Streaming HD I-player video.

Further to the person who was asking..lost the original thread..I just
made some checks.

On my link here a 4Mpbps BRAS is good enough, but I am running into raw
CPU power to keep the Flash going without the odd jerk when the scene
changes. Even on 'small screen' rather than 'full screen'

I've only got a two core 1.6G Celeron..Nvidia graphics card.

And a 64 bit flash running under Linux.

So it looks like in my case CPU is the limiting factor.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> So it looks like in my case CPU is the limiting factor.

Flash rarely seems to hit its promise of using GPU acceleation instead
of CPU grunt, even on Windows.

The Natural Philosopher <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Further to the person who was asking..lost the original thread..I just
>made some checks.
>
>On my link here a 4Mpbps BRAS is good enough, but I am running into raw
>CPU power to keep the Flash going without the odd jerk when the scene
>changes. Even on 'small screen' rather than 'full screen'
>
>I've only got a two core 1.6G Celeron..Nvidia graphics card.
>
>And a 64 bit flash running under Linux.
>
>So it looks like in my case CPU is the limiting factor.

It could be?

Can you play this Alps video
http://vimeo.com/29735955

That was made for about 2.5megabits/sec *average* bitrate. Another
more original version is here, which could not have been messed with
by Vimeo
http://www.zen74158.zen.co.uk/videos/st-gallen-alps.m4v

A lot of PCs won't play it even off the hard drive.

Andy Burns wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> So it looks like in my case CPU is the limiting factor.
>
> Flash rarely seems to hit its promise of using GPU acceleation instead
> of CPU grunt, even on Windows.
>
Over many years I have come to the firm conclusion that if Adobe write
it, it will be a pile of CPU inefficient steaming wombat turds.

From my first exposure to postcript 'the file is HOW big? You mean I
need more processing power and RAM in my PRINTER than in the whole
office SERVER let alone the MAC or PC...to Flash, its always been the
same story...designed by academics to be all things to all men, and
needing a computer the size of a planet to run it.

I did notice some improvement when going from intel onboard to NVIDIA
card..the full screen NORMAL flash was unusable on the intel - and going
from 32 bit to 64 bit native OS as well.


So it must use SOME advanced stuff.

But it remains probably THE most CPU hungry process on my system.

Peter wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> Further to the person who was asking..lost the original thread..I just
>> made some checks.
>>
>> On my link here a 4Mpbps BRAS is good enough, but I am running into raw
>> CPU power to keep the Flash going without the odd jerk when the scene
>> changes. Even on 'small screen' rather than 'full screen'
>>
>> I've only got a two core 1.6G Celeron..Nvidia graphics card.
>>
>> And a 64 bit flash running under Linux.
>>
>> So it looks like in my case CPU is the limiting factor.
>
> It could be?
>
> Can you play this Alps video
> http://vimeo.com/29735955
>

Yes, in full screen its slightly jerky when the camera moves fast or
when the scene changes. using nearly all CPU.



> That was made for about 2.5megabits/sec *average* bitrate. Another
> more original version is here, which could not have been messed with
> by Vimeo
> http://www.zen74158.zen.co.uk/videos/st-gallen-alps.m4v
>
> A lot of PCs won't play it even off the hard drive.

Ill try..its downloading it instead of playing it...if its a windows
type format I may not have a codec tho. Oh VLC seems to play it very
well. FAR less CPU than flash.

Lovely video. If you took it, I am jealous as hell.

The Natural Philosopher <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Over many years I have come to the firm conclusion that if Adobe write
>it, it will be a pile of CPU inefficient steaming wombat turds.

Yes, and same for anything even looked at by Symantec.

The Natural Philosopher <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Peter wrote:
>> The Natural Philosopher <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>> Further to the person who was asking..lost the original thread..I just
>>> made some checks.
>>>
>>> On my link here a 4Mpbps BRAS is good enough, but I am running into raw
>>> CPU power to keep the Flash going without the odd jerk when the scene
>>> changes. Even on 'small screen' rather than 'full screen'
>>>
>>> I've only got a two core 1.6G Celeron..Nvidia graphics card.
>>>
>>> And a 64 bit flash running under Linux.
>>>
>>> So it looks like in my case CPU is the limiting factor.
>>
>> It could be?
>>
>> Can you play this Alps video
>> http://vimeo.com/29735955
>>
>
>Yes, in full screen its slightly jerky when the camera moves fast or
>when the scene changes. using nearly all CPU.
>
The jerkiness is a problem I have not resolved on *any* PC. But then I
don't have a PC which is a totally money no object state of the art
gaming machine.

The only way I can ever see that video smoothly is via HDMI playback
direct from the camcorder into a 1080P Sony TV, and that bitrate is
about 25mbits/sec.

The only way I can make it playable on any "computing device" I have
is to avoid rapid camera panning, which is obviously a good idea
anyway.

This is all OT but it remains a mystery.

Iplayer plays fine on a half decent PC, or an Ipad2, but not in the HD
mode whatever I do.

>> That was made for about 2.5megabits/sec *average* bitrate. Another
>> more original version is here, which could not have been messed with
>> by Vimeo
>> http://www.zen74158.zen.co.uk/videos/st-gallen-alps.m4v
>>
>> A lot of PCs won't play it even off the hard drive.
>
>Ill try..its downloading it instead of playing it...if its a windows
>type format I may not have a codec tho. Oh VLC seems to play it very
>well. FAR less CPU than flash.
>
>Lovely video. If you took it, I am jealous as hell.

Yeah, that one is from here
http://www.peter2000.co.uk/aviation/kithira/
A non low cost hobby

There is a basic issue, also unresolved for me, that under windoze one
has to download the whole file before it starts playing, which is
ridiculous for a file of say 1GB. On Apple platforms it starts
playback as soon as it has buffered a bit. This is also supposed to
happen with some windoze players e.g. VLC but for some reason it fails
as a result of the browser doing something wrong.

The way it is solved under windoze is by installing a media server on
the file server, and that is what Youtube, Vimeo, etc provide you
with.

Peter wrote:

> Can you play this Alps video
> which could not have been messed with by Vimeo
> http://www.zen74158.zen.co.uk/videos/st-gallen-alps.m4v
>
> A lot of PCs won't play it even off the hard drive.

Lowly AMD Fusion E350 plays it fine fullscreen or windowed

using vLC 35-40% CPU
or WMP 25-30% CPU

Andy Burns <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote

>Peter wrote:
>
>> Can you play this Alps video
>> which could not have been messed with by Vimeo
>> http://www.zen74158.zen.co.uk/videos/st-gallen-alps.m4v
>>
>> A lot of PCs won't play it even off the hard drive.
>
>Lowly AMD Fusion E350 plays it fine fullscreen or windowed
>
>using vLC 35-40% CPU
>or WMP 25-30% CPU

I would be interested in whether you get totally smooth playback.

Peter wrote:

> http://www.zen74158.zen.co.uk/videos/st-gallen-alps.m4v
>
> A lot of PCs won't play it even off the hard drive.
> I would be interested in whether you get totally smooth playback.

Silky smooth (other than the camera wobble).

Instantaneous disk reads measured by VLC (i.e before decoding) ranges
between 1.4 and 6.5MB/s, can't see why that would worry any disk unless
it's fragmented to hell ...