth with CorePlayer but I would like to know if there is any codec which make it possible with the native multimedia player!
Thanks
i downloade ttansformers hd (1080p) from youtube and coreplayer played that completely O.K. but i couldn't got it to play almost most .mp4 ones. it plays some .mp4 but doesn't many. also plays raw 640x480 videos from my digital camera not smooth but acceptable.
Camcorder that doesnt have a screen???
720p dont play in hd2 forget about 1080, it cant handle the resolution or the bitrates.
I don't know why Microsoft/HTC didnt done things right.
I have HD2 dual boot with Android.
where WM unable to play 720P but Android on same HD2 play 1080 smooth and crisp with out any frame delay/skip.
I think Microsoft has to optimize there graphics driver to come at par with Android.
Thanks
Pawan

[Q] Xoom HD playback capability

There are a lot of MP4 video clips that I cannot get to play on Xoom smoothly but they play back really well on my HTC Desire.
On Xoom the video is laggy while the audio is audible. This happened to both 720p and 480p videos. I used both the default player and Moboplayer to ensure I am using the hardware acceleration.
Strangely on my Xoom the Moboplayer can soft-decode 480p MP4 with ffmpeg and playback without any problem. 720 is smoother but the decoding was too slow which resulted in A-V async.
Again, all those clips play really well on my HTC Desire. Tegra 2 should be able to handle them.
Anyone knows anything?
Please search the forum before asking questions. This has been asnswered.
The problem you're having is to do with the clips using high profile encoding.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=968640&highlight=video
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=968308&highlight=video
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=972812&highlight=video
There's lots more. All I can say is, learn to love Handbrake and be prepared to have your computer running all night every night if you ever want to watch HD movies on this thing.
I dont agree; I have transcoded 2 blue rays, hellboy and start trek 2009 in about an hour each, using my imac and handbreak
Oh, and download Vitalplayer from the market for the best hd video playback..
wase4711 said:
I dont agree; I have transcoded 2 blue rays, hellboy and start trek 2009 in about an hour each, using my imac and handbreak
Oh, and download Vitalplayer from the market for the best hd video playback..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, well, I don't agree.
I converted 2 720p mkv 90 minute movies and a 40 minute 720p mkv TV show last night and it took 6 hours. This was done on an Intel Core 2 duo P750 2.26GHz
Not everyone has the same hardware. I suppose I could run out and buy an i5 or i7 for the sole purpose of encoding video for the XOOM.
Maybe Motorola can partner with a PC company. How about 20% off a new laptop when you buy a XOOM that way you will be able to take advantage of its HD video capability in 2 hours instead of six.
Digital Man said:
Yeah, well, I don't agree.
I converted 2 720p mkv 90 minute movies and a 40 minute 720p mkv TV show last night and it took 6 hours. This was done on an Intel Core 2 duo P750 2.26GHz
Not everyone has the same hardware. I suppose I could run out and buy an i5 or i7 for the sole purpose of encoding video for the XOOM.
Maybe Motorola can partner with a PC company. How about 20% off a new laptop when you buy a XOOM that way you will be able to take advantage of its HD video capability in 2 hours instead of six.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It all depends on your settings, and keep in mind that the imac is going to have similar hardware to your machine. The recommendation is to set max width to 1280, set B Frames to 0, turn off CABAC, 8x8 Transform, and Weighted P frames. If you do that, you'll find fairly consistent encoding times even with older hardware. Also, keep in mind that encoding is entirely processor bound and will do better the more cores you can throw at it.
mcnutty said:
It all depends on your settings, and keep in mind that the imac is going to have similar hardware to your machine. The recommendation is to set max width to 1280, set B Frames to 0, turn off CABAC, 8x8 Transform, and Weighted P frames. If you do that, you'll find fairly consistent encoding times even with older hardware. Also, keep in mind that encoding is entirely processor bound and will do better the more cores you can throw at it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Been there done that. There are no shortcuts. Good quality takes time or more cores. Or harness the GPU ie CUDA but that causes horrendous macroblocking in bright scenes.
No matter how you sugar coat it, re-encoding video is a time consuming pain in the ass for most people.
I also seem to remember there are multiple versions of the imac, with variable hardware specs, from dual core up to quad core 3.6GHz - so your claim of similar hardware seems unlikely.
..........
e.mote said:
>I converted 2 720p mkv 90 minute movies and a 40 minute 720p mkv TV show last night and it took 6 hours.
Suggest using 800 max width for substantially faster encode speed and smaller size. Quality diff is negligible on a 10".
If using 2-pass, switch to 1-pass for both faster encode time AND better quality.
