|
|
|
Thanks for the update, I'm going to try this.
|
|
|
Thanks. As it happens with AMD, Intel and NVidia, it's clearly not a configuration / driver issue.
Hopefully they were able to reproduce it and it will be fixed in the next build. Fingers crossed!
Please post here if/when a new build solves this, I frequently miss build releases. I'll do the same.
|
|
|
My ticket was closed too. The last I heard was on 10 sept:
"Regarding your concern, I would like to inform you that we have reported the condition to related departments for further investigation. Our engineers are working on research."
I have no idea why they close tickets before an issue has been resolved or even investigated, and am very disappointed that this hasn't been solved.
I had to revert to V1804 and am stuck with this version until this white border issue is resolved. Hopefully in the next patch?
I'll re-open the ticket otherwise.
What is your O/S, GPU and driver version?
|
|
|
I give up, good luck in your quest ![]()
|
|
|
A lot of people are using decoding to analog. There is just no need for the vast majority of them to decode full Atmos/DTS:X to analog.
People using headphones and PC speakers or even 7.1 speakers CAN play Atmos and DTS:X tracks. There is no need for them to get specific Atmos decoding. Atmos/DTS:X tracks are fully backwards compatible with Dolby TrueHD and DTS:HD. You play the Atmos track or the DTS:X track, and the Dolby TrueHD/DTS:HD core can be decoded up to 7.1 analog if you want to. Of if you want full Atmos/DTS:X and you simply bitstream the track to an AVR (which is what most people with a dedicated home theatre room would do anyway). There is just no sizeable market for analog decoding of full Atmos/DTS:X, but PDVD plays Atmos/DTS:X tracks without any problem for 99.99% of its audience.
The only thing you might see IMHO is support for Headphone:X (simulation of DTS:X immersive sound for headphones) because this comes in a separate track and Cyberlink can easily license the technology from DTS. There is a Headphone:X track in Hunger Games Mockingjay for example. This is likely to be popular, because it relies on hardware every one has and uses on their desktop, laptop, tablet, phone, everything that the majority of PDVD users actually use: headphones.
Likewise, if Dolby comes up with a similar immersive track for headphones, PDVD will likely add support for it, because there is a likely return on investment: 1) it's easy to implement 2) there is standard hardware support in all PCs and 3) it's relevant for the majority of its user base. Therefore it would be a good business decision to implement it.
Exactly the opposite of implementing decoding Atmos/DTS:X to analog: 1) it's complex (expensive) to implement 2) there is no standard hardware support for it and 3) the demand for it is minuscule, it's only the portion of their user base who are using an HTPC to playback movies in a dedicated room with more than 7.1 speakers (i.e. you and me, but a tiny, tiny, tiny minority of PDVD users) AND are not happy to bitstream the Atmos track to an AVR (you, an even smaller minority).
Here is a question for you (I'm not being facitious, so please answer it): how big do you think the portion of PDVD's user base you represent - those who need Atmos decoding to analog because they have more than 7.1 speakers installed and are not happy to bitstream the track to their AVR - is? You're saying that Cyberlink could close if they don't provide a solution for these users, which represent in my opinion less than 0.01% of their user base. How big do you think the market is for them to implement this?
I'm sorry if you can't see the logic of this, but I respect your position. I even hope I'll be proved wrong ![]() .
|
|
|
There is no error in my opinion, you just don't seem to be listening to what I have been trying to explain, so I'll try to sum it up one last time:
- The market for immersive sound is minuscule right now. The market for playing immersive sound on a PC is a fraction of that market, and PDVD already caters for 99% of that market (bitstream the HD Audio track to an Atmos compatible AVR and you play Atmos fine). The market for playing immersive sound on analog audio from a PC is a fraction of that market. We're talking a few hundred of people worldwide, at most.
- There is no standard hardware support in PC motherboards for more than 7.1 analog channels. You need a minimum of 9.1 channels to support Atmos (I guess you could do 5.1.2 but there is no point in doing that when 7.1 would give you more). Dedicated hardware needed to support more than 7.1 analog audio out costs more than the software itself (PDVD). This further reduces the potential market.
