From owner-freebsd-multimedia Sun Jan 18 21:54:58 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA28024 for freebsd-multimedia-outgoing; Sun, 18 Jan 1998 21:54:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-multimedia@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from mail.scsn.net (scsn.net [206.25.246.12]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id VAA28018 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 1998 21:54:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dmaddox@scsn.net) Received: from rhiannon.scsn.net ([208.133.153.49]) by mail.scsn.net (Post.Office MTA v3.1.2 release (PO205-101c) ID# 0-41950U6000L1100S0) with ESMTP id AAA149; Mon, 19 Jan 1998 00:53:00 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by rhiannon.scsn.net (8.8.8/8.8.7) id AAA00322; Mon, 19 Jan 1998 00:54:19 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from root) Message-ID: <19980119005418.44652@scsn.net> Date: Mon, 19 Jan 1998 00:54:18 -0500 From: dmaddox@scsn.net (Donald J. Maddox) To: Michael Imor Cc: multimedia@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Poor Performance from Linux RealPlayer Reply-To: dmaddox@scsn.net References: <19980118225249.12048@scsn.net> <199801190143.BAA12385@fang.cs.sunyit.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.88 In-Reply-To: <199801190143.BAA12385@fang.cs.sunyit.edu>; from Michael Imor on Mon, Jan 19, 1998 at 12:38:19AM -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-multimedia@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, Jan 19, 1998 at 12:38:19AM -0500, Michael Imor wrote: > I believe its because XFree86 doesn't use the scaling hardware on the video > card so the CPU has to do all the scaling. > > Mike Really? Is this true of _all_ XF86 servers? It would be nice if someone using the XiG server could report what kind of performance they get from the RealPlayer at high bit-rates/zoomed window... > > At 10:52 PM 1/18/98 -0500, Donald J. Maddox wrote: > >I find that performance of the Linux RealPlayer is pretty atrocious > >on high-bit-rate streams... With the W95 version, I can play a > >100Kbps stream zoomed to full screen with no problems, but the > >Linux version chokes to death on a 100K stream if you try to > >zoom the window :-( > > > >Anybody know if the performance is this bad under Linux? > >