On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 12:48 AM, Travis King wrote:
> That's incredible. I was reading some threads(albeit from some Linux
> distro mailing list) from 2008 about a 2Ghz Core2Duo with some Intel
> GPU on a R61(a machine I recently bought) being too slow for 1080
> resolutions with mplayer in any s
On Sun, 26 Dec 2010 23:54:24 -0500
Ted Unangst wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 11:05 PM, Travis King
> wrote:
> > On Fri, 24 Dec 2010 22:46:36 -0500
> > Ted Unangst wrote:
> >
> >> Contrary to the mplayer documentation, the gl video output driver
> >> may work better than xv, at least for some
On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 11:05 PM, Travis King wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Dec 2010 22:46:36 -0500
> Ted Unangst wrote:
>
>> Contrary to the mplayer documentation, the gl video output driver may
>> work better than xv, at least for some systems, in at least two ways.
>>
>> Playing a large video (1080p), x
On Fri, 24 Dec 2010 22:46:36 -0500
Ted Unangst wrote:
> Contrary to the mplayer documentation, the gl video output driver may
> work better than xv, at least for some systems, in at least two ways.
>
> Playing a large video (1080p), xv can't keep up, and the video falls
> behind audio. With gl,
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 10:46:36PM -0500, Ted Unangst wrote:
> This is a laptop with intel video, other systems may be different, but
> if you're having any trouble with mplayer video, the gl driver is
> worth trying.
I used to notice a lot of tearing on Intel X3100 chipsets (GM965). I
don't see
Contrary to the mplayer documentation, the gl video output driver may
work better than xv, at least for some systems, in at least two ways.
Playing a large video (1080p), xv can't keep up, and the video falls
behind audio. With gl, works great. Even with xv, CPU is
considerably less than 100%, s
6 matches
Mail list logo
