Video playback bottleneck

[TrueBlueLS]

Okay, I need some advice on the video playback in my computer. I'm currently using a Packard Hell for my computer until I have the money to build a new one sometime in August. Here's what I'm currently working with:

Intel Pentium 233 MMX
128 MB 60ns EDO RAM
ATI Rage II 2 MB PCI (Soon to be updated with a Elsa Gloria XL 1624 24 MB PCI card)
Windows XP

Until I put the ATI Rage II into this (onboard S3 Trio64 before), I would only get sound from the video I tried to watch. Now with the Rage II, I get very choppy frame rates. I can understand that this isn't the most powerful system, but is there anything I can do to try and make this a experience where I won't blow up this computer before August?

 

[Harabecw]

weird. my old Rage II 4MB had no problems playing video - P166mmx with 64MB ram. I'll look around to see if there are specific problems.

 

[TrueBlueLS]

Originally posted by: Harabecw
weird. my old Rage II 4MB had no problems playing video - P166mmx with 64MB ram. I'll look around to see if there are specific problems.

What OS were you using?

 

[Harabecw]

hmm...Win98 I think.

 

[McCarthy]

What kind of video?

To play higher res Divx files for example my Celeron 450 would stutter. Went in, changed filter properties, lost some video quality, but playback was smooth. Don't need to do that anymore, but I assume you can still adjust the playback filters for Divx. With other formats you may or may not get filter options.

 

[0roo0roo]

to play a high res divx wtih higher filter settings u need atleast a celly 850+ to play a really high res video u need a very fast pc.

ur mmx is good for low res mpeg and little else.

 

[trak0rr0kart]

ya.. I think it is more you cpu then anything causing your video to not playback right. At least it is with my secondary computer that is a P2 @ 333mhz. when I turn off the filters etc... then I can play it back..

I think you need to update your computer for any good video playback

I have a rage 8MB in it with 256 MB of sdram too

 

[TrueBlueLS]

Originally posted by: trak0rr0kart
ya.. I think it is more you cpu then anything causing your video to not playback right. At least it is with my secondary computer that is a P2 @ 333mhz. when I turn off the filters etc... then I can play it back..

I think you need to update your computer for any good video playback

I have a rage 8MB in it with 256 MB of sdram too

I guess that means I'll have to move things over to the Asus SP-97V board I have then and try to pick up a K6-2 400 MHz cheap.

 

[trak0rr0kart]

I'm not sure you will be able to put the k6-2 @ 400 mhz in there..

that motherboard will support these processors though:

Intel® Socket 7 ZIF Socket
Intel® Pentium® Processor 75 to 233 MHz (P55C/P54C/P54CS)
AMD® K5?/K6? PR166-PR233
IBM®/Cyrix® PR166+ (Rev 2.7 or later) & 6x86MX?PR166-233

All those processors are not much better then what you have now either.

 

[0roo0roo]

k6-2 is a joke. my p2-450 couldn't run many videos smoothly and its way faster then a k6-2. u just gotta shell for a half decent pc. xp 2000+ combos with m/b at frys generally go for 99bux. an xp 2000+ is used 95+% when playing a 1000x540 quicktime of the new matrix reloaded trailer.

 

[TrueBlueLS]

Originally posted by: trak0rr0kart
I'm not sure you will be able to put the k6-2 @ 400 mhz in there..

that motherboard will support these processors though:

Intel® Socket 7 ZIF Socket
Intel® Pentium® Processor 75 to 233 MHz (P55C/P54C/P54CS)
AMD® K5?/K6? PR166-PR233
IBM®/Cyrix® PR166+ (Rev 2.7 or later) & 6x86MX?PR166-233

All those processors are not much better then what you have now either.

There's a newer BIOS flash that allows you to run a K6-2 450 MHz with the instructions here. Also stated in the first post, I cannot build a new system until I have the money which won't be until August. The only part I wouldn't have to run a K6-2 system is the CPU in itself.

 

[AgaBoogaBoo]

Seriously though, screw waiting till August and spend like $400 on a new system, that thing is gonna blow that old one of yours. With $400, you could get a nice AMD setup with integrated Gefroce 4 MX video, some audio, lan, etc.

 

[SpeedFreak03]

I guarantee your problem is because you are running XP. 233MHz is the minimum speed for it to boot. I tried XP on my 266MHz P-MMX laptop (only had 64MB SDRAM though) and it was a dog. Try putting 98 or 2000 on it until August. Good luck!

 

[SpeedFreak03]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
k6-2 is a joke. my p2-450 couldn't run many videos smoothly and its way faster then a k6-2. u just gotta shell for a half decent pc. xp 2000+ combos with m/b at frys generally go for 99bux. an xp 2000+ is used 95+% when playing a 1000x540 quicktime of the new matrix reloaded trailer.

I agree. With my K6-2 450MHz, I couldn't even play DVD's with a 128MB ATI Radeon and a 16X DVD-ROM drive! I then got my 500MHz P-3 CPU and mobo for really cheap, and I can play everything. I know 50MHz didn't do that much!

 

[TrueBlueLS]

Originally posted by: AgaBooga
Seriously though, screw waiting till August and spend like $400 on a new system, that thing is gonna blow that old one of yours. With $400, you could get a nice AMD setup with integrated Gefroce 4 MX video, some audio, lan, etc.

If I end up blowing up the motherboard, it's not a big deal. I can revert back to the Packard Hell I'm using now or the motherboard I got with the 128 MB EDO RAM and 200 MMX I got for $12.

 

[winterlude]

You still didn't answer what kind of video.

First off, the videocard won't make any difference unless it has mpeg hardware (assuming that you are running mpeg anyway).

They are right about DIVX. The better the quality, the more processing power you need to decode the algorithms.

AMD is the cheaper way to go, but in my experience, Intel is more reliable at playing back video.

I converted DV to Mpeg2 using Ulead Studios using the default settings, and I still get some chop with my XP 1800+. It plays smoothly on my PIII 950mhz.

Everything else plays fine on my XP 1800+ though.

I have a system similar to yours: p2, 233 mhz, 64 meg EDO ram. It understandably plays back DIVX choppy. With DIVX, it's mostly about processing power.

 

[TrueBlueLS]

Originally posted by: winterlude
You still didn't answer what kind of video.

First off, the videocard won't make any difference unless it has mpeg hardware (assuming that you are running mpeg anyway).

They are right about DIVX. The better the quality, the more processing power you need to decode the algorithms.

AMD is the cheaper way to go, but in my experience, Intel is more reliable at playing back video.

I converted DV to Mpeg2 using Ulead Studios using the default settings, and I still get some chop with my XP 1800+. It plays smoothly on my PIII 950mhz.

Everything else plays fine on my XP 1800+ though.

I have a system similar to yours: p2, 233 mhz, 64 meg EDO ram. It understandably plays back DIVX choppy. With DIVX, it's mostly about processing power.

A lot of the stuff I watch are street racing videos. I'm not sure what they are encoded in. The tab when you go to check the properties does not identify the codec.

 

[Blastman]

I guess that means I'll have to move things over to the Asus SP-97V board I have then and try to pick up a K6-2 400 MHz cheap.

K6-2? had a very weak FPU (floating point unit) compared to the P2/P3?s cores which were about 40% faster clock/clock in FP. DIVX encoding will tax this area of the processor.

I could play some Divx?s on my Celeron 333 - as long as the resolution was below about 480x320 and it was 24fps instead of 30 (30 takes more encoding per second). A K6-2 400 will be slower than my C333 in Divx playback (C333 x 40% = 466 K6-2). My brothers P3-600 laptop plays even the larger Divx?s with no problem.