Database Users

Video playback on LEO

Will there be issues on video playback like all other HTC devices ?
Will leo be able to play a not converted divx ?

firiel said:
Will there be issues on video playback like all other HTC devices ?
Will leo be able to play a not converted divx ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think it's able to play till 480p res. videos even no exist video acceleration or drivers... It's powered by brute cpu force with snapdragon to process vid. codecs IMO...

firiel said:
Will there be issues on video playback like all other HTC devices ?
Will leo be able to play a not converted divx ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not gonna worry about that. For Touch HD, I used Total Video Converter, I used Iphone H264 MP4 best settings and play in Windows Media Player, even in Touch HD it is smooth and stunning at full 800 X 480, only that scrolling through time frames or during video startup is sluggish. And for HD2, I believe the loading time will be shortened.
Playing high quality videos have been non issue with these HTC devices, you just need to do it right.

precsmo said:
Playing high quality videos have been non issue with these HTC devices, you just need to do it right.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you don't mind wasting time on conversion, that is.

From HTC website: Video supported formats: .wmv, .asf, .mp4, .3gp, .3g2, .m4v, .avi
Can't speak to quality because the phone isn't out. ;-)

Reason4444 said:
I think it's able to play till 480p res. videos even no exist video acceleration or drivers... It's powered by brute cpu force with snapdragon to process vid. codecs IMO...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Which means that when a device from another manufacturer like samsung or acer grabs the snapdragon we will cry with the results, right ?
And dont have me even mention tegra

rebecker said:
From HTC website: Video supported formats: .wmv, .asf, .mp4, .3gp, .3g2, .m4v, .avi
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Touch Diamond2 specs also mention .avi, but it's a half-truth. I use a Topaz ROM on my Touch HD and can't view regular DivX/XVid videos with anything built-in. Maybe the FullScreen Player from HTC Album (or Windows Media Player) here can play .avis with some weird codecs, but it's absolutely irrelevant to real-life scenarios.

vangrieg said:
Touch Diamond2 specs also mention .avi, but it's a half-truth. I use a Topaz ROM on my Touch HD and can't view regular DivX/XVid videos with anything built-in. Maybe the FullScreen Player from HTC Album (or Windows Media Player) here can play .avis with some weird codecs, but it's absolutely irrelevant to real-life scenarios.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've gone back to the stock rom on my hd, after an unfortunate incident with some muggers. But Coreplayer (ver 1.3.2) seems very adept at handling any native divx/xvid files

AshHD said:
I've gone back to the stock rom on my hd, after an unfortunate incident with some muggers. But Coreplayer (ver 1.3.2) seems very adept at handling any native divx/xvid files
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then we probably have very different HDs because mine reminds me of the era of 200MHz HTC devices. Playback of unconverted is jerky with visibly very low FPS, dynamic scenes are more like slideshows than films, even with 700MB rips, 1.4GB ones are even worse. This is not to mention that CorePlayer doesn't support AC3 audio which means that half of the movies I have are mute. If this is called being "very adept at handling" then I don't know what isn't.
Stock ROMs are exactly the same in terms of video performance, the reason why I mentioned Topaz ROM is simply because that device boasts .avi support, which it is in fact lacking. That said, ".avi support" is pretty much a meaningless phrase since .avi is just a wrapper, there could be a full zoo of codecs inside.

firiel said:
Which means that when a device from another manufacturer like samsung or acer grabs the snapdragon we will cry with the results, right ?
And dont have me even mention tegra
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In what way do you imagine that these devices will be superior to the HD2 when it comes to video playback? If the HD2 can play back video at full screen resolution (800x480) with no dropped frames at all and support any wrapper or codec you might want, how much better can any other device really get? That (most likely) is what the HD2 running Coreplayer will deliver.
The only time there's likely to be an issue is if you expect to play back a high-definition (e.g. 1280x720) video downscaled to the screen resolution in real time. But, even if it's only for reasons of storage space, you'd probably want to downscale any clips like that to 800x480 resolution anyway.
It's possible that other devices (the ones that can use GPU acceleration when playing xvid and divx stuff) will offer better battery-life during video playback, I guess, but I doubt it'll be that big a margin.

