[vdr] Advice on new motherboard, xineliboutput, vdpau, hdmi video & audio, etc.
theunis.potgieter at gmail.com
Fri Aug 20 11:36:33 CEST 2010
On 20 August 2010 00:37, Niko Mikkilä <nm at phnet.fi> wrote:
> Thu, 2010-08-19 at 20:54 +0400, Goga777 wrote:
>> > Computer hardware usually cannot provide 50.000Hz, 59.940Hz or 23.976Hz
>> > outputs to your TV/Monitor. This will cause some judder on display output
>> > as MPEG/AVC input-stream is not synchronized to output framerate.
>> do you mean that all nvidia vdpau cards with existing drivers from Nvidia can't provide exact 50.000Hz,
>> 59.940Hz or 23.976Hz ??
> There is no graphics card, BD/DVD player or other standalone device that
> outputs those rates exactly. I don't know how much they deviate, but I'd
> guess it's usually something like 0.01 % (50.005 Hz instead of 50 Hz),
> as Jori said.
> However, the rate doesn't need to match exactly because the display
> device is synchronized to the video signal. The rate could be 50.1 Hz or
> maybe even 51 Hz and the display wouldn't mind. 50 fps video files would
> play slightly faster, but there would be no need to drop video frames
> because of that.
> Things are more problematic when receiving live broadcast. Then the
> display and the video source (graphics card and software) needs to be
> synchronized to the broadcast to avoid dropping or duplicating frames.
> Set-top digital television boxes and FF DVB cards do that, but most
> graphics cards/drivers can't because they aren't designed to follow an
> external time source.
> Audio playback synchronation is another issue, and somewhat difficult to
> handle properly on a PC where the audio chip's clock is almost always
> separate from the graphics card's clock. By default, many media players
> time everything according to the audio clock, and therefore they need to
> drop/duplicate video frames every now and then. The other alternative is
> to drop/duplicate audio frames or resample the audio completely.
The hardware is also running some kind of software/firmware (binary
blob). I would think that the Larabee would have been the perfect
choice, easier to create newer/maintaining firmware, since it is x86
based. If they made the Larabee propriety for the parts that we are
interested in. Then it would also defeat the purpose of having a
dynamic decoding environment. Which current hardware devices fail to
do. There for the argument to have a software based solution that can
do more than just one thing, not just live tv but also alternative
Current hardware is good for Live TV and Recordings, software based
solutions are good for dynamic media/source input, newer codecs etc,
not so good at displaying it properly 100% all the time.
More information about the vdr