Unfortunately, HB doesn't provide x264's speed presets. You can gain additional speed (at cost of some nominal size increase) with the faster presets. Hmm, I should update my HB script to allow "downloadables" as input.
>The recommendation is to set max width to 1280, set B Frames to 0, turn off CABAC, 8x8 Transform, and Weighted P frames. If you do that, you'll find fairly consistent encoding times even with older hardware.
Encoding to baseline profile (what the above basically means) gains speed by disabling more advanced "compression" features. The trade-off is significant size increase, about +30% vs high profile.
Using a lower res allows more efficient settings. At 800 width, you can use main profile. Speed diff between main & baseline is insignificant. Speed gain for the lower res is substantial.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I appreciate that your trying to help, but those are the settings that I have been using already: 1280, set B Frames to 0, turn off CABAC, turn off 8x8 Transform, and turn off Weighted P frames....
and it is still taking well over 3 hours to re-encode a 1:30 movie.
I understand that lowering the resolution will decrease the encoding time, but I consider that a last resort compromise. In fact I would consider that basically a failure of the XOOM.
I have considered buying an i5 or i7, but I feel stupid buying a new laptop for the sole purpose of encoding for the XOOM, when I could just pick up my Galaxy Tab and just play these videos immediately. No encoding. Just copy them over and play.
I am quite sure those videos are not high profile. Their bitrates were around 2M, way below 20M.
And, as I said, I can even do soft-decode to play the 480ps which does not play well with hard-decoding.
480ps, man. 480ps. Stunning.
e.mote said:
Last edited by e.mote; Today at 10:19 PM. Reason: reply removed, as recipient can't read
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your sarcasm needs work. It lacks creativity. And removing the original post is just immature.
Digital Man said:
Your sarcasm needs work. It lacks creativity. And removing the original post is just immature.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't really care about the encoding stage, I have an i7-950 which encodes a blu-ray in handbreak in well under an hour.
What I'd like to know, is are the codecs really this lacking, and will we see a solution?
I, like the OP have a HTC Desire and I could be devastated to find the XOOM can't handle the videos my Desire can.
Does it natively support mkv? I like to watch TV episodes in mkv like the 86MB Big Bang Theory episodes.
All my non-TV stuff I rip myself so I'm not concerned. Other than the DRM wmv I buy. Which play back fine on my galaxy tab.
alias_neo said:
I don't really care about the encoding stage, I have an i7-950 which encodes a blu-ray in handbreak in well under an hour.
What I'd like to know, is are the codecs really this lacking, and will we see a solution?
I, like the OP have a HTC Desire and I could be devastated to find the XOOM can't handle the videos my Desire can.
Does it natively support mkv? I like to watch TV episodes in mkv like the 86MB Big Bang Theory episodes.
All my non-TV stuff I rip myself so I'm not concerned. Other than the DRM wmv I buy. Which play back fine on my galaxy tab.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most TV shows that are 720p mkv, and are privately enoded, and downloaded, average about 1.2 GB and will and not play. Support for MKV as a container isn't a problem, its the profile of the h264 video in the container that is the problem.
If the Video that you like to watch is only 86MB, that doesn't sound like high profile 720p. So it might play, only way to know is to try or download mediaInfo and check its properties.
Good to hear that the i7 that you have can do a blu-ray in an hour. That sounds like what I should do eventually. Wonder if an i5 will do as well. I've heard that the i7, though it has 4 physical cores, is seen as 8 due to multithreading, wheras the i5 is limited to 4.
I watched two re-encoded episodes of fringe last night, and the Video on the XOOM is really amazing. It actually is almost worth the wait.
Digital Man said:
Most TV shows that are 720p mkv, and are privately enoded, and downloaded, average about 1.2 GB and will and not play. Support for MKV as a container isn't a problem, its the profile of the h264 video in the container that is the problem.
If the Video that you like to watch is only 86MB, that doesn't sound like high profile 720p. So it might play, only way to know is to try or download mediaInfo and check its properties.
Good to hear that the i7 that you have can do a blu-ray in an hour. That sounds like what I should do eventually. Wonder if an i5 will do as well. I've heard that the i7, though it has 4 physical cores, is seen as 8 due to multithreading, wheras the i5 is limited to 4.
I watched two re-encoded episodes of fringe last night, and the Video on the XOOM is really amazing. It actually is almost worth the wait.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's correct, it's an 8 threaded processor, running on an Asus ROG III Gene.