- There is a huge difference between HD audio formats like DTS HD which are channel-based, so the softare only has to decode the streams and send send to each channel, and object-based formats like Atmos where the software would have not only to decode the ear level channels (5.1 or 7.1) but also render the position of the objects, based on the specifics of each speaker layout (rendering will be different for a 5.1.2, 5.1.4, 7.1.2, 7.1.4, 9.1.2 layout). This makes the feature a lot more complicated to implement, not to mention license fees for the Atmos software. A PC can do it. Trinnov does it, and charges $30000 because the market is minuscule, so the only way for them to recoup their investment is to charge astronomical prices.
- Those who are interested in this feature- decoding Atmos - can get their AVR decode AND RENDER Atmos in their AVR. I do this today with PDVD. I only have to bitstream HD Audio to my AVR. So the title of this thread is misleading. PowerDVD supports Atmos (and soon DTS:X) perfectly. It just doesn't decode and render it because there is no standard hardware support for more than 7.1 analog channels and because there is no need to do it to cover 99% of the already minuscule market of those interested in playing immersive audio from their PC.
- The one box concept is fine but only applies to stereo, if you play audio on headphones or PC Speakers. Otherwise, you need an amplifier to power your speakers (unless you use only powered speakers). PDVD was made initially to play DVDs and Bluray on a computer (desktop or laptop) using headphones or PC speakers. That's the huge majority of its market. That's where most of the sales are. The HTPC crowd - us - is a very small fraction of that. The HTPC crowd not using an AVR to get better sound - you - is a minuscule fraction of that.
- If Cyberlink doesn't spend the huge amount of development time - way superior to decoding HD Audio as you have to basically do what $1000+ AVRs do - they will lose 0% of their turnover. If they spend the time developing this feature, they will never recoup that money in additional licenses sold (money they wouldn't have made otherwise) and if they sell it as an option for those like you who would be willing to pay for it, they will never sell enough to recoup their investment either. This is called a business decision. If there is a market, I'll make a product if I can sell it for the right price. Otherwise, if I want to stay in business, I stay away.
- Right now, based on this thread, there are a handful of people who are interested in Atmos decoding by PDVD. There are like 15 Atmos titles available on bluray. Maybe a few thousands consumers have installed an Atmos setup around the world using an HTPC as a main source for their content, and NONE OF THEM - except you and a few others - need PowerDVD to decode it, most of them are perfectly happy to have the player bitstream the HD Audio track to let their AVR decode the metadata and render Atmos in their dedicated room / living room.
- Things - the number of Atmos and DTS:X titles - might change with UHD Bluray, but there is no guarantee that PowerDVD will ever support UHD Bluray. Not because PCs can't do it - you'd only need a BDXL player and a compatible GPU - just because granting a software license is what led to Blurays AACS being cracked, so the BDA might never give a license to a software PC Player in order to prevent AACS 2.0 from being cracked immediately after that. Also, given how streaming/downloads are taking over physical media, I'm not even sure Cyberlink will see a market for UHD Bluray and would invest the time and license fees to try to cater for it. I'd love to see a version of PDVD playing UHD Bluray, but I'm not convinced it will happen.
- One thing that might happen is support for Headphone:X, as this would rely on implementing a mainstream DTS technology on headphones, would be realistic - no huge development, they just have to get a license for the existing DTS software - and would reach a sizeable market within their target market (laptop/desktop users with heaphones). If Atmos comes up with a similar technology (Atmos decoding a dedicated track into headphones to simulate immersive sound), that might happen too.
- You need to think past your own opinion and setup
![]() You can either take the above into acccount, and try to find other ways - more realistic ways - to get Atmos decoded and rendered on your system (namely, by an AVR supporting Atmos and bitstream the movie to it), or you can keep barking at that tree hoping Cyberlink will make a poor business decision.
- By the way, I would love it if Cyberlink decided to suddenly become a hi-fi company, supported decoding and rendering of immersive sound formats and supported MadVR for calibration and picture processing. Unfortunately, it has zero chances to happen. Cyberlink is a mainstream company. They cater for the masses. The masses don't even know what Atmos is, and when they find out they couldn't care less because they don't even have a 5.1 speaker layout and don't want to drill holes in their ceiling. They watch movies on their TVs with the TV speakers, of if they are a bit refined, they have a soundbar. So I'm using other tools like MyMovies, MPC-BE, LAV and MadVR to get the quality I'm after, both from a sound quality point of view and from a picture quality point of view. I only use PDVD when I need full BD Menus or to play 3D Blurays.
