VirtualLarry
No Lifer
- Aug 25, 2001
- 56,570
- 10,205
- 126
I did some testing with my HTPC, a BE-2400 on a 780G under XP 32-bit, 2GB of RAM.
With Flash 10.1 release version, and CPU oced to 2.875Ghz, 250FSB, and the onboard graphics oced from 500 to 750, full-screen 480P Hulu was very smooth.
I downclocked to 1.1Ghz, and removed the oc on the video chipset, and the flash still played, but you could tell it was skipping frames, and occasionally there would be mpeg-decoding-like graphical glitches. Lip-syncing was actually still good though, you could tell that it was still using hardware accel, it just wasn't keeping the frame rate up.
So hardware accel helps (it was still watchable at the lower clocks), but good CPU speed helps a lot too.
Hmm. I just tried watching the same clip on my laptop, which has a 1.6Ghz TF-20 single-core AMD CPU, and a mobile 780G chipset. It was quite watchable, but compared to my overclocked HTPC, it looked like it was dropping frames a little bit. Not quite as bad as when my HTPC was downclocked to 1.1Ghz, but almost.
With Flash 10.1 release version, and CPU oced to 2.875Ghz, 250FSB, and the onboard graphics oced from 500 to 750, full-screen 480P Hulu was very smooth.
I downclocked to 1.1Ghz, and removed the oc on the video chipset, and the flash still played, but you could tell it was skipping frames, and occasionally there would be mpeg-decoding-like graphical glitches. Lip-syncing was actually still good though, you could tell that it was still using hardware accel, it just wasn't keeping the frame rate up.
So hardware accel helps (it was still watchable at the lower clocks), but good CPU speed helps a lot too.
Hmm. I just tried watching the same clip on my laptop, which has a 1.6Ghz TF-20 single-core AMD CPU, and a mobile 780G chipset. It was quite watchable, but compared to my overclocked HTPC, it looked like it was dropping frames a little bit. Not quite as bad as when my HTPC was downclocked to 1.1Ghz, but almost.
Last edited: