Does Vista support natively h264 GPU accelerated decodign?

Hi.
I read that Firefox will support html5 h264 decoding, but not natively.
Does Vista support natively h264 GPU accelerated decoding? or have I in the future to give up this upcoming new feature of FF? thanks

your link does redirect to
http://www.mozilla.org/us/firefox/fx/?from=getfirefox
and FF11 does not support html5 h264 video yet...
it is strange that it is difficult in establishing if Vista (released 2007) is able or not in handling h264.

Similar Messages

Does Keynote support CUDA or GPU usage?

Thinking about buying a Nvidia K5000 video card.
Does anybody know if Keynote supports CUDA and GPU usage?

Keynote uses OpenGL hardware acceleration for animation. So yes, if you have a decent GPU then animation may run smoother. That being said, a K5000 is complete overkill for something like Keynote. Even the Intel HD4000 graphics on my Macbook Air runs Keynote animations very smoothly.

Supported GPUs for GPU Acceleration

Hello,
I had a quick question about the compatability of some GPUs with Premiere Pro. I'm looking into buying a system with a "nVidia GeForce GTX 760M". This card is not listed under the supported GPUs for acceleration, although it does support both CUDA and OpenCL. So my question is, will I have any problems using this GPU for GPU acceleration? I'm not sure why it wouldn't be supported by Premiere.
Any help is appriciated.
Thanks.

Virtually any nVidia with a minimum of 1Gig of video ram will work... Adobe has limited time to test & certify cards
For CS6 and earlier (CS5 and CS5.5) read http://forums.adobe.com/thread/629557
For CC I think it simply uses the card if the tech specifications are met

Does ICH5 support Native Command Queuing?

Hello,
I was just wondering if the INTEL ICH5 chip (it is a chip, isn't it?) supports Native Command Queuing for S-ATA harddrives.
If so, is NCQ still an advantage for RAID modi or does it affect only single drive setups?
Bye
M3

I don't think so. Native Command Queing is part of the SATA II specification.

Does Vista support SAP?

Hi,
   The function 'GUI_DOWNLOAD' doesn't work well on Vista ,no files have been downloaded to the local . But when i run the report on Windows XP, everything is well.
   Anyone has meet this problem?
   Expect your help. Thanks in advance.
           qiuguo

Hi,
    I hava set the codepage. pls help me to check whether there is some error.
    thanks very much.
    the code is below:
   call function 'GUI_DOWNLOAD'
    exporting
      BIN_FILESIZE                    =
      filename                        = content_filename
      filetype                        = 'ASC'
      <b>CODEPAGE                        = '4310'</b>
      APPEND                          = ' '
      write_field_separator           = 'X'
      HEADER                          = '00'
      TRUNC_TRAILING_BLANKS           = ' '
      write_lf                        = 'X'
    tables
      data_tab                        = t_dn_document
      fieldnames                      = download_fieldnames
   exceptions
      file_write_error                = 1
      no_batch                        = 2
      gui_refuse_filetransfer         = 3
      invalid_type                    = 4
      no_authority                    = 5
      unknown_error                   = 6
      header_not_allowed              = 7
      separator_not_allowed           = 8
      filesize_not_allowed            = 9
      header_too_long                 = 10
      dp_error_create                 = 11
      dp_error_send                   = 12
      dp_error_write                  = 13
      unknown_dp_error                = 14
      access_denied                   = 15
      dp_out_of_memory                = 16
      disk_full                       = 17
      dp_timeout                      = 18
      file_not_found                  = 19
      dataprovider_exception          = 20
      control_flush_error             = 21
      others                          = 22
if sy-subrc ne 0 .
    message id 'HRPAYCN' type 'E' number '019'.
endif.

AMD FirePro W4170M Graphics - Ai gpu acceleration

Hello,
I'm looking into buying a new work laptop, and like the look of the Dell Precision Laptops - which use the AMD FirePro graphics cards.
I want to be able to make use of the new GPU acceleration in Ai, and the AMD cards are not listed as compatible:
GPU Performance
My question is really to confirm, are the AMD FirePro Graphics cards supported for this gpu acceleration function?
Thanks and Best Regards,
Tim Peck

Also, the card K2000 is listed, does this mean the K2000M will also be compaible?

Quadro2000 does not support ie9 GPU hardware acceleration.

Hi
I’ve tried many time but my w520‘GPU (quardro2000) seemed does not support Internet Explorer 9 GPU hardware acceleration.
The test website is here.
http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/Performance/PsychedelicBrowsing/Default.html
Did anybody know how to solve the problem?
Thanks in advance.

dxh8497 wrote:
Yes, I sure that I set BIOS Display as Discrete.
And chrome Firefox supported GPU hardware acceleration, but ie9 didn't.
Well first of all, all three support GPU acceleration on the W520 with the 2000M. So something else is causing problems. I would suggest reviewing the latest BIOS and video driver versions on support.lenovo.com against your machine and updating where needed.
After that, I would run your BIOS with default settings then retest. That will be Optimus mode. I would then change the BIOS Dispplay setting to Discrete with OS auto detect disabled and retest.

Does the new gpu acceleration in illustrator not support the GTX 750ti?

We have a brand new computer with a Nvidia GTX 750ti in it but we can't get Illustrator to recognize it for GPU acceleration.

Nvidia GTX 750ti is supported.
Illustrator currently support single GPU card with upto 2 displays connected. Could you please check if you are using more than two displays or more than one GPