2.7 series Avidemux with CUDA/ATI acceleration support?

[Refrigerator]

Hello!

What do you think about the intruduce of Hardware encoders like the CUDA & ATI?

MR. Mean, what do you think about it?

[Evil_Burrito]

*I am not a programmer or video professional*

I am almost sure it isn't possible for avidemux to "simply" support hardware acceleration when only a few new codecs (x264) can even use it. Also, I don't think there are many good open source filters that can use it .

I will just be happy if avidemux 2.6 is ever finished.

[Refrigerator]

*I am not a programmer or video professional*

I am almost sure it isn't possible for avidemux to "simply" support hardware acceleration when only a few new codecs (x264) can even use it. Also, I don't think there are many good open source filters that can use it .

I will just be happy if avidemux 2.6 is ever finished.

Filters are less important, only video compressing is important. X264 hasn't HW acceleration. ATI and CUDA has own h.264 encoders. Other (non h264 based) lossy codecs are irrelevant in 2012...

[FeRD_NYC]

Irrelevant? To video players, perhaps, at least in the overwhelming majority of situations. They're going to primarily be handling content targeted for hardware-accelerated playback, yeah. I'm not quiiiite as convinced that encoding is irrelevant unless hardware-accelerated, but I agree it'll increasingly become a focus.

But avidemux isn't a video player, or even a video encoder. It's a filtering transcoder... so, to say "filters are less important"... if you're not using filters, and you're not working with any formats other than the very limited set of hardware-encodeable ones, then what are you using avidemux for?

I mean, I'm all for avidemux getting support for hardware encoding, or for pretty much any other cool technology that's out there. But if it's going to be something that's only useful with a very limited set of codecs, for only a small subset of users (not everyone has a CUDA farm under their desk), in only very specific situations (no filters, etc.) then I'd hate to see it prioritized above other, more broadly useful features.

But, hey, if you have patches to submit, personally I'd love to try them out! If there's anything a GeForce 8400 GS can usefully accelerate, that is...

[Refrigerator]

Most filters in Avidemux don't need high computing peroformance, therefore the HW acceleration is irrevelant for that filters. However HW video encoding has prominent importance due to its high computing performance on CPU.

In 2012, the only modern lossy video codec-family is the h.264-based codecs. Other video codecs have bad efficiency & worse video quality.

[digitaltoast]

In 2012, the only modern lossy video codec-family is the h.264-based codecs. Other video codecs have bad efficiency & worse video quality.

Other (non h264 based) lossy codecs are irrelevant in 2012...

Well, you'd think now that virtually everything from the cheapest mobile up to the largest broadcaster has pretty much settled on h264 both in hardware and software, that this might have established a standard. Except Google, in a mindbogglingly stupid move, has decided that what the web needs is to be fractured again:

http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-01-google-chrome-browser-h264.html

On January 11, 2011, Google announced that Chromeââ,¬â,,¢s HTML5 video support will change to match codecs supported by the open source Chromium project. Chrome will support the WebM (VP8) and Theora video codecs, and support for the H.264 codec will be removed to allow resources to focus on open codec technologies.

Now look at Chrome's market share: http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

Code Select Expand

2012 IE Firefox Chrome Safari Opera
Feb 19.5 % 36.6 % 36.3 % 4.5 % 2.3 %

So just as the web was coming together for video playback, Google has gone all Apple on it's ass, so now we DO have to start looking to other codecs.
Great, more work, more encoding, more storage, more bandwidth.

[digitaltoast]

*I am not a programmer or video professional*

I am almost sure it isn't possible for avidemux to "simply" support hardware acceleration when only a few new codecs (x264) can even use it. Also, I don't think there are many good open source filters that can use it .

I will just be happy if avidemux 2.6 is ever finished.

Filters are less important, only video compressing is important. X264 hasn't HW acceleration. ATI and CUDA has own h.264 encoders. Other (non h264 based) lossy codecs are irrelevant in 2012...

[Agent_007]

It is good thing to have multiple video standards. Competition usually leads to better solutions in the long run.

But as is said, supporting hardware GPU encoding would require some major work in many fronts, so I doubt CUDE or similar support will happen.