As for the videos I'm watching:
Video
ID/String : 1
Format : AVC
Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec
Format_Profile : [email protected]
Format_Settings_CABAC/String : Yes
Format_Settings_RefFrames/String : 4 frames
Format_Settings_GOP : M=4, N=48
CodecID : V_MPEG4/ISO/AVC
Duration/String : 20mn 24s
BitRate/String : 465 Kbps
Width/String : 624 pixels
Height/String : 352 pixels
DisplayAspectRatio/String : 16:9
FrameRate/String : 23.976 fps
Standard : NTSC
ColorSpace : YUV
ChromaSubsampling : 4:2:0
BitDepth/String : 8 bits
ScanType/String : Progressive
Bits-(Pixel*Frame) : 0.088
StreamSize/String : 67.8 MiB (77%)
They're not 720, but they're nice enough on my Galaxy Tab. They are High Profile @ L4.0 though which I'v heard a lot of bad-mouthing about on the forum lately. I'm no expert on media codecs and frankly couldn't care as long as theyre watchable. I'd love to know I could rip my Blu-Rays at 720p and watch them on the XOOM comfortably though.
What you are posting is interesting. Its high profile, but low bit rate. Some of the early claims for the Tegra 2, which is used in the XOOM, said it actually could play high profile but only at a low bit rate, but I haven't heard it confirmed. I suspect this video will not play, but later on I will try encoding a video in a simliar manner to yours and see what happens.
Digital Man said:
What you are posting is interesting. Its high profile, but low bit rate. Some of the early claims for the Tegra 2, which is used in the XOOM, said it actually could play high profile but only at a low bit rate, but I haven't heard it confirmed. I suspect this video will not play, but later on I will try encoding a video in a simliar manner to yours and see what happens.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great, if you like I can dropbox the file I have and PM you the link for testing. These files playback flawlessly using the Galaxy Tab with every single player software I have tried, whether hardware or software decoding. FOr them not to play on the XOOM would be a killer.
Got your file. Sorry, it plays but with no sound. I tried RockPlayer and Moboplayer and the System Player and all play the same - silent.
The Video is actually pretty good. Smooth and very acceptable. So I guess it can technically play high profile, very low bitrate files - just not with sound. Have to Play around some more and see if I can learn anything else that might get this to play correctly or figure out what the problem is.
Edit: Actually, this is a Divx encoded file, not h264, so that is why it plays. So I am a little surprised about the lack of audio. And its only mp3 audio!!! This is really amazing. I can't believe the XOOM isn't playing this correctly. Has to be a way.
Update: Ok, success! It does play correctly in Rockplayer in software decoding mode. With sound. So it looks like you will have no problem.
Digital Man said:
Got your file. Sorry, it plays but with no sound. I tried RockPlayer and Moboplayer and the System Player and all play the same - silent.
The Video is actually pretty good. Smooth and very acceptable. So I guess it can technically play high profile, very low bitrate files - just not with sound. Have to Play around some more and see if I can learn anything else that might get this to play correctly or figure out what the problem is.
Edit: Actually, this is a Divx encoded file, not h264, so that is why it plays. So I am a little surprised about the lack of audio. And its only mp3 audio!!! This is really amazing. I can't believe the XOOM isn't playing this correctly. Has to be a way.
Update: Ok, success! It does play correctly in Rockplayer in software decoding mode. With sound. So it looks like you will have no problem.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting, if somewhat concerning that it won't play this in the standard players or with hard-decoding even though it uses mp3 audio.
How about VPlayer Advanced? I find this plays most of my videos nicely on the Tab.
Probably just lack of Divx support in hardware. Thats not a big deal, even a single core CPU of lower power can easily decode low res, low bitrate Divx. I don't consider that a flaw at all. Software decoding video like this with the XOOM's dual core A9's is trivial. Results are fine. Just need an app like RockPlayer that does it. XVID files will probably not work in hardware either.
From Motorolas website:
PLAYABLE FORMATS
AAC, H.263, H.264, MP3, MPEG-4, ACC+ Enhanced, OGG, MIDI, AMR NB, AAC+
Digital Man said:
Probably just lack of Divx support in hardware. Thats not a big deal, even a single core CPU of lower power can easily decode low res, low bitrate Divx. I don't consider that a flaw at all. Software decoding video like this with the XOOM's dual core A9's is trivial. Results are fine. Just need an app like RockPlayer that does it. XVID files will probably not work in hardware either.
From Motorolas website:
PLAYABLE FORMATS
AAC, H.263, H.264, MP3, MPEG-4, ACC+ Enhanced, OGG, MIDI, AMR NB, AAC+
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeh that's pretty fair I guess. How do you think it would manage if converted to MP4? I can do it on my 950 when I get home and send you it if you like? I'd not mind converting the whole lot if it played in the stock player.

