Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AVS is slow in fullscreen

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • rovastar
    replied
    Re: No need to!

    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.

    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
    Last edited by Rovastar; 24 November 2001, 00:12.

    Leave a comment:


  • UnConeD
    replied
    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

    Leave a comment:


  • Tino
    replied
    I DO hope you will be able to run the AVS plug in at 1280x1420 or higher!

    Leave a comment:


  • Angry Weasel
    replied
    Yep. And I will be the first to have a bazillion gigabytes of ram....first civilian anyway jk

    Leave a comment:


  • Tino
    replied

    Leave a comment:


  • flatmatt
    replied
    Oh, well, planning for the future.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tino
    replied
    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

    Leave a comment:


  • Angry Weasel
    replied
    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

    Leave a comment:


  • Winamprocker
    replied
    an AMD athlon XP 1900+

    might be able to do it

    Leave a comment:


  • Tino
    replied
    so...

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

    greetz

    Tino

    Leave a comment:


  • bluetape2k1
    replied
    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

    Leave a comment:


  • NuLoser
    Guest replied
    Yup. AVS is slow in full screen. It does not use hardware acceleration.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tino
    started a topic AVS is slow in fullscreen

    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
Working...
X
😀
🥰
🤢
😎
😡
👍
👎