- If there was hardware and software support, I would love to do what you've done and forget about having to upgrade my AVR everytime a new format appears. But as it's not going to happen for a price that I can justify (I'm not ready to pay $30000 for a Trinnov), I'm just replacing my 9 months old X5200W with an X7200W to get HDCP 2.2 and DTS:X support (along with Atmos and Auro 3D which I already had with the X5200W). It's annoying but it's not the end of the world. And it's much cheaper than a Trinnov or a Datasat...
- I'm not writing all this to argue with you, only to save you from hoping for something that has IMHO zero chances of happening. But if you want to keep hoping, please do, I'm not your enemy
![]()
|
|
|
|
Quote:
Good things come to those who wait!
All I wanted was a reply from someone at cyberlink confirming or denying if they are going to implement it.
All the nay sayers coming in saying it isn't technically possible is not true and is definitely not helping.
Personally, I never said it wasn't technically feasible. It obviously is. Trinnov is doing it and selling it for $30000.
I only said it didn't make any business sense for Cyberlink to invest a lot of man hours in a develepment that matters to the minority of a minority of a minority, especially when Atmos and DTS:X are perfectly supported when bitstreaming HD Audio tracks to an AVR able to decode these formats.
I thought I was helping suggesting you'd be more likely to be successful asking for people like jRiver, but you didn't like my help. It doesn't mean I didn't mean to be helpful.
Sometimes, being realistic saves a lot of energy ![]()
To give you an example, I only use PDVD for 3D Bluray (or when I need full BD Menus) as it doesn't support MadVR, and I could also waste my time here asking for MadVR support, but as it's unlikely to ever happen (for exactly the same reason, too few people - including you - care about this), I tried to find ways to play my content the way I wanted to. Wouldn't I prefer it if PowerDVD (or TMT at the time) supported MadVR? Sure, I would. But is there a chance in hell for it to happen? Not one.
Anyway no one is stopping you from hoping, and I sincerely hope your wish will be granted ![]()
|
|
|
Thanks for your feedback.
I've reported this issue to CS (Question ID = CS001505391) and it's being escalated.
It might help to get a faster resolution if you do the same - as well as anyone experiencing the issue - although I have given a link to this thread for reference.
Please post your case ID if you do open a ticket.
Also what's your GPU/OS/graphics driver version?
|
|
|
I've installed build 2003 and there is a bug on Windows 8.1 Pro x64 with MCE.
When playing a bluray from MCE using the MCE plugin, there is a thin white border all around the screen that cannot be removed.
This is present in 2D and 3D.
It's not present in the standalone app (it's there initially but you can get rid of it when pressing the full screen icon and going to cinema mode).
I reinstalled build 1804 and the bug is gone, so it's only with 2003.
This is with an AMD HD7870 and Catalyst 14.12
|
|
|
Wow. No need to keep discussing indeed. Good luck in your quest, I'm sure a Cyberlink representative will invite you in a private meeting room any time now to discuss the custom development you would like to commission for your special needs. I can now see that the market is you, and that you have the financial means to finance this with your own funds.
Apologies for underestimating you and your purchasing power.
Over and out, this is getting nowhere.
|
|
|
Quote:
Let's get one thing straight. I fully understand how Dolby Atmos and DTSX works.
I find your post extremely patronising whilst at the same time highly amusing.
I have a degree is music production, composed music for games and films and have created many surround sound mixes encoded to DTS and the likes.
You clearly have been taken in by the marketing lingo.
How do you think games provide surround sound in real time exactly? I'll tell you how, in exactly the same way (near enough as Atmos, see here if you care.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=0TAE5me0GhwC&pg=PA306&lpg=PA306&dq=sound+in+games+object+based&source=bl&ots=_7HBI-0SHY&sig=LLh41J5f5pXk9-GM_my2MkDpovk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCAQ6AEwAWoVChMI2ZXM1JiXxwIVRA4sCh2GygJw#v=onepage&q=sound%20in%20games%20object%20based&f=false
These object based sounds are created in real time and can also add effects in real time (for example footsteps on metal or carpet using the same audio object sample source with real time effects)
This is all going on whilst rendering the gfx, physics, AI, etc but you reckon it'll be impossible for powerdvd to come up with a way of panning simple audio objects without effects, gfx, AI, physics whilst playing a video file?
That did make me laugh I have to admit.
Do you really think that an AVR/processor is the only way to know how many speakers are connected to a source? Youve never plugged a mini jack cable into a PC and been asked what it's used for?