[Q] CM7/Gingerbread Video Playback

Hi everybody. I am running Phiremod 6.2. What I really want is to be able to drop a standard definition video on the sd card, such as a divx or xvid file on the and have it play back smoothly on the nook. It seems that hardware video decryption doesn't work and that is the reason we are stuck using software decryption. What is the best video player? Even with the best video player, do you still need to re-encode the videos to lower resolution for proper playback? What format do you re-encode video to? Do we expect hardware video decryption to be accomplished by the amazing xda hackers?
Thanks!
I use Mobo player for playback. Have encoded several standard def videos from a TV series using Handbrake with the nookcolor preferences created by someone else on this forum, in H.264 format. They look and sound very good this way, except it does not fill the screen which is expected as it is standard def. Have not tried any HD content yet.
waldes said:
Hi everybody. I am running Phiremod 6.2. What I really want is to be able to drop a standard definition video on the sd card, such as a divx or xvid file on the and have it play back smoothly on the nook. It seems that hardware video decryption doesn't work and that is the reason we are stuck using software decryption. What is the best video player? Even with the best video player, do you still need to re-encode the videos to lower resolution for proper playback? What format do you re-encode video to? Do we expect hardware video decryption to be accomplished by the amazing xda hackers?
Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Isn't Phiremod just a modded CM7? CM7 suppports hardware decoding, for up to 480p files (max 854x480). Anything beyond that will be soft decoded. Anything that isn't expressly supported by Nook's "supported" video/audio formats are, afaik, also software decoded (the base player will not do this, need something like vitalplayer or rockplayer, etc.)
- If a video is just not a supported format but is 480p and under, it runs very smoothly for me in CM7 as software decoded -- you wouldn't be able to tell that it wasn't hardware accelerated.
- If a video is higher than 480p (720p, etc) or the bitrate is too high, even if it is the supported format, it will also attempt to be software decoded. My experience with this is that it's poor quality (stutters, audio desync a lot of times, etc.)
MP4 container, H.264 baseline codec for video conversion. Anamorphic loose, 854x480. AAC / MP3 (I forget what else is supported) codecs for audio, choose 44.1 khz sampling rate instead of 48khz to avoid problems. Bitrate for video and audio are up to you, but I wouldn't use the lossless setting for H.264 because you'll have issues with it playing (and will be an enormous file). You also really don't need to use it for a 7" screen. For me, video bitrate of 800 kbps (avg) is low but acceptable, 1100 for medium, 1500 is (non-HD) dvd quality. 128-160 kbps audio, your choice.
There's a lot of players out on the market, many free. I like Vital Player Neon a lot but the paid app version failed on me because of their self-copy protection. I use Moboplayer and also installed the Neon codec from the dev's website, it improved my performance noticeably on some more system-intensive videos.
As always, YMMV.
LBN1 said:
I use Mobo player for playback. Have encoded several standard def videos from a TV series using Handbrake with the nookcolor preferences created by someone else on this forum, in H.264 format. They look and sound very good this way, except it does not fill the screen which is expected as it is standard def. Have not tried any HD content yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is the <-> (vs >-<, etc options) not working for you to expand it to full screen? I have not had any issues getting 480p content to edge-to-edge (provided it's 16:9 aspect ratio, which many shows and movies are. While Nook's resolution isn't true 16:9 it's close enough that you won't notice any real edge). The only videos that display with bars for me are the wider aspect ratio ones.
(On stock rooted firmware, with 1.1Ghz OC)
I also use handbrake... encoding to 1024x576 xvid seems to do the trick with mobo player. (Altough so far I tried only one video file.)
edit: tried an other one, plays almost perfectly in sync. It is about 1 frame out-of-sync that can only be noticed with hard, fast sounds like slapping.
Encoding to h264 with the said resolution results in video being played back slower and of course audio being out of sync.
480p h264 baseline / aac mp4 files can be hardware decoded and play nice, but I'm all for the bigger resolution.
angomy said:
Is the <-> (vs >-<, etc options) not working for you to expand it to full screen? I have not had any issues getting 480p content to edge-to-edge (provided it's 16:9 aspect ratio, which many shows and movies are. While Nook's resolution isn't true 16:9 it's close enough that you won't notice any real edge). The only videos that display with bars for me are the wider aspect ratio ones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The ones I did were not in 16:9 aspect ratio, they were 4:3 which is why I believe I could not expand them to full screen. I haven't yet tried a 16:9 video like a movie but will soon.
in addition to the formats/resoluton mentioned try using Vital Player Neon - works with a lot of formats - plays really smooth on my NC (CM7 7.02+1.3GHzOC)
Thanks a bunch!

Categories

Resources