Old 18th November 2001, 18:09   #1
Tino
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 7
AVS is slow in fullscreen

I have a question : Why is AVS so slow in the fullscreen mode ? I have a Athlon 1.4 and geforce2 mx400(64ram) with 256mb ram pc133. Or is this the same on every pc ?

greetz

Tino
Tino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th November 2001, 18:16   #2
NuLoser
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Yup. AVS is slow in full screen. It does not use hardware acceleration.
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th November 2001, 18:33   #3
bluetape2k1
Banned
 
bluetape2k1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 1,356
Send a message via Yahoo to bluetape2k1
on full screen, don't use something like 800 by 600 or something

I'm on a k6-2 500 with the same Graphics card as you except I have a pci with 32 meg but it works


anyways I use 320@240 around that area you will get better avs
bluetape2k1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th November 2001, 19:21   #4
Tino
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 7
so...

so I guess there is no pc that can handle 1027*728 at 24fps ?? Thats quite strange.

greetz

Tino
Tino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th November 2001, 08:30   #5
Rocker
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 9,906
an AMD athlon XP 1900+

might be able to do it
Rocker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th November 2001, 13:06   #6
Angry Weasel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 145
1027x728 is not what Winamp uses, and for a good reason. Computers work best with numbers that are powers of 2. Which is why you get desktop resolution options like 640x480 (does anyone actually USE that?), 800x600, 1024x768, 1280x1420 (or something like that) and 1200x1600
Angry Weasel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th November 2001, 15:47   #7
Tino
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 7
1027x728 is not what Winamp uses, and for a good reason. Computers work best with numbers that are powers of 2. Which is why you get desktop resolution options like 640x480 (does anyone actually USE that?), 800x600, 1024x768, 1280x1420 (or something like that) and 1200x1600

>>>>>>>>> I made a mistake : I ment 1024*768

But it is still stupid because when winamp came out with that AVS thing there was no pc that could handle it !

Tino
Tino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th November 2001, 19:49   #8
flatmatt
Iron Chef
(Reviewer)
 
flatmatt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Winamp Island
Posts: 3,036
Oh, well, planning for the future.
flatmatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th November 2001, 19:53   #9
Tino
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 7
Tino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th November 2001, 20:00   #10
Angry Weasel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 145
Yep. And I will be the first to have a bazillion gigabytes of ram....first civilian anyway jk
Angry Weasel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th November 2001, 20:04   #11
Tino
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 7
I DO hope you will be able to run the AVS plug in at 1280x1420 or higher!

Tino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2001, 00:31   #12
UnConeD
Whacked Moderator
 
UnConeD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,104
No need to!

The cool thing about AVS is that it can perform very complex effects that look good even on lower resolutions. Besides, for projecting onto big screens, AVS is perfect, because you don't get a great resolution there anyway.

It's a choice... go for Milkdrop if you want smooth 1280x960 performance... but you won't get as much interesting effects as AVS.

By the way, if no-one ever made a program that was runnable on the average PC, then you'd have missed out on some of the greatest pc stuff:
- The 7th Guest (this CD-ROM game made CD-ROM drive-sales skyrocket)
- Unreal (even though its software mode was slow and not many people had 3D cards, the quality of the graphics were definately Unreal at that time!)
- etc.

Of course all the more recent PC freaks won't remember the days when new software was usually a revolution
UnConeD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2001, 00:53   #13
Rovastar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: London, England
Posts: 3,632
Send a message via AIM to Rovastar
Re: No need to!

Quote:
Originally posted by UnConeD
It's a choice... go for Milkdrop if you want smooth 1280x960 performance... but you won't get as much interesting effects as AVS.
True but Milkdrop is improving all time and now with a healthy preset scene. Stuff very different to the default presets.

Quote:
Of course all the more recent PC freaks won't remember the days when new software was usually a revolution
PC's they are those new business IBM computer things aren't they?!?
Good old C64 those were the days.

Rovastar

"Rules are for the guidance of wisemen and the obedience of fools"

Visuals - Morphyre www.Morphyre.com

Last edited by Rovastar; 24th November 2001 at 01:12.
Rovastar is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Go Back   Winamp & SHOUTcast Forums > Visualizations > AVS

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump