Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

When will leopard be on par with vista for 1080p playback?

G

gothamm

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Nov 18, 2007
844
3
we all know that vista is superior to leopard when it comes to HD playback of .mkv files or any other files supported by vlc.


i have tons of blu-ray rips, and here is to hoping that snow leopard's graphics acceleration will help it get on far!
 
What sort of superiority are you talking about?

I have plenty of 1080 mkv files that I play on my MBP and they play absolutely fine. Snow Leopard will even make it easier on the cpu load, but there's nothing wrong with Leopard handling 1080 mkv / h264 files at all
 
I'm with MagicWok. Superior in what ways? It would be easier to carry on a conversation if we knew in what ways you feel Vista is better at handling 1080p mkv files.
 
There are Windows apps that support GPU decoding of x264 mkv's (mpc + dxva for example) - OS X Quicktime only decodes apples own h264 profiles with the GPU afaik, and that's not a codec thats very widespread in certain scenes.

Also there is CoreCodecs CoreAVC (=quick multithreaded h.264 decoder) that is a codec supported by multiple windows apps because it is a codec component - the OS-X Version is a standalone player only (havent tried it yet, $$).

Personally i use "Plex" for 1080p mkvs since it has multithreaded h.264 decoding, has a nice media library and is free. Its decoding speed not as fast as CoreAVC but its definitive faster than VLC.

I have my hopes high that SnowLeopard/Grand Central/OpenCL/QuicktimeX changes this all but we'll see...
 
Nightkrawler said:
There are Windows apps that support GPU decoding of x264 mkv's (mpc + dxva for example) - OS X Quicktime only decodes apples own h264 profiles with the GPU afaik, and that's not a codec thats very widespread in certain scenes.

Also there is CoreCodecs CoreAVC (=quick multithreaded h.264 decoder) that is a codec supported by multiple windows apps because it is a codec component - the OS-X Version is a standalone player only (havent tried it yet, $$).

Personally i use "Plex" for 1080p mkvs since it has multithreaded h.264 decoding, has a nice media library and is free. Its decoding speed not as fast as CoreAVC but its definitive faster than VLC.

I have my hopes high that SnowLeopard/Grand Central/OpenCL/QuicktimeX changes this all but we'll see...
Click to expand...

I understand that drivers that come with graphics cards in Windows enable hardware decoding of HD content.

However, whilst we know technically what is going on, as long as the video content is smooth and hits the target FPS, then for a standard user he/she is not going to notice or really care. Snow Leopard will finally be bringing hardware decoding of h.264, but hardware decoding or no - everything runs fine on my MBP and others with lower specs, so it's no real advantage in my eyes.
 
Vista is NOT superior to Leopard in playing files. VLC is a TERRIBLE video player and SHOULD NOT be used as a comparison.
 
geoffreak said:
VLC is a TERRIBLE video player and SHOULD NOT be used as a comparison.
Click to expand...

Really? The general consensus has always been that VLC is a solid video player. It certainly plays most things that I throw at it, and plays them better than QT (not that QT should be used as a comparison, as it can't play half the stuff VLC can).

jx
 
geoffreak said:
Vista is NOT superior to Leopard in playing files. VLC is a TERRIBLE video player and SHOULD NOT be used as a comparison.
Click to expand...

Really? Exactly why do you consider VLC a terrible player? I have experienced no problems with VLC, it just works. What other video player would you recommend then?
 
It also seems to be one of the main solutions as a single player across multiple operating systems. Seems to incorporate many codecs. I even use it as my main player on my Linux box. What do you feel is a solid player to use then?
 
MPlayer is much better as a Linux player. MPlayer OSX is for Mac.
VLC was never intended to be a media player, but rather a media server. For basic use it works most of the time, but as soon as you try to give it anything off the thin margin of "normal", it fails miserably.

Here is a good guide to playback on Mac OSX
 
geoffreak said:
MPlayer is much better as a Linux player. MPlayer OSX is for Mac.
VLC was never intended to be a media player, but rather a media server. For basic use it works most of the time, but as soon as you try to give it anything off the thin margin of "normal", it fails miserably.

Here is a good guide to playback on Mac OSX
Click to expand...

Yeah, MPlayer is good also. I have trouble getting ATI graphics cards to output video to external devices using MPlayer on Linux however.
 
NJuul said:
Really? Exactly why do you consider VLC a terrible player? I have experienced no problems with VLC, it just works. What other video player would you recommend then?
Click to expand...

Its entirely software based, not HW decoding and its quality is not as good as other players for Windows. Its a jack of all trades, master of none player.
 
Hopefully when Snow Leopard comes out applications like Plex, VLC, Mplayer will start supporting openCL to receive a boost in playback.

I read somewhere that the FFMEPG developers are working to support openCL as well
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back