Old 21st November 2001, 17:58   #1
chrisduncan
Junior Member
 
chrisduncan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 9
Send a message via ICQ to chrisduncan
AVS hardware acceleration!!!

i do believe that the most important wish i have for any of the new versions of winamp is a hardware accelerated AVS. how good would 'elivs' and 'AVsociety' in fullscreen @ 120fps???? very good i hear u say!

ps: finish WINAMP 3 quicker please!
chrisduncan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th November 2001, 19:06   #2
Thor
Major Dude
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Gent, Belgium (Europe)
Posts: 968
Send a message via ICQ to Thor Send a message via AIM to Thor
hw accel for AVS is quite impossible due to the concept of how it works as far as I know...
I've asked stuff like that to justin and other NS people and they've explained that making it faster is not really possible...

AVS isn't rendered in 3D, so it can't use 3d hw...
AVS rendering is just calculating of 2d pixels on the CPU

to get uber fast fullscreem vis try Milkdrop or good old Geiss!

and about wa3, it's done when it's done
Thor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th November 2001, 20:50   #3
chrisduncan
Junior Member
 
chrisduncan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 9
Send a message via ICQ to chrisduncan
ooo! i see!
maybe a matrox or sommit would make the AVS fast as shit hot off a frying pan
ive got both of 'em but they aint da shit compared to AVS n its presets.
wot i want is motherfucking fast mini-screen AVS (not fullscreen) going @ 300fps wots the best vis u reckon for dat then?

WINAMP 3: oi wot ya mean when its done!??? work harder!!

ta
chrisduncan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th November 2001, 20:58   #4
Thor
Major Dude
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Gent, Belgium (Europe)
Posts: 968
Send a message via ICQ to Thor Send a message via AIM to Thor
buying maxtor card won't help
it's all CPU based
and btw, Matrox isn't _that_ good
nVidia onwz all
Thor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th November 2001, 21:03   #5
chrisduncan
Junior Member
 
chrisduncan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 9
Send a message via ICQ to chrisduncan
'cause i know nvidia r00l u ph00l i was finkin in terms of 2d sp33d
well if it aint due to da vid cards, then sommit like a s00ped up AMD????? DD
chrisduncan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th November 2001, 23:19   #6
Thor
Major Dude
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Gent, Belgium (Europe)
Posts: 968
Send a message via ICQ to Thor Send a message via AIM to Thor
well, i have an Athlon 1,4GHz
prittym uch the shitz
but AVS in full screen at 800*600 still isn't really smooth
like i said the way AVS works is just almost impossible to be smooth at resolutions like that...
Thor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th November 2001, 11:12   #7
chrisduncan
Junior Member
 
chrisduncan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 9
Send a message via ICQ to chrisduncan
so wots da point in making sommit that can neva be good??! nah dont get me wrong, i am highly appreicative of AVS but it jsut aint as good as i thought it could. is winamp3 gonna do the AVS /vis any different?
how bout some1 could design a plug in that converts the 2d pixels calculated on the CPU to 3d pixels on the 3d card? is anything like that possible?
chrisduncan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th November 2001, 17:16   #8
Thor
Major Dude
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Gent, Belgium (Europe)
Posts: 968
Send a message via ICQ to Thor Send a message via AIM to Thor
AVS is good
it's not really intented to be run fullscreen at high resolutions, that's all.
No, don't think that's possible.

Like i siad, try Milkdrop or Geiss.
Thor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th November 2001, 17:37   #9
chrisduncan
Junior Member
 
chrisduncan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 9
Send a message via ICQ to chrisduncan
yeah yeah but i use the avs as a small window so it, and winamp doublesized, fills my second 17" monitor. 'Sexy attached analyzers' by Mike Lynch is very good as a simple subsitute to avs for my usage. Milkdrop is very impressive and also geiss, but they aint got the massive range of skilled vis presets u find in the AVS.
chrisduncan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th November 2001, 18:01   #10
Thor
Major Dude
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Gent, Belgium (Europe)
Posts: 968
Send a message via ICQ to Thor Send a message via AIM to Thor
yea well, start coding you're own milkdrop presents i'd say
Thor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th December 2001, 01:02   #11
meLted
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 19
Send a message via AIM to meLted
God i hate people that think their in the ghetto

God i hate people that think their in the ghetto
meLted is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th December 2001, 04:06   #12
^AciD^|^BurneR^
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Perth Australia
Posts: 6
Send a message via ICQ to ^AciD^|^BurneR^
i get decent fps in fullscreen at 640x480
well decent as in watchable...
no actual noticeable from a slight distance stutter
somewhere around 30fps...

