[mythtv-users] Output from the Hauppauge HD-PVR?

[Brad DerManouelian]

On Aug 27, 2008, at 6:23 AM, Robert McNamara wrote:

>>> I asked about this in another thread and was told and explained that
>>> my AMD 64 X2 4200+ simply doesn't have the power to play back h.264
>>> video.
>>> In fact, I believe the quote was something emasculating like
>>> "woefully
>>> inadequate". Yup. There it is:
>>> http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/users/345697#345697
>
> *sigh*.  Here we go again.  As explained in the very first sentence of
> that post, That system (and those like it) are inadequte for all but
> *the lowest bitrate HD-PVR samples*.  And what fact is everyone
> ignoring here?  The sample in question is at 6 Megabit/s, less than
> half of the bitrate the HD-PVR is capable of.  Also, as John Poet
> mentioned last time, the VBR setting on the HD-PVR is now usable when
> recording in myth which brings the requirements down a bit.
>
> I *never* said it didn't have the capacity to play back h.264 video,
> so it would be nice not to have words put in my mouth.  In fact,
> "h.264 video" in itself is a totally generic term.  Even very low spec
> systems could play back h.264 given adequately (there's that word
> again!) low bitrates and encoding options.  When dealing with the
> HD-PVR at bitrates that are of good/great quality (read: 12-13.5
> Megabit/s) you are dealing with both medium bitrate, complex encoding
> options and, as I mentioned before, single sliced encoding, making it
> currently playable in only a single core in linux.  Guess what the
> HD-PVR's setting at 6 Mbit/s is called in windows?  "Low Quality."  So
> yeah, my original statement stands.
>
> The other thing that is giving the OP a major speed boost is the fact
> that Myth is throwing out the audio as he hasn't compiled in support
> for it.  Myth doesn't have to waste any cycles decoding or (more
> importantly) syncing the audio to the video.
>
> So, what have we learned?  6 Mbit video != 13.5 Mbit video.  Audio
> decoding/sync == takes cycles too.
>
> Also, if one is emasculated when the power or capability of their
> computer is called into question, well then... I don't know how to
> help with that problem.

I didn't think you would take my comments so personally and respond in  
such a condescending way. I apologize for making you think I was upset  
at all by your comments in either thread. In fact, I'm grateful for  
the information.

Here's my issue: Someone with my same processor can play back the same  
file without a problem. I'm trying to find out why I can't. The OP  
doesn't have audio happening, but another poster does and can play  
back this same file.