Mirillis forum

I have an Hp ProBook 4530s Notebook with AMD 6490M Graphic Processor.
Does Splash.Pro.Ex Support AMD Graphic Processor

!!

For video decoding - yes, for video encoding - no (only nvidia CUDA and intel QuickSync are supported).
http://mirillis.com/en/products/splashe ... tures.html

UPD: wait... your notebook have intel SB CPU, so it supports intel QuickSync. And it is better than both nVidia CUDA and Ati Stream for video encoding and (decoding) - it have better quality and much faster (for decoding it also much faster).

vivan wrote:And it is better than both nVidia CUDA and Ati Stream for video encoding and (decoding) - it have better quality and much faster (for decoding it also much faster).

No it can't have better quality. Cuda and OpenCL gives you more computing power, Quicksync is hardware h.264 implementation, which must give less quality.

RuskiRozpierdalacz wrote:Cuda and OpenCL gives you more computing power

... F1 car have a lot of horsepower, so it's definitely good in offroad racing, right?
GPGPU is very limited to what it can do, it's impossible to implement almost any complex algorithm there. That's why there's only a few applications that support it and can do something useful.

RuskiRozpierdalacz wrote:Quicksync is hardware h.264 implementation, which must give less quality.

Must? Read some appropriate comparisons before making such statements. For example annual MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 Video Codecs Comparison by compression.ru (or, at least, casual comparison from mirillis team).
Here is one of the reports, http://compression.ru/video/codec_compa ... arison.pdf
And picture from there (page 102):
Points on that graph represents bitrate/elapsed time of the encoded videos that have same quality. You can see that:
- x264 is the fastest encoder (with ultrafast2 preset). It's faster that any h/w solution but resulting bitrate is HUGE.
- fastest intel QS encode has same speed as x264 with superfast preset, but have 50% bigger bitrate (for the same quality).
- fastest CUDA encode is slower by 15% and have 75% higer bitrate than that intel QS encode.
There's no comparisons with AMD Stream encoders, but judging by others - it even worse than CUDA encoders by both speed and quality/bitrate.

Good Answer My Friends
I am convinced.

VeryThanks by Neyestani.