You've clearly just read a few paragraphs on Dolby Atmos and now consider yourself an expert.
You think it'll take a lot of work for motherboard manufactures to provide one or two extra mini jacks for front and/or rear height speakers? Do you think the extra mini jacks should be added before suitable methods of playing back said source are available?
Exactly the same thing happened with 5.1 and 7.1.
You think software can't have a diagram of the speaker layout where you can move the positions to what matched your setup? Just like windows can have a 5.1 setup with sides or rears in the windows configuration.
You think that "audio objects rendered in 3D space" is some amazing feat of technology that isn't just panning and volume between the speakers you have?
Last time I checked every PC from the last 10 years has a mic input.
People that take sound 'seriously' (as you call them that apparently need an AVR) won't even consider using the mic method. Room treatment and speaker placement will always sound better than cutting and boosting frequencies resulting in a phasing, wishy washy mess that only sounds good if you put your head in the exact position of the mic!
I remember this 'tech' being pushed to recording studios over 10 years ago. It was laughed out of the controls room world wide and put into these consumer AVR's we see today.
It doesn't work well basically, but that's another thread.
Do you work for cyberlink? How do you know it's only hundreds of customers that would use this tech?
You don't, you just assume and assumption is the mother of all cock ups as I'm sure you know.
People have been asking for Atmos since powerdvd 14. There are threads on this very forum from users asking for it. Maybe if you tried searching you will see all that.
It sounds to me like your trying to justify a purchase of your overpriced AVR and don't want to see it being made redundant by a piece of software that is capable of doing exactly the same thing for a fraction of the cost.
Microsoft has also paid for Dolby licensing in windows 10 which should include Atmos.
You can buy tablets and phones that have Dolby Atmos (albeit cut down) Star Wars battlefront game is coming out with Dolby Atmos support this year.
Atmos is everywhere, apart from the PC.
I think I see a niche here, apparently I'm the only one who can)
Windows 10 have dropped media player so consumers will be looking for an alternative.
It's this kind of support that is required to differentiate powerdvd from the rest of the market, the market of free players that'll do bitstreaming for nothing!
If they don't someone else will.
I can't get over how you think your AVR will decode Atmos but it'll be impossible for cyberlink to achieve.
You are truly an idiot who can't see past his own opinions and can't see the wood for the trees.
Can someone from cyberlink please tell me if they are looking into/are/are going to look at Dolby Atmos decoding to analogue please so I don't have to educate patronising fools that always seem to pop in with their misinformed nonsense and try and hijack a thread.
ARE CYBERLINK WORKING/GOING TO WORK ON DOLBY ATMOS OR SHOULD I LOOK ELSEWHERE?
Now it's your turn to be funny. I work in film, and used to be a programmer, so I know both of these worlds very well. One of my best friends works for Dolby and unlike you I have read all the available documentation about Atmos, including their white papers for home cinema installation and commercial cinema installation. I have a 10.2.11 speaker layout, using Atmos and Auro 3D with a Denon X5200W and more amplifiers for additional channels allowing me to support up to 7.1.4 or 9.1.2 channels. What are you using right now to play Atmos or any kind of immersive sound?
Anyway, back to the silly game comparison. Who has invested the development time to render these games using Atmos? Cyberlink or the game company, which has a huge user base potentially caring about this feature?
I never said it wasn't possible technically to use a PC to decode Atmos. Of course it its. Trinnov and Datasat are already doing it. Game companies are doing it, although I'm curious to know how they support more than 8 channels/speakers in a PC, because Datasat or Trinnov do have additional hardware (quite a lot in fact, which partially explains the astronomic price of their solution).
Do they require the gamers to buy additional hardware? Which models do they support? How much do they cost? How many gamers have done so if it's the case?
Or are they, most likely, simulating Atmos in a pair of stereo headphones, which is what the majority of gamers are using anyway, and what DTS:X headphone does brilliantly?
In a real Atmos setup, you don't only need to tell what each speaker is used for. You also need the AVR/processor to calculate the distance, level and crossover for each speaker, or you get garbage. Nothing that a PC with a microphone couldn't do, but you really see the Cyberlink development team spending time on something for which they have zero competence?
I'm only saying there is NO MARKET significant enough for Cyberlink to justify the cost of that development, when bitstreaming covers the needs of 99.99999999999% of their users.