Shasarak, it's not clear how the downscaling will work performance-wise without GPU support, and CorePlayer doesn't support AC3 sound. Not that I need to listen to AC3 on a phone, but I certainly have movies with it. So at this moment CorePlayer is definitely a mediocre solution as far as I'm concerned.

Shasharak,
Am not arguing that the device hopefully might be able to play, by CPU power 480p, but what about HTC not delivering for once again, what our money worth.
If u search for comparisons of omnia and any htc 528 based model, you will see great differences on video playback. This is unacceptable from me.
And what about gaming or 3d accelerated apps. We are getting to a new age of handheld devices, that should be (MUST BE) able to deliver video, web, audio and entertainment. And should do it with all their power.

vangrieg said:
Shasarak, it's not clear how the downscaling will work performance-wise without GPU support, and CorePlayer doesn't support AC3 sound. Not that I need to listen to AC3 on a phone, but I certainly have movies with it. So at this moment CorePlayer is definitely a mediocre solution as far as I'm concerned.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, as I say, I don't imagine anyone will want to downscale video on it anyway - HD video won't look any worse if it's downscaled off-line, and it will take up far less space on the memory card than the original HD file.
Coreplayer not supporting AC3 is a problem, I'll grant you. It's possible that Coreplayer version 2 will support it. If not, then you'll have to see if you can get TCPMP running on the Leo - I expect there will be a version that does.

firiel said:
Shasharak,
Am not arguing that the device hopefully might be able to play, by CPU power 480p, but what about HTC not delivering for once again, what our money worth.
If u search for comparisons of omnia and any htc 528 based model, you will see great differences on video playback. This is unacceptable from me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, but that's the point: you won't see those differences on the HD2. I own a Touch Pro2, so I understand how annoyed you are. But the difference with the HD2 is that the CPU is so powerful that it should be able to play back anything with a resolution of 800x480 or less without dropping any frames using the CPU alone - why would you care if it's using the CPU or the GPU if you can't see any difference in the playback? The Snapdragon CPU is nearly three times as powerful as the one in the TP2. Even without GPU acceleration it'll still work just fine.
firiel said:
And what about gaming or 3d accelerated apps. We are getting to a new age of handheld devices, that should be (MUST BE) able to deliver video, web, audio and entertainment. And should do it with all their power.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, we know from existing benchmarks that the Leo will deliver hardware-accelerated OpenGL ES, so that's a good start. On some 3D benchmarks it's more than 20 times as fast as a TP2. (I doubt there will be any 3D-accelerated apps for Windows Mobile, anyway - otherwise people who own cheaper, slower WinMo phones will buy them and then complain they can't run them. WinMo apps tend to be written for low-end hardware.) Web should be fine - especially once we have a version of FlashPlayer 10.1 which will be in beta before the end of the year. I wouldn't worry.

Shasarak said:
Well, as I say, I don't imagine anyone will want to downscale video on it anyway - HD video won't look any worse if it's downscaled off-line, and it will take up far less space on the memory card than the original HD file.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I, on the other hand, can't imagine why anyone would want to convert any videos to watch on the phone. I have a notebook with a 60GB SSD and some 1.16GHz processor - it's blazing fast for Office/internet use but it'll take forever to convert any videos. I also store files like videos on a network drive, so using the more powerful desktop is still slow. And I need to watch videos only occasionally - when going on a trip I can copy a movie or two to take with me on a plane. So space isn't a problem really while ability to watch unconverted video is.
In any case, there was a question you asked about how another device may be more powerful in video playback - I guess with proper driver support they can be, and there are use cases when this is important.

vangrieg said:
I, on the other hand, can't imagine why anyone would want to convert any videos to watch on the phone. I have a notebook with a 60GB SSD and some 1.16GHz processor - it's blazing fast for Office/internet use but it'll take forever to convert any videos. I also store files like videos on a network drive, so using the more powerful desktop is still slow. And I need to watch videos only occasionally - when going on a trip I can copy a movie or two to take with me on a plane. So space isn't a problem really while ability to watch unconverted video is.
In any case, there was a question you asked about how another device may be more powerful in video playback - I guess with proper driver support they can be, and there are use cases when this is important.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As a TP2 owner with a slow desktop PC I feel your pain, I really do. I'm simply pointing out that the HD2 won't suffer from this problem to anywhere near the extent that current-generation HTC phones do. My best guess is that no video clip that runs at 800x480 or lower will require conversion; it's only ones in higher resolutions that will. And the chances are that even your netbook wouldn't be able to play a 720p video smoothly, so what use is it to store the videos in hi-def format in the first place? You might as well download a lower-res version.
If you end having to convert something very occasionally then just leave it running on your desktop PC overnight - it's not that big a deal.
The key difference, here, is that a TP2 can't even get close to playing a 624x351 xvid clip without conversion, while the HD2 will play it perfectly. It'll play anything other than high definition clips perfectly without conversion - so there is exactly one use-case where GPU acceleration is relevant, and it's not an important one.

