Tino

18th November 2001 18:09 UTC

AVS is slow in fullscreen
I have a question : Why is AVS so slow in the fullscreen mode ? I have a Athlon 1.4 and geforce2 mx400(64ram) with 256mb ram pc133. Or is this the same on every pc ?

greetz

Tino

NuLoser

18th November 2001 18:16 UTC

Yup. AVS is slow in full screen. It does not use hardware acceleration.

bluetape2k1

18th November 2001 18:33 UTC

on full screen, don't use something like 800 by 600 or something

I'm on a k6-2 500 with the same Graphics card as you except I have a pci with 32 meg :( but it works


anyways I use 320@240 around that area you will get better avs

Tino

18th November 2001 19:21 UTC

so...
so I guess there is no pc that can handle 1027*728 at 24fps ?? Thats quite strange. :confused:

greetz

Tino

Rocker

20th November 2001 08:30 UTC

an AMD athlon XP 1900+

might be able to do it

Angry Weasel

20th November 2001 13:06 UTC

1027x728 is not what Winamp uses, and for a good reason. Computers work best with numbers that are powers of 2. Which is why you get desktop resolution options like 640x480 (does anyone actually USE that?), 800x600, 1024x768, 1280x1420 (or something like that) and 1200x1600

Tino

20th November 2001 15:47 UTC

1027x728 is not what Winamp uses, and for a good reason. Computers work best with numbers that are powers of 2. Which is why you get desktop resolution options like 640x480 (does anyone actually USE that?), 800x600, 1024x768, 1280x1420 (or something like that) and 1200x1600

>>>>>>>>> I made a mistake : I ment 1024*768 :rolleyes:

But it is still stupid because when winamp came out with that AVS thing there was no pc that could handle it ! :confused:

Tino

flatmatt

20th November 2001 19:49 UTC

Oh, well, planning for the future.

Tino

20th November 2001 19:53 UTC

:D :D :D :D :D

Angry Weasel

20th November 2001 20:00 UTC

Yep. And I will be the first to have a bazillion gigabytes of ram....first civilian anyway :D jk

Tino

20th November 2001 20:04 UTC

I DO hope you will be able to run the AVS plug in at 1280x1420 or higher!

:cool: :)

UnConeD

24th November 2001 00:31 UTC

No need to!
The cool thing about AVS is that it can perform very complex effects that look good even on lower resolutions. Besides, for projecting onto big screens, AVS is perfect, because you don't get a great resolution there anyway.

It's a choice... go for Milkdrop if you want smooth 1280x960 performance... but you won't get as much interesting effects as AVS.

By the way, if no-one ever made a program that was runnable on the average PC, then you'd have missed out on some of the greatest pc stuff:
- The 7th Guest (this CD-ROM game made CD-ROM drive-sales skyrocket)
- Unreal (even though its software mode was slow and not many people had 3D cards, the quality of the graphics were definately Unreal at that time!)
- etc.

Of course all the more recent PC freaks won't remember the days when new software was usually a revolution :)

Rovastar

24th November 2001 00:53 UTC

Re: No need to!

Originally posted by UnConeD
It's a choice... go for Milkdrop if you want smooth 1280x960 performance... but you won't get as much interesting effects as AVS.

Of course all the more recent PC freaks won't remember the days when new software was usually a revolution :)