Hitcher Wrote:I tried the latest build from kees1869 but FPS were running around 160.
I've not been able to try out the glXSwapIntervalSGI patch for ATI cards though.

Hitcher Wrote:Thanks, I'll try it out later and report back.

What V-Sync option do I need to choose?

alanwww1 Wrote:@Bobo1on1:

For me the branch is pretty stable and works ok most of the time. When do you think it will be merged to main trunk ?

What issues are you working on currently ?

I think what could be improved is the way sound "catches" up with the video so that when i start, pause, skip the video the pitch gets funny low of high for about 10 secs. On win Reclock it is solved so that until the sound gets in sync with video, the player plays the original sound in the original speed. Than it switches to the sound with the adjusted speed. But this is only until it detects all things in the beginning.

What i don't understand is why it needs to catch up again when i pause or skip the video. I mean until that time, the player could know the refresh rates, framerates, video clock rates.

Anyway, thanks for the great work. Now i don't have to watch at panning screens whether i loose frames or not. I see all the frames all the time. It is really great.

Quote:1. Can you add settings that allow xbmc to upsample audio (in both music and video) to a user defined value? For example, if my DACs support 192 KHz in stereo and 96 Khz in 7.1, then it would be nice to utilize that capability. It is far preferable to handle this on a relatively powerful CPU (with a good algorithm like SRC) vs. having a sound card resample with a much slower DSP! Even most receivers (<$1k) would lag far behind secret rabbit code upsampling on a modern CPU.

2. Of course, upsampling is most appropriate when also able to utilize a user selected quality level. As libsamplerate can be highly CPU intensive for 'audiophile' levels, it would be good if XBMC offered different user selectable quality levels for Music and Video playback (defaults could be Music = higher quality [bestsinc] and Video = lower quality to allow software video decode).

3. Slightly off topic, but if Xbmc was able to load the entire audio file (or a substantial portion for video) into RAM then jitter could be minimized. Beyond eliminating jitter in audio and video, the HDD could spin down during music/movie playback to eliminate noise and heat. Given the move towards 64 bit Core i7 systems with up to 24 GB RAM on MicroATX (Asus, DFI), the user could select the amount of RAM that XBMC should utilize, or a suggested amount could be part of a setup routine at install.

4. With a near perfect waveform and noisefloor using the above methods, XBMC must then avoid windows XP meddling with perfection. When windows mixer muddles the noise, it does so with a dynamic range of 92 db. In contrast, secret rabbit code has an SNR of 143 db at highest quality levels! XBMC needs to play well with WSAPI (vista/windows7) and Kernel Streaming (XP) to avoid having poor drivers resample/remix to a khz and bit level supported by an HDMI connection or sound card DAC (96/192 khz 24 bit).

spiff Wrote:bobo wanted to start over. no other reason (but yes, it also brings vdpau into there)

dmidi Wrote:Given your familiarity with secret rabbit code (SRC)...
The above 4 enhancements combined with xbmc's great GUI would make for an audio/videophile level system. As it is now, XBMC holds back even the best hardware in terms of sound and video quality. With the right combination of code (like libsamplerate) and hardware, the PC can be a much better AV platform than dedicated machines. A $1000 PC will rival $20k 'audio/videophile' gear - and the GUI will be leagues ahead.