and yes vid card does matter


from a 2 meg ATI turbo graphics card to a Geforce 2 Ti 64meg does make a shit load difference, ati (320x240) 30fps max, Ti (320x240) 120fps max...
i also have the same ammount of cpu power and ram, (duron 850 256 sd 150)

anywayz
if u want fullscreen decent fps just do overlay and put the window at a reasonable size and u will be fine
^AciD^|^BurneR^ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th December 2001, 23:31   #13
SuckMyPopadidge
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 39
if vid card matters then every1 that uses VIS big time (like parties or whatever), should have an AAlchemy system.. like 16 vsa-100s running in parallel with like 1 gig of texture memory (each chip has like 64 megs allocated to it - so really 64) but the sheer speed of it is insane.. 16x166mhz=2.652 ghz video card haha.. im thinkin ud probably be gettin a few hundred frames a second full screen .. or just get somethin like ascii white if vid card doesnt matter... what 12.4 terraflops not good enuff for u? more convential maybe like a cray 3 supercluster (i think they are like 6 terraflop)... orrrrr you could just use overlay mode and take the resolution hit and get same fps as you do in window mode
SuckMyPopadidge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2001, 19:34   #14
Garp
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1
AVS full screen frame rate

I don't know why it runs so bad in full screen. I don't think it's impossible to make it run faster. Synthesoft visualizations run very fast in full screen, why can't the AVS visualizations?

I have a early Pentium 4, 1.3 with a geforce 2mx card if that matters, there seems to be some disagreement on that. In full screen frame rate is between 15 and 20 on average. Runs close to 100 at small size. I think they can be made to run faster if the coding and the tweak screens are modified.
Garp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th December 2001, 00:59   #15
Scarface2k1
Banned
 
Scarface2k1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: i dont get out much so i dont remember
Posts: 1,032
Send a message via ICQ to Scarface2k1 Send a message via AIM to Scarface2k1 Send a message via Yahoo to Scarface2k1
well, onje could raise the refreash rates on their monitors (depending on what kind of vid card they have) but it'll only give out like 1 or 2 at the max more frames a sec
Scarface2k1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th January 2002, 16:38   #16
ben2l4c
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 4
Man it gotta be possible. I got no doubt in that, but it may need a total conversion of the AVS .. Nothing is impossible if you do it the right way, though it may seem far.

And i really want that shit to go faster, just attached my sorround system and television with my nVidia GeForce2 PRO 64MB overclocked to the same as the GF3 TI-500 .. And of course an AMD XP 1700+ 1550mhz @ 1937mhz, on the new Abit motherboard with 512 DDR RAM

^^
Tweaked quite a lot here, so it kinda have to be smooth, else theres a bug.. how the hell can you expect people to running it smooth if they need anything higher than this, cuz i still get laggy motion!
ben2l4c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th January 2002, 12:41   #17
Clang
Junior Member
 
Clang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 33
mmm, k, now i also wanna try it

Thor said, that AVS renders everything in 2D.

Now i thought:

IF AVS passes the instructions directly to the vid hw/card, is it possible that this way of generating viz is faster than let all the stuff done by the CPU?

Yeh, i know, a >1 GHz CPU must be somehow faster than a 200 MHz GPU, BUT: a GPU ist optimized to do such gfx-related things. and doin' them fast.

And vid-cards are/must be able to eat 2D-instructions, or is this whole GUI of Windows done by the CPU ?! (just an example)

plz tell me if i'm completely wrong or something.

(Sorry if i made some mistakes, but my skill in english isn't that good...at least i'm not talking this ghetto-zlang )

edit: btw does AVS use MMX ?

Last edited by Clang; 17th January 2002 at 14:52.
Clang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th January 2002, 15:29   #18
UnConeD
Whacked Moderator
 
UnConeD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,104
Funny

Whoa, this thread is weird. Some statements are totally off really.

Here's an explanation that pretty much sums it up:

Each AVS element either renders or changes a 2D buffer image in memory in a certain way. Because everything is done by the CPU, it's a lot slower than most things you're used to seeing today:

Jaw-dropping special effects in full smooth 3D @ 1280x1024 or higher.

What most people forget is that all this is done by *dedicated hardware* that is 100% optimized for 3D. Your 3D card can draw triangles lightning fast and blend several pixel-layers together with little or no hit. That's because you can do those things nearly 'for free' if you design a special circuit/chip for it.

Even on the newest CPU, a software 3D renderer couldn't even get half the resolution that 3D hardware gets, simply because a CPU wasn't optimized for 3D things. On the other hand, a CPU can handle an entire OS. All your 3D card can do is draw, draw and draw (ok, these days they also can handle vector mathematics, but you still get the idea).