If you can't see that, keep waiting for something that isn't going to happen. The only reason you're waiting is because you're too cheap to spend a few hundred to buy an Atmos AVR. Do this and your problem is solved. Intead, you want Cyberlink to invest hundreds of thousands in development cost that they will never recoup. Sure, makes complete business sense.
Try to come up with a number or a percentage of PDVD users who actually care about this. That is, within the super small minority which is using bluray and is ready to install more than 8 speakers in their living room (because those with a dedicated room, again, don't care about this and have dedicated hardware to achieve this with PDVD or without).
I can count two or three in this thread. It's not as if this is going to send Cyberlink out of business if they are unhappy (or rather have unrealistic expectations).
Then, out of this minuscule, microscopic potential user base, count how many would be ready to pay more (the only way to recoup the investment for Cyberlink, as the vast majority of their user base couldn't care less about this) for the software and also for additional, non standard hardware.
Come on, put yourself in the shoes of Cyberlink's CEO. Will you assign significant resources to develop a feature which is never, ever going to recoup its cost?
If you believe so, I'm glad you're not running my company ![]()
|
|
|
|
Quote:
I disagree. I remember people saying the same thing about 7.1 but Cyberlink supported analogue decoding of that eventually.
Seriously what is the point in powerdvd if you're bit streaming?
You might as well just buy a bluray player.
You say it's too complex of a thing to program?!?
Games have been making realtime panning positions in surround sound for decades and I'm sure my PC's CPU has a lot more processing power than any AVR out there!
The game star wars battlefront is coming out in a few months which is the first game to support Dolby Atmos.
Powerdvd is there to replace standalone bluray players and decoders and the like.
That's the sole purpose of this software, it's the unique selling point, it's primary function to keep it all in the box!
Picture and sound is all they need to support. Drop the apps and cloud fluff that nobody wants and give the enthusiast a legal method of playing back the latest formats in the way they want to do it.
I find it hard to believe it will be hard to implement when the Dolby Atmos and DTSX mixes for films on made on PC's using said soundcards in the first place. If I can buy Dolby Atmos plugins for protocols why can't I buy software to play it back? Your argument is illogical.
If cyberlink don't someone else will. They could hit the ground running with this and clean up if they pull their finger out!
Saying it's only good for a handful of enthusiasts is also illogical. It's only the handful of enthusiasts who buy powerdvd in the first place. Otherwise they'll use plenty of the free players like MPC or a bluray player as powerdvd would be pointless.
You support it all or don't bother at all. Otherwise your product is not a viable solution for said enthusiast.
You don't understand the difference between channel based formats (up to 7.1 TrueHD and DTS-HD MA) and object based formats (like Atmos / DTS:X).
In channel-based formats, you only have to decode the PCM streams and send them to each speaker. One channel = one speaker.
In object-based formats, the objects are not in any given channel. They are positioned in 3D space, and the processor/AVR - which is the only one to know the number / position of the speakers, as the layouts vary between 5.1.2, 5.1.4, 7.1.2, 7.1.4, 9.1.2 and so on - renders the objects IN REAL TIME according to each specific speaker layout. The same Atmos track will not be rendered the same way in 5.1.2 and 7.1.4 or 9.1.2.
This is why you need to send the channel-based core and the object metadata via bitstream to an AVR or processor which knows how many speakers are connected and will send the channels to the base layer (ear layer) and will RENDER the object, in real time, using all the available speakers, including the wide and height speakers when present.
This is why PDVD will never handle that, especially when it fully supports the new standards with bitstream.
Analog outs were handle for 7.1 channel based formats because most motherboards and mainstream soundcards had 7.1 analog out.
The vast majority of PDVD users are using it to play DVDs on their laptop or computer in stereo.
A small minority is playing bluray.
A small minority has a 5.1 setup.
An even smaller minority has a 7.1 setup.
An even smaller minority has legacy matrix format setup with wides or heights, like Neo:X, Dolby PLz or Audyssey DSX.
An even smaller minority has an Atmos or DTS:X layout with heights.
Out of these users, most of those with a 5.1 or better set up will use an external AVR to playback the soundtracks.
The amount of users who are going to install a dedicated sound card to handle 11+ Atmos/DTS:X speakers is counted in hundreds, and I'm generous. Definitely not enough to warrant the huge development time and licensing cost that decoding Atmos and DTS:X natively would incur, with the need of additional hardware costing many times the cost of the software for the user on top.
jRiver is your best bet, but then you lose full BD menu and 3B bluray playback, which again is the main reason why people with HTPCs and more advanced configurations are still using PDVD. Otherwise, they use jRiver or MPC/LAV/MadVR and gett much better playback quality.