Shasarak said:
I'm simply pointing out that the HD2 won't suffer from this problem to anywhere near the extent that current-generation HTC phones do.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is most certainly true. I still bought HD even though I knew about these problems, but it's still an annoyance. HD2 will be better for sure.
Shasarak said:
And the chances are that even your netbook wouldn't be able to play a 720p video smoothly,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not a netbook, it's a "real" notebook, Thinkpad X300, but anyway - I don't watch movies on my computers - I use a network media server and a network player, they are streamed to my TV. So my phone is the only computer-like device that needs to be able to play videos, actually.
Shasarak said:
so what use is it to store the videos in hi-def format in the first place? You might as well download a lower-res version.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In fact, I try to avoid downloading HD videos whenever I can as I don't care for viewing them in high resolutions even though I have a large Full HD TV. The problem is only that low-res versions aren't always available, and increasingly so. It's not my preference but rather an unfortunate trend.

So you think that the snapdragon "RAW" is enough. Enough for what ? There are no limits for what to expect.
Should HTC, continue to ignore what GPU means, we should not. once again accept it It was like 2 years ago when I complained about my TC performance, without getting any answer. And now Samsung, on their first winmo device (omnia), has really better results, using the same processor. There will be tons of snapdragon devices, or even tegra powered (hopefully) soon enough.

If Qualcomm refuses to give the guys who write CorePlayer access to their intellectual property, that isn't altogether HTC's fault. Any software actually written by HTC does use GPU acceleration - there's a limit to the extent that they can be held responsible for the deficiencies of third party software.
firiel said:
So you think that the snapdragon "RAW" is enough. Enough for what ? There are no limits for what to expect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I set down very precise limits in my prediction: CPU-only video decoding will (IMO) be adequate for all videos with a resolution of 800x480 or lower. Any video with higher resolution may require transcoding - but it obviously couldn't look any better than an 800x480 video if it's being played back on an 800x480 screen.

firiel said:
Should HTC, continue to ignore what GPU means, we should not. once again accept it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And how exactly should we "not accept it"? I am also pissed off at HTC, but I don't think we can do anything except buying something else, but there are also reasons not to (all of them very individual).
Shasarak said:
If Qualcomm refuses to give the guys who write CorePlayer access to their intellectual property, that isn't altogether HTC's fault.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, with a BUT: they (HTC) could enable their software to play real-life video formats. Samsung's Touch Player does that. And a smaller "but": they could also provide generic driver that would provide DirectX/OpenGL interfaces for Qualcomm's quirky technologies. Both options would cost them money I guess, so they chose not to.

720p/1080p Encoding - How long ?

What are the specs of your computers and how long are your average encodes taking ?. I'm looking to buy some new gear soon so I'm just looking to find out how fast the encodes can be.
I have over 100 720p films to convert so its gonna be very time consuming.

they'll probably just work if you use moboplayer

Well. if you have a core i7 then it shouldn't take too long.

I have an i5 750, ati HD5850, and 4GB of RAM. Video encoding is the only thing that maxes out all four cores on my processor, and it takes about one minute per six minutes of video on average using handbrake. However, I don't bother re-encoding videos anymore. I just use plex, but that might not work for your circumstances.
Whatever you do, make sure you encode baseline h264.

Asus P6X58D Premium - Intel Core i7 930 - XFX Radeon 5750 HD Video Card - 12gb DDR3 Corsair XMS3
30 minutes to convert a 4gb blu ray using dvdcatalyst to Xoom HQ1

@OP
Get a quadcore. Otherwise, it doesn't matter all that much. This, from one who has xcoded thousands of movies & movie clips on a bottom-end dual-core.
It matters more how you're encoding, and what software you're encoding with. x264 has different speeds, and unintuitively, 'fast' speeds can get a smaller size than slower ones.
Resolution makes a big diff. Many think 1280x720 is best for tablets. The truth is, there's very little quality difference between 1280 and 800 on a small screen, and the 800 res is about half the size and xcode twice as fast. It also streams much smoother over wifi.
Ignore the peeps who said you have to encode to baseline profile. The 3.1 update apparently can handle high profile now, although it still doesn't have native MKV/AC3/DTS support. I would try high prof first, then main prof.
Lastly, it only takes a long time if you sit and wait for it. I'm doing a 21-CD miniseries to MKV, and before that a 95-eps series. Each job takes me about 10 mins to set up, and some extra for spot checking. Otherwise, just let it run and ignore it.

e.mote said:
@OP
Ignore the peeps who said you have to encode to baseline profile. The 3.1 update apparently can handle high profile now, although it still doesn't have native MKV/AC3/DTS support. I would try high prof first, then main prof.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know high profile has worked fine for SD content, but are you actually getting smooth playback on high or main profile 720p?
Edit: I just tried a few that I had that happened to be high profile with aac audio, and I'm still getting pretty choppy playback but it IS better than it was in 3.01. I'm still curious to know whether you or others are getting better results here, though.

mug2k said:
What are the specs of your computers and how long are your average encodes taking ?. I'm looking to buy some new gear soon so I'm just looking to find out how fast the encodes can be.
I have over 100 720p films to convert so its gonna be very time consuming.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have an Intel i7-2600 with 8GB of RAM and a Intel SSD for my machine, and a 1.33hr 720p rip of Restrepo takes 30mins to encode using the attached Handbreak preset (rename to "xoom 720p.plist" and import). I think I got this from XDA but I can't remember, and it works nicely for HD content.
I also use Moboplayer as it's the only one that seems to work without issue.

I have an i7-950, 12GB DDR3 (XMS3) and GTS450, on an Asus ROG III Gene. Can convert a blueray with handbrake in under 20 minutes and a DVD in under 15. And I always write the output to a different physical hard disk.
Macbots drool as I XOOM through the Galaxy to my hearts Desire.

>I'm still curious to know whether you or others are getting better results here, though.
Let's find out.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1091204

e.mote said:
>I'm still curious to know whether you or others are getting better results here, though.
Let's find out.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1091204
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cool, downloading your clips now to see.

h.264 Encoder for Transformer/Tegra 2

I'm looking for an application which supports h.264 encoding on the Tegra 2. My desktop PC is just way too slow at re-encoding and the fans get too loud to leave it running over night.... so I thought I might do my re-encodes on the TF itself, but so far I haven't found an application which supports this. Does anyone know if there is one?

I haven't seen one but I have the feeling it would be horribily slow...

leonpr said:
I haven't seen one but I have the feeling it would be horribily slow...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is Obviously going to be slower than realtime, otherwise you'd play the movie smoothly without the need to reencode.

Not sure why you would think the TF with a 1Ghz mobile chip and 1G ram would be faster than a desktop, unless your desktop is very old.

GetLaid said:
I'm looking for an application which supports h.264 encoding on the Tegra 2. My desktop PC is just way too slow at re-encoding and the fans get too loud to leave it running over night.... so I thought I might do my re-encodes on the TF itself, but so far I haven't found an application which supports this. Does anyone know if there is one?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
unless your PC is more than 5 years old, there is a good chance it will still encode h264 faster than the TF...
what numbers in fps you are getting if you use handbrake to encode H264 720p in High Profile? I have a rather beefy desktop with i5 2600k and it encodes about 65-70 fps, and my old dell laptop with T7200 runs about just over 20fps

I have a 2.8GHz Pentium 4 with 1GB RAM. From what I've tried so far my encoding speed hovers between 1-5 fps. So yeah, encoding on the Transformer can't be that much worse, and I wouldn't have to deal with roaring fans.

Tegra2 probably supports hardware encoding of h264 (for the camera for example) but apps won't have access to that unfortunately.

HTC HD2 outperforms Atrix Software Decode

I recently did some testing. I encoded 2 of the exact same videos at h264 AVC .mp4 video files. Both at 2,000kbps video bitrate. The hd2 was at 800x480 with a 5:3 pan and scan at 23.97fps. I do realize that the reduced resolution is easier on the hardware but doesn't use much more cpu. I will do another test at a more universal resolution like say 720x480 for both devices to test again. The atrix was at 960x540 with a 16:9 pan and scan at 23.97fps. I then played back both videos on both devices in Vital Player Pro in software decoding. I set the clock to 750Mhz on the atrix and it was unable to playback smoothly. I had to increase to roughly 800Mhz to barely playback smoothly. For flawless playback, I needed 900Mhz+ on the atrix. With the hd2 on the other hand I first set the clock to 576Mhz and it was very choppy. So i increased it until it could playback smoothly. I raised it to 652Mhz and was able to playback flawlessly. I'm losing a lot of respect for the atrix with it not being able to decode without raising the cpu way up. It's a dual core but it's likely the OS and the application can't utilize the additional thread. This however shows that when running on one thread, the HTC HD2's cpu is much more powerful while software decoding video under vital player. I suppose once the roms and kernel's get more perfected, I suppose the Atrix will perform better. The down side is that's not going to happen for some time.
Your thoughts would be highly appreciated.
ATRIX @ EternityProject kernel, android 2.3.4, stock
- Maximum Available frequency @ 1210Mhz
HTC HD2 @ Rafpigna's 2.0, android 2.3.3, stock
- Maximum Available frequency @ 1536Mhz

Wrong section..
Sent from my CM7 Atrix+ 4G using the XDA Premium App

sure someone cancel and close this thread please. Or just move it to GENERAL.

1chris89 said:
I recently did some testing. I encoded 2 of the exact same videos at h264 AVC .mp4 video files. Both at 2,000kbps video bitrate. The hd2 was at 800x480 with a 5:3 pan and scan at 23.97fps. I do realize that the reduced resolution is easier on the hardware but doesn't use much more cpu. I will do another test at a more universal resolution like say 720x480 for both devices to test again. The atrix was at 960x540 with a 16:9 pan and scan at 23.97fps. I then played back both videos on both devices in Vital Player Pro in software decoding. I set the clock to 750Mhz on the atrix and it was unable to playback smoothly. I had to increase to roughly 800Mhz to barely playback smoothly. For flawless playback, I needed 900Mhz+ on the atrix. With the hd2 on the other hand I first set the clock to 576Mhz and it was very choppy. So i increased it until it could playback smoothly. I raised it to 652Mhz and was able to playback flawlessly. I'm losing a lot of respect for the atrix with it not being able to decode without raising the cpu way up. It's a dual core but it's likely the OS and the application can't utilize the additional thread. This however shows that when running on one thread, the HTC HD2's cpu is much more powerful while software decoding video under vital player. I suppose once the roms and kernel's get more perfected, I suppose the Atrix will perform better. The down side is that's not going to happen for some time.
Your thoughts would be highly appreciated.
ATRIX @ EternityProject kernel, android 2.3.4, stock
- Maximum Available frequency @ 1210Mhz
HTC HD2 @ Rafpigna's 2.0, android 2.3.3, stock
- Maximum Available frequency @ 1536Mhz
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cool story bro

HD2 wins
Yeah,
I have an atrix and an HD2 with nexus s rom on it. I found the HD2 better in anyways than the atrix, the hd2 is very very smoot compared to the atrix.........
maybe motorola did not a good job in software optimization.....
I have last official rom

It requires more power because your running it at a higher resolution...

I have both the phones
Sent from my unlocked rooted and 2.3.4 Atrix using tapatalk

installed cm7 and eternityproject kernel for 1100mhz. Same result. Couldn't maintain stable playback until 912Mhz. I'll reconvert the video into a universal 720x480 one at a 16:9 pan and scan and the other at a 5:3 pan and scan. I may even do a universal standard video to just compare the two devices.

you need to take into account the fact that the atrix is also driving a larger screen regardless of the video resolution. this is like comparing an orange to a fork.

1chris89 said:
installed cm7 and eternityproject kernel for 1100mhz. Same result. Couldn't maintain stable playback until 912Mhz. I'll reconvert the video into a universal 720x480 one at a 16:9 pan and scan and the other at a 5:3 pan and scan. I may even do a universal standard video to just compare the two devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since when could you run cm7 with kholks kernel?
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App

neer2005 said:
Since when could you run cm7 with kholks kernel?
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One cannot use Kholk's Kernel and CM7 together. This is correct.
He seems slightly like he is trolling as well.

This comparison really matters because most people under clock their phones when watching videos, amirite?
---
- adb push iPad2post.apk to /forum/thread

TheBassman369 said:
This comparison really matters because most people under clock their phones when watching videos, amirite?
---
- adb push iPad2post.apk to /forum/thread
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No no, his point is valid. If the other device can play the same video at 652mhz and our at 912mhz, ours drains more battery while doing the same thing.
He still hasn't actually proven this anyways.

diedemus said:
you need to take into account the fact that the atrix is also driving a larger screen regardless of the video resolution. this is like comparing an orange to a fork.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i loled
.

nexxusty said:
One cannot use Kholk's Kernel and CM7 together. This is correct.
He seems slightly like he is trolling as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 troll.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA Premium App

I'd like to point that the player used in op's test is not mentioned. As i posted in the best video player thread, i tried all video players mentioned in there and NONE was able to play correctly 2-3 test videos i tried, except for one, dice player. Plays 720p FLAWLESSLY! No choppiness, no out of sync, nothing. I am realy amazed! Please do try it and report back. It's a paid app, but has a 3day trial version. The player you use makes a huge difference. As if developers don't yet know how to take full advantage of tegra's capabilities in playing videos? Anyway, my new player, DICE!
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App

Op said he used vital player pro.
Mx video player performs pretty well on everything I've thrown at it so far and its free
Sent from my MB860 using XDA Premium App

diedemus said:
Op said he used vital player pro.
Mx video player performs pretty well on everything I've thrown at it so far and its free
Sent from my MB860 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm you're right i missed that, guess too eager to reply. But i insist on testing with dice. Mx is no match trust me plus it pixelizes a bit my videos and ruins the quality.
Wow i just tried vital and it reaaly struggles to keep sync, hopeless to say the least.

diedemus said:
you need to take into account the fact that the atrix is also driving a larger screen regardless of the video resolution. this is like comparing an orange to a fork.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well fork the orange and see what kind of pulp you get (maybe a new ROM?)

Vital player pro is by far the best player I have used. It plays almost every format. Unlike other players. Anyway, using hardware decode on both devices you can run the bare minimum frequency and run flawlessly. However under software decode it uses raw cpu power and not the gpu ie (adreno on the hd2 and the nvidia tegra 2 on the atrix). I encoded a fresh new movie using AVC h264 mp4 video at a 2,000kbps video bitrate, 720x480 with an auto aspect ratio letterbox at 23.97fps, AAC audio at 48,000khz and 128kbps. I ran the tests of both devices and the results were very interesting! The htc hd2 was able to software decode with no problem at an astounding 537Mhz! Anything lower resulted in terrible audio sync issues and stuttering. I then ran the test on the atrix with very interesting results as well! The atrix was unable to decode stutter free at anything below 912Mhz!!! I suppose it comes down to the cpu not being designed to efficiently decode video in single threaded applications or software decode in general. However in combination with the devastating gpu power, all hell breaks lose and it would blow the doors of an hd2 in a balls to the wall full hardware comparison. However the atrix performs poorly in a single threaded application using software decoding. The hd2 is a beast when it comes to software decoding with it's beastly single thread. Just for your information both devices are able to decode the video in hardware mode at there minimum allowable frequencies perfectly. What I honestly suspect being the culprit is the fact that the kernel has not been perfected and it still highly based off of motoral's kernel with minor modifications. Once a fresh kernel is built from scratch and perfected for at least 6 months of release builds, then we will see the atrix outperforming the hd2 under this type of test. I believe Motorola intended people to rely on hardware decoding which is ideal since the cpu power doesn't really matter.
Hope you guy's like the tests.
Later
Atrix on a honeycomb blur rom w/ faux123 kernel (atrix cm7 rom had no effect on this test)
HD2 on a cm7 rom with rafpigna's 2.0 kernel

[Q] Video playback on new Atom hybrids - OK or Tegra 2 syndrome?

As movies/films is one of the main tasks this device will have in my possession I want to make sure I will not run into disappointment owners of first Tegra 2 tablets run into.
So... Atom + this SGX... mkv 720p - OK?
How about BR rips in 1080p?
I got some clips (Full HD) from may handycam in m2ts format - will they work?

It's been a week or two since I tried. I remember being pretty disappointed with 1080p and some 720p videos. I'll load a few videos with VLC, Zoom, and KMPlayer and see how well it plays.
Off hand what I remember is mostly disappointment with 1080p videos, those that played, seemed to be dropping frames and have a slight jittery feel to them. Other higher bit rate videos would pixelate during some scenes.
I have some 720p MKV Anime subs and I think the mostly played okay, but might have had some minor frame dropping. I'll have to check them out again, my memory is a little faded now. I was disappointed, but it's not Tegra 2 bad, but not Tegra 3 good either.

I have a samsung ativ with atom.1080p mkv even at 40mps play very good. All you need is enabling dxva with mpc and haali media splitter or lava filters. Then the cpu will not go above 30-40%
Inviato dal mio GT-I9300 con Tapatalk 2

Just saw new video and audio drivers today for the 500T. Just installed those, so really curious now if there is going to be some improvement when I test tonight.

Ugh, new video drivers didn't help. In fact it has gotten worse, not much. But in the high bit rate 1080p video I had tested before, I'm seeing it freeze up (it didn't do that before) and pixelate in more scenes. And the 720p MKV videos, the audio is slightly out of sync.
I think it's a mix between drivers and hardware. I dunno of the SGX545 is up to the task of doing 1080p or 720p MKVs smoothly.

If you guys remember video files used as test for Tegra 2 devices we were talking about I am just uploading them to my Dropbox.
Once they are that I will share the link so you can test your Atom W8 devices and report back.
OK?
Not to mention quite different opinion between you guys (gaetanolip & Ravynmagi)

galtom said:
If you guys remember video files used as test for Tegra 2 devices we were talking about I am just uploading them to my Dropbox.
Once they are that I will share the link so you can test your Atom W8 devices and report back.
OK?
Not to mention quite different opinion between you guys (gaetanolip & Ravynmagi)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mine is not an opinion. In oorder to play 1080p level 4.1 at 40 mbs you have to enable hardware acceleration. I just did explain how , if you guys are not capable to do so please do not complain how new atom is not enough to play 1080p (h264)videos because new atom fully CAN.
This is the proof ( older atom but same gpu even at lower mhz than my ativ ). I followed the guide ( even if I used newer lav splitters instead of haali media splitters )
http://www.eeepc.it/video-guida-filmati-1080p-eee-pc-cedar-trail/
Test video http://www.auby.no/files/video_tests/
I can easily play birds 40 mbs , very high bitrate
Inviato dal mio GT-I9300 con Tapatalk 2

I do not have device just yet
I want to make sure it will play most or all popular video formats.
I will give you Dropbox link as soon as I get home
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

Try those samples: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/axjlfeeqd6t7vfl/n5JS9stbNF
And let us know how is it handling them...

mate, GPU hardware acceleration will play it, ive had some insanely high bit rate videos playing on much older hardware, but as has already been mentioned you need to have a player that supports DXVA 1/2. MPC-HC will do it just fine, personally I use shark007 codecs that gets WMP doing the same thing (I prefer that because it allows me to use WMC to play videos as well)

On my old PC with Windows 8 but higher power than Atom I got k-lite pack of codecs and I am using WMP.
Does it mean that for W8 I should be using different (better?) codec pack like those Shark007 you mentioned?
Perhaps I would put less strain on my current HW?
Did I get it right?

look at it this way, if you try play a high bit rate HD video and your CPU usage is a sustained 80-100% then your not using hardware acceleration. Its been a while since I used k-lite as from my experience in the past it was full of crap you simply didn't need, Shark007 is about as lean and efficient as you can get. if you use MPC-HC you should see DVXA at the bottom left corner of the screen when in window mode.
if you are using hardware acceleration then id expect CPU usage to be around 5-20%
back in the day a 3Ghz P4 wasn't able to play high bit rate HD content by its self without dropping frames, THAT is what GPU hardware acceleration can bring
if you are going to use Shark make sure you delete ALL codecs you've installed before attempting to install it, most codec issues are conflicts