Now here's the thing: half of the effects that AVS does can't be done through todays 3D cards. Some, like the Dynamic Movement, most of the Render's and so on can be done by a 3D card (a dynmov would be drawing a flat grid that has the coordinates of the points slightly distorted). A 3D card can draw surfaces very fast, so you can just have everything be 2D in a 3D space to use its features on a 2D picture. However other features can't be done this way. So in order to do those other things, the picture would have to be fetched from the video card into system memory, changed, and sent back to the video card. This is a very intensive operation.

So what could be done? You could create an AVS that contains only effects that can be done by a 3D card. That would include most of the renders, most of the movements (a Trans / Mov could be a problem), some effects like Bump (using DOT3 bump mapping). Some of the color operations would a problem and would have to be stripped out. The resulting plug-in already exists: it's called Milkdrop :P
Granted, Milkdrop doesn't give you the freedom of combining effects in an arbitrary order, but it can be changed to allow that.

As for having a Matrox Card (they tout "Full 2D Acceleration"), these are just a few boring features for quickly drawing things to the screen. This won't affect AVS one bit.

I *really* don't see why some people want AVS @ 800x600 fullscreen @ 30fps. The reason your 3D card can do it and AVS not, is because your 3D card is a 'stupid' machine designed for 3D only. Get used to this, and get used to a lower resolution.

And yes, AVS uses MMX. This is the reason why the window width must be a multiple of 4 (check the width when you resize the window). Well you can scale it to an arbitrary width, but AVS will work on a wider image internally and clip off the 1/2/3 extra columns.

Btw
Quote:
God i hate people that think their in the ghetto
I hate people who mix up homophones.
UnConeD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th January 2002, 21:46   #19
Clang
Junior Member
 
Clang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 33
UnConeD:
Your reply is very informative...but I still have a question:

a) Your reply showed me the foolness of my other post (sysmem>>vidmem etc.). Ok, let it be done by the CPU. MMX is a possibility to increase Speed. Now: There are 3DNow!/SSE and those others. If AVS uses these Extensions, it would be faster, right ?
Clang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th January 2002, 20:05   #20
ben2l4c
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 4
Heh... The ones who dont have a GFX card should buy one... candy is more expensive than graphic cards these days
ben2l4c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th January 2002, 03:20   #21
BlurPak2k1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: well you got to find me first :D
Posts: 201
Re: Funny

Quote:
Originally posted by UnConeD
Get used to this, and get used to a lower resolution.
roflmao
bout time someone told them
BlurPak2k1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st January 2002, 23:06   #22
ben2l4c
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 4


Theres no use in it.. It should be removed!

Think if you'd run it on a comp with gateway etc. a few function with normal prioritry and this bitch comes in realtime and screws the other progs.. heh
ben2l4c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd January 2002, 13:17   #23
Clang
Junior Member
 
Clang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 33
ben...running AVS on a gateway-comp...
Clang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd January 2002, 21:55   #24
ben2l4c
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 4
Actually i happened to be working on my WinXP gateway, and it basicly increased the internet connection alot with my server .. heh, i didnt know that AVS took so much CPU really
ben2l4c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd January 2002, 20:52   #25
Clang
Junior Member
 
Clang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 33
Nah, np, I just had to laugh, don't take it personal
Clang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th January 2002, 18:38   #26
AEternal
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Posts: 1
Send a message via ICQ to AEternal Send a message via AIM to AEternal
I don't get it...

Well if there is already a plugin that allows us to take advantage of our massive 3D hardware acceleration, why aren't more people developing MilkDrop plugins? Heck, I didn't even know it was a full plugin system like AVS until I read this thread.
AEternal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th January 2002, 22:39   #27
BlurPak2k1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: well you got to find me first :D
Posts: 201
I just dont see why couldnt just some of the rendering (such as the render/lineplane or the render/dot fountain and/or etc.) could be converted into 3d drawn acceleration and some of the transistions in 2d...
But why not if the math served in a superscope was made, couldnt by in some case could it be accelerated in 3d, OR for shits-and-giggles:

Redisign the render/superscope, so itll automatically add the 3d and all someone would need to do is add the math for the three dimentions.

And even have a funtion for it that'll change in from a basic mode (just the three dimention, and maybe a few buttons that have some preset ), to a somewhat advanced version that would let the user customise the 3d math....
just a sudjestion..
BlurPak2k1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Go Back   Winamp & SHOUTcast Forums > Winamp > Winamp Wishlist

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump