"ATI Stream Technology Cuts Video Transcoding Time in Half"

Sabrewulf...

Sabrewulf...

Gawd
Joined
Jan 18, 2008
Messages
1,019
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=15264

"Since ATI is a part of AMD, Stream has been designed to work with the CPU, instead of exclusively offloading all work onto the GPU."

Hmmm, what a smart design, use the CPU and GPU together to take full advantage of the processing potential, instead of just wasting that other less important chip.
 
Blah blah. They release a statement like this every year, and every year they release some shitty transcoding app with horribly limited options that is always broken in x64.
 
I really wasn't all that impressed with ATi's AVIVO video converter. I either ended up with flaws in video or program crashes.

I haven't used the 3rd party applications yet so I can't judge on their quality compared to my x264 encodes or the AVIVO conversions. I would really like having a much closer to real-time solution using a HQ 2-pass profile. My Q6600 at 3.0ghz is still not fast enough at the quality I want.
 
Last edited:
Sabrewulf165 said:
Blah blah. They release a statement like this every year, and every year they release some shitty transcoding app with horribly limited options that is always broken in x64.
Click to expand...

Your rant is very informative, keep up with the work!!! /END SARCASM AVIVO is less limited compared to the Badaboom.

That is good news, after all, not all the applications can be run in parallel, CPU's are great for branchy codes with subroutines and GPU's are great for parallel and linear code, unlike nVidia who thinks that GPU can replace CPU something that will never happen, this means that we all can have the benefits of it, it took a while to make it up to x64 but finally!!
 
evolucion8 said:
Your rant is very informative, keep up with the work!!! /END SARCASM AVIVO is less limited compared to the Badaboom.

That is good news, after all, not all the applications can be run in parallel, CPU's are great for branchy codes with subroutines and GPU's are great for parallel and linear code, unlike nVidia who thinks that GPU can replace CPU something that will never happen, this means that we all can have the benefits of it, it took a while to make it up to x64 but finally!!
Click to expand...

And your assumptions are very misguided, keep it up! :rolleyes:
 
AVIVO video converter didn't work well for me up until now but there is a big difference with the latest 9.5 Catalyst release.
 
Why did they compare a 32 SP 9500GT with a 320 SP HD 4670? :p The closest card in price is probably the 9600GT. newegg has several 9600GT and 4670 cards for about $70.

Oh wait, I know why. :p
 
pxc said:
Why did they compare a 32 SP 9500GT with a 320 SP HD 4670? :p The closest card in price is probably the 9600GT. newegg has several 9600GT and 4670 cards for about $70.

Oh wait, I know why. :p
Click to expand...

You really can't compare the number of SPs. They aren't the same thing.

Also, the 9500 GT is ~$50, 4760 is ~$70, 9600 GT is ~$80, however there are a bunch of 4670s with MIRs that put its price at $50-60 which would then be comparable to the 9500 GT (Some 9500 GT and 9600 GT cards have MIRs as well - but they seem to be few and far between whereas with the 4670 its like half the cards available)

Sure the 4670 isn't exactly the same price as the 9500 GT, but it is still cheaper than the 9600 GT
 
kllrnohj said:
You really can't compare the number of SPs. They aren't the same thing.

Also, the 9500 GT is ~$50, 4760 is ~$70, 9600 GT is ~$80, however there are a bunch of 4670s with MIRs that put its price at $50-60 which would then be comparable to the 9500 GT (Some 9500 GT and 9600 GT cards have MIRs as well - but they seem to be few and far between whereas with the 4670 its like half the cards available)

Sure the 4670 isn't exactly the same price as the 9500 GT, but it is still cheaper than the 9600 GT
Click to expand...

11205_large_Stream3.jpg


4600 series is the lowest card that supports encoding.

-edit woops totally misread your statement, but i doubt an upgrade from 9500gt to 9600 or even 9800gt would make that much of a difference for encoding?
 
I wonder how I can use stream computing to compress blu-ray to 25 gb.

Anyone know?
Posted via [H] Mobile Device
 
risqu3 said:
4600 series is the lowest card that supports encoding.

-edit woops totally misread your statement, but i doubt an upgrade from 9500gt to 9600 or even 9800gt would make that much of a difference for encoding?
Click to expand...

lol, upgrading from a 9500GT to a 9800GT makes a world of difference for encoding.

32SP vs 112SP. Not to mention faster memory bandwidth. Do the math! ;)
 
RADEoN said:
I wonder how I can use stream computing to compress blu-ray to 25 gb.

Anyone know?
Posted via [H] Mobile Device
Click to expand...

If all you want to do is get it down to 25GB, you could simply pull out the main stream (.m2ts), dump the contents, and remux only the parts you want (probably a single audio track, chapter file, and video stream). I haven't run across many that are over 20GB after doing that. Sure beats encoding, IMO, however this assumes you don't care about the rest of the disc contents.
 
I can't get it to work at all. I completely removed my drivers, then installed 9.5 and Avivo, but every time I try to open a file to transcode, it says "The selected source file contains either an unsupported video/audio format or no video/audio content. Please try another source file". I've tried divx, xvid, and wmv, all with the same result. I'm running a 4850 on vista x64 sp1.

Edit: Looks like it works on mpg, but that's the only format.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top