[shri]

Stoob - same here. I'm on a 4 year old P4 - 2.8Mhz CPU with 2GB RAM but cannot view HD files with any reasonable resolution.

Either I've got my system configured wrongly or HD just needs a newer CPU (more cache / more cores).

[Boris]

I have downloaded these files ( needs a particular codec ) and on a normal monitor with a " middle of the road " graphics card the image is good. However, most video geeks commenting on the boards usually burn the image to disc and then play it on their HD complaint players to a suitable HDTV compliant TV and then get all picking about things that I, as a normal person, would not consider relevant.

This file type would never produce HD quality on your normal bog standard monitor no matter what the card. After all the card just processes the information and is not capable of morphing your monitor into something it was never designed to do.

My set up is similar to Shri.

[Stoob]

Boris

I am currently trying to play these files using Quicktime (I believe it is an Apple format?), are you using a normal media player with an installed codec?

The problem is not the visual quality it is the framerate (1 frame every 2 secs or so), FYI I have the PC connected to an HD capable plasma telly through HDMI. The quality is noticeably better than the normal SD files.

[vmlinuz]

I've started downloading the odd HD video, and I've noticed the same thing. My flatmate's low/mid-range 2008-class PC can play them with no trouble at all, while my 2006-class laptop simply can't handle them. I am planning to upgrade my 2005-class PC at some point pretty soon, and it shouldn't have any trouble. Right now, I'm tempted to setup a vaguely-automated thing on my fileserver to general SD copies of HD videos for viewing on old hardware - including the Xbox (original) I use as a media player, which doesn't have the slightest chance of dealing with HD

[Boris]

Originally Posted by Stoob

Boris

I am currently trying to play these files using Quicktime (I believe it is an Apple format?), are you using a normal media player with an installed codec?

The problem is not the visual quality it is the framerate (1 frame every 2 secs or so), FYI I have the PC connected to an HD capable plasma telly through HDMI. The quality is noticeably better than the normal SD files.

Ahhhhh Quicktime -- my favourite hate program.
I feel it doesn't work well on a PC. Had loads of issues with it.

I use WMP because I am lazy -- BUT ---- If the file won't run or I need to get rid of subtitles, have problems with the sound etc etc then I use VLC.

VLC is brilliant. It runs everything and the picture quality on the monitor is much better than WMP in running the same file. With all the technology that MS has it really mystifies me as to why this little program wipes the floor with them. You can do so much more with it. Your 264 HD file will be noticeably better in VLC.


Are not frame rate issues memory related? HD files are larger for the same physical runtime for obvious quality reasons. Therefore my thinking is you either need a dedicated card with memory and / or more box ram.
If your running into an HDMI port maybe you have a suitable card with the HDMI output already? I would look at memory and cache size / buffer issues.

For me, this reply is really only about the issue of the player. I don't physically output to an HD device. Just play the files. But if I did and had the same issues then what I have said is what I would do as a NON GEEK.

[Stoob]

Thanks, I'll give VLC a try this evening..

[Lammarite]

I have just finished watching every episode of Never Mind the Buzzcocks on alluc.org and will now start on The Tudors I think!

[Stoob]

I downloaded VLC and it works like a charm, plays all my HD files flawlessly.

Thanks for the tip Boris

Shri, it may be worth a try on your machine!

[Boris]

Originally Posted by Lammarite

I have just finished watching every episode of Never Mind the Buzzcocks on alluc.org and will now start on The Tudors I think!

Thats REALLY sad !!

[Meerkat]

VLC=default player=rocks!

Love it