Also many users replace a standalone player with PDVD because they stream files, or their DVD/bluray rips from hard drives r servers. They don't want to have to look for a disc everytime they want to play a movie. That's another part of the market, and it's bigger than the audio enthusiasts who would want to decode Atmos or DTS:X on a PC, simply because they tend to want dedicated high end hardware to do that.
I don't think you realise 1) how small the market you represent is compare to PDVD bulk market and 2) how complex what you are asking Cyberlink to implement is compared to legacy, channel-based formats.
Please look into how Atmos and DTS;X work, and look into the bulk of Cyberlink's user base, and you'll understand what I mean.
Again, I'd be delighted if Cyberlink was to support this, just like I'd be delighted if they were to support MadVR or at least its 3D LUT capability, but this is simply never going to happen. It's not for nothing that high end processors like Trinnov or Datasat sell for tens of thousands. It's not easy to do it.
You're barking at the wrong tree. This is a feature request for jRiver, maybe Kodi. Not PowerDVD. It's too mainstream for that, at least until you get 11+ analog outs in mainstream motherboards or soundcards and they come with a microphone to measure the distance/delay/levels of each speaker present in the system.
|
|
|
Sorry guys, but PDVD 15 already supports Atmos and DTS:X on bluray. The market for decoding these is simply two small compared to the complexity:
You're asking PDVD to not only decode but also render these sound formats according to each specific speaker layout (which can be anything within the 34 supported atmos locations).
Decoding was possible with 7.1 because it was limited to one single speaker layout (7.1, or possibly 5.1) with identified speaker locations.
Decoding Atmos or DTS:X will only happen in processors/AVRs, so bitstream is the only way forward.
It will be the same with UHD Bluray, although no one knows if PDVD will ever support this new format, as again the market is likely to be very small, provided they can get a license.
I don't want to rain on your parade, but you're tried to solve a problem that doesn't exist, except for a handful of enthusiasts.
The bulk of the market for Atmos/DTS:X/UHD Bluray is high end users who spend thousands in high end AVRs and processors. Not HTPC users using a PC to decode sound formats.
The main reason for a licensed player like PDVD is full BD menus and 3D Bluray playback, not analog audio decoding.
|
|
|
Thanks for this Derrek, maybe this will help our professional friend to see the light, although Carrizo is an integrated chip and we were discussing discrete GPUs ![]() .
|
|
|
|
Quote:
http://i.imgur.com/zpoOmkP.jpg
There you go, have fun. Sorry I had to repeat it for it to be understandable.
I understand that this is your own understanding of hardware decoding accelation, it's not just what the competent part of the industry calls it.
People who know what that is call it hybrid acceleration.
Don't you think that if the AMD 290X supported H265 harware decoding acceleration it would be listed in its specs or mentioned in its review?
Do you wonder why every single review of the nVidia 960 mention it as the first GPU to support H265 hardware decoding acceleration?
You can post that screenshot of your 290X choking under the load at 96%, it doesn't make your statement true.
Please post a THIRD party link to anyone vaguely knowledgeable (like a professional reviewer, preferably from a reputable outfit like Anandtech) or even a specs list from AMD listing H265 hardware acceleration as a feature on your 290X and I will say that I'm sorry, that I was wrong and that I stand corrected.
Meantime, enjoy your 290X and its hybrid h265 acceleration. It's much better than having no acceleration at all, at least most of the load is moved to your GPU, freeing your CPU for other tasks.
I said I gave up, but only if you stop posting misinformation.
From now on I'll just post "third party link to support your claim please", as this is getting old ![]() .
|
|
|
That's the whole point. Nothing mainstream will support Atmos because you don't have too. You just bitstream Dolby TrueHD to the AVR and you're done. Same for DTS:X (bitstream DTS:HD).
Either you care about sound and you have a full setup with an AVR (I have a X5200W with 10.2.11 speakers) or you don't and Dolby TrueHD/DTS-HD is probably more than enough already.
This is why I don't see any return on investment for them.
They might do this if/when they decide to support UHD Bluray playback, but I'm not even sure this will happen because the market is too small.
But I could be wrong, and I wish you luck (genuinely).
