<HTML><BODY style="word-wrap: break-word; -khtml-nbsp-mode: space; -khtml-line-break: after-white-space; "><DIV><DIV>On Nov 29, 2006, at 8:41 AM, Michael Tiller wrote:</DIV><BR class="Apple-interchange-newline"><BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><BR><BR><DIV><SPAN class="gmail_quote">On 11/29/06, <B class="gmail_sendername">Brad DerManouelian</B> <<A href="mailto:myth@dermanouelian.com">myth@dermanouelian.com</A>> wrote:</SPAN><BLOCKQUOTE class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> On Nov 29, 2006, at 8:22 AM, Michael Tiller wrote:<BR><BR>> (granted, it is a Celeron)<BR><BR>case closed. :)</BLOCKQUOTE><DIV><BR>Seriously though...is it really hopeless? <A href="http://www.mythtv.org/wiki/index.php/XvMC"> This table</A> implies it can be done (at least with a 2.93 GHz Celeron) with XvMC support (which doesn't work to well for me so far).<BR><BR>I have a full P4 2.4 GHz in another machine. Are they the same socket? (I don't remember off the top of my head) <BR><BR>Would I have better luck if I switched them?!?<BR><BR>Also, is an AGP video card essential or will a PCI be sufficient?<BR></DIV><BR>--<BR>Mike<BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV>That table states "<FONT class="Apple-style-span" face="Helvetica" size="3"><SPAN class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 12.7px;">Without XvMC, HD stutters a lot."</SPAN><FONT class="Apple-style-span" face="Bitstream Vera Sans"> on the 2.93GHz Celeron. Also note that it states no de-interlacing is being used. So yeah, I would say it's hopeless to get HD happening on that processor without XvMC. AGP/PCI should make no difference that I can tell. The table also states that using a Pentium 4 2.4, you can run HD without XvMC and get up to 70% CPU utilization. Switching might be your best option. You'll have to check your processors to see if they use the same socket. Pentium and Celeron came in a variety of different footprints.</FONT></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>