1

Topic: VMR9 vs EVR

Now I study  transfer of my program with VMR9 on EVR, with a sight on the last versions 10 of Windows. Dock on EVR all is beautiful  as it can be collected. Yes here in an Internet the judgement that EVR , than VMR9 walks. Therefore, who worked with these , impart experience - as they in operation? It is necessary to waste time on it? .VMR9 I use in Windowless a mode

2

Re: VMR9 vs EVR

Hello, Vicul, you wrote: V> Dock on EVR all is beautiful  as it can be collected. Yes here in an Internet the judgement that EVR , than VMR9 walks. Whose judgement? ? V> Therefore who worked with these , impart experience - as they in operation? It is necessary to waste time on it? Worked, but at me 2D video. VMR9 can work not correctly in Win 8.1 + therefore it is necessary to translate.

3

Re: VMR9 vs EVR

K> Worked, but at me 2D video. VMR9 can work not correctly in Win 8.1 + therefore it is necessary to translate. VMR9 on 8.1 works normally. But here with Vin10 1703 on  (VMWare Workstation 12.6) what that   -  works only in right  to a corner, start to shift to the left - at first a frame , and after disappears generally - a gray background in a window, video a flow thus in a program is not interrupted. If to return a window to the right, all is recovered. On other versions Vin10 of it there was not. It is not possible to fall down it on a jamb in VMWare, however check up it by the pure machine with 1703 Windows I can.  I too has 1703 Windows, and there all . But the Windows 10 there were  to 1703 versions, therefore dirty  it turns out. Here and doubts at me on incorrectness VMR9 appeared.

4

Re: VMR9 vs EVR

Hello, Vicul, you wrote: V> Dock on EVR all is beautiful  as it can be collected. Yes here in an Internet the judgement that EVR , than VMR9 walks. If support XP use EVR is not necessary. It it is not simple faster VMR-9, and it is infinite faster. The main difference in support MF, and in that that it supports the most important thing DXVA2. At all I do not remember, when the last time in our software codecs without support DXVA2 - for example were used: 25 SD windows - loading CPU of 20 % 8 HD windows - loading CPU of 30 % As the software works for you without acceleration...

5

Re: VMR9 vs EVR

V> If support XP use EVR is not necessary. It it is not simple faster VMR-9, and it is infinite faster. The main difference in support MF, and in that that it supports the most important thing DXVA2. At all I do not remember, when the last time in our software codecs without support DXVA2 To me were used support  is necessary, but fortunately the amount of users there decreases. Anyway it is possible to add necessary  if to define, on what OS the user V> sits As the software works for you without acceleration... VMR9 works with DXVA1

6

Re: VMR9 vs EVR

Hello, Vicul, you wrote: V> VMR9 works with DXVA1 Fairly, DXVA1 passed and never with it worked. I, even, did not see filters which it is a mode support. I know that DXVA, initially, had  API where acceleration has been spread"by an equal layer on the decoder and a renderer that very much it was not convenient to vendors of decoders. Then, the Microsoft overworked API and made DXVA2 where all acceleration moved entirely to the decoder. Actually, if you are concentrated only on DirectShow - for you EVR will differ only that supports format NV12 which is necessary for display Direct3D c which generates DXVA2 the decoder. About windowless, I not in course as we entirely"moved"on own engine of a player where DirectShow filters are used separately from the graph, on a level with ffmpeg. Renderers that video that audio, at me the. It is all it is necessary for support of playing with the arbitrary speed forward and back, and also for game of plej-sheets. But, anyway, DXVA2 gives a huge scoring in speed, it is especially noticeable at playing back when GOP  in advance in video storage, and it is then lost upside-down.

7

Re: VMR9 vs EVR

V> But, anyway, DXVA2 gives a huge scoring in speed, it is especially noticeable at playing back when GOP  in advance in video storage, and it is then lost upside-down. Thanks for the information, are already over what to think. Well, and how conducts DXVA2 in new 1703 Windows 10? V> About windowless, yes with it just problems also are not present - all dares through  a window which should be given application.

8

Re: VMR9 vs EVR

Hello, Vicul, you wrote: V> Thanks for the information, are already over what to think. Well, and how conducts DXVA2 in new 1703 Windows 10? Fairly, so far did not run. In Win10 1607 works without changes. V> yes with it just problems also are not present - all dares through  a window which should be given application. Once for a long time we worked in this mode, therefore I a little in course. It was necessary to refuse, as if it is necessary fast  video windows, events of change of the size of a window and change of the size of video happened not absolutely simultaneously, especially in a pause mode. Now we use for interface Qt c ANGLE, in quality  rendering. ANGLE gives Qt interface OpenGL atop Direct3D, but saves interop between Direct3D and OpenGL. It allows to "mold" DXVA surfaces directly in OpenGL surfaces, without creation  windows. Accordingly video-windows work as native widgets in Qt and superimposing participates in all,  etc. . over video it is possible to superimpose translucent menus, and generally any Qt-shnye widget.

9

Re: VMR9 vs EVR

V> it is fair, so far did not run. In Win10 1607 works without changes. A C of 1607 problems just also was not. In 1703 they started a drawing to correct. At me on  the hogwash with rendering  began. More shortly, it is necessary to me where that a computer  that it is all to check up on pure OS V> Once for a long time we worked in this mode, therefore I a little in course. It was necessary to refuse, as if it is necessary fast  video windows, events of change of the size of a window and change of the size of video happened not absolutely simultaneously, especially in a pause mode. Well as quickly, the initial window should in  be translated a screen and it is reverse. On VMR9 special brakes did not note. And video a window is used, is faster for control of video of a flow, than for playing. As the environment I use Vizual Studio. Though the idea with QT was pleasant to me

10

Re: VMR9 vs EVR

Hello, Vicul, you wrote: V> a C of 1607 problems just also was not. In 1703 they started a drawing to correct. At me on  the hogwash with rendering  began. Very interesting. Means we will carefully prepare... V> As the environment I use Vizual Studio. Though the idea with QT was pleasant to me Well and we 2013 use a Visual Studio. But for the interface - QT. Painfully beautifully and quickly all turns out. Plus, any yankings and blinkings at copying as QT uses internal buffering before an interface output, and from standard window system winapi only one window - the main thing. All remaining, as a matter of fact, a picture in this window.

11

Re: VMR9 vs EVR

Hello, Vicul, you wrote: It here 32 different video in Sciter: It is used DirectShow for obtaining video frames and Direct2D. On XP - OpenGL. Since <video> in Sciter this same that <img> (only image for it are updated in rate of a waltz) that it is possible to represent any effects. For example real time ambient background: Or everyones overlays type dynamic video controls: Well or generally all it to build in in DirectX pipeline: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nuDkwJwUuY