I only use PowerDVD to play 3D Bluray and whenever I need full menus, otherwise I use MPC-BE with LAV and MadVR which offers much better quality.
|
|
|
In that case I agree it makes sense, but I doubt PowerDVD will ever support it as it's probably an issue for only 0.0000001% of its customer base. You might know a lot of people who have ditched AVRs, but I doubt this market is even on Cyberlink's radar.
I hardly think that this is a crucial selling point for them, given that you need dedicated hardware to handle this, so I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.
It would take them about 1000 years to recoup the investment in development time compared to the number of licenses they would sell for this feature only.
This is why this type of use tends to be in the realm of custom install and $$$$$ setups, not a $99 piece of software.
Maybe jRiver would support this, as it's more up their street?
Anyway, sorry for the misunderstanding, and good luck.
|
|
|
Yes for real ![]()
Still waiting for that link of yours ![]()
|
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
This screenshot is the very proof that your 290x doesn't have hardware acceleration when playing H265.
This is why the GPU is maxed up.
The GPU being used is the very definition of hardware acceleration by the graphic card... by the way, the GPU isn't "maxed up", the usage varies, it just happened to be at 96% on that screenshot. The card doesn't even heat, the fan is still at 20% which is the "idle" speed.
Quote:
I never said you were not able play H265 file, or that the GPU wasn't involved in the process.
Haha nice twisting... clutching at straws? So it's not hardware accelerated because it actually uses the GPU? Tell me, when you're playing a video game and it uses your GPU, do you also say it's not hardware accelerated by the graphic card?
Cutting off the rest of your arrogant dribble, the personal attacks and the insults, but seriously... do you realize how ridiculous what you are saying sounds?
I give up ![]() . Some people never learn. I'll reply if you post a link confirming that the 290X supports H265 decoding hardware acceleration, which should keep you busy for a while as it doesn't. I only match my attitude to yours by the way.
Meantime, you might want to research - from other sources as you can't seem to be able to read or understand the way I attempted to explain it to you - the difference between hybrid acceleration and hardware acceleration.
I'll be nice and offer a starting point: http://forum.kodi.tv/showthread.php?tid=208777
Good luck!
|
|
|
To think that you are a "professional" is a vey scary thought ![]() . I'm glad I'm not one of your employers...
This screenshot is the very proof that your 290x doesn't have hardware acceleration when playing H265.
This is why the GPU is maxed up.
I never said you were not able play H265 file, or that the GPU wasn't involved in the process.
This is what I have been trying to explain to you from the beginning of our conversation, but the concept seems out of your grasp.
Take a deep breath, try to open your mind, and make the effort of reading what follows, trying to understand it. I haven't said anything different before, but I'll try to spell it out one last time.
When a GPU doesn't have any acceleration, the CPU is used and the GPU isn't used much.
When a GPU is used with hybrid acceleration (the case of your GPU), the load is transferred from the CPU to the GPU, which is why your GPU chokes at 96% under the load. The CPU, on the other hand, should have little load. This is when the driver, and software like OpenCL, handle the decoding. It's called hybrid because it's software accelration that uses the GPU (as a progammable processor) instead of the CPU to handle the decoding.
Full hardware accelration is when the GPU has decoding routines wired into the GPU itself. It doesn't provide better quality necessarily (usually not compared to excellent software renderers/scalers like MAdVR who would do the same as a hybrid support and often max the GPU to achieve the best possible quality), but it provides a performance boost, so that the GPU isn't maxed up like this (if your 290X had hardware accelartion, your GPU load would show something like 60% or less). This allows less powerful GPUs (like intergrated ones, or fanless discrete GPUs for HTPC) to handle the load.
This is my last attempt at trying to explain the difference between hardware acceleration (not expected on AMD until the 390X this summer) and hybrid acceleration (such as on your 290X).
If your 290X had hardware decoding acceleration, it wouldn't max up the way it does.
It was exactly the same when H264 arrived. You first had hybrid implementation to offload the CPU and make it possible to play a file on PCs with a weak CPU that couldn't handle it, then it was wired into the GPUs themselves to allow them to not max up doing it.
Please try to find a link showing that your 290X has hardware H265 decoding, and post it. Good luck with that.
Otherwise, try something simple: say I was mistaken, I stand corrected. There is no shame in that. We all learn something new everyday.
Have a good sunday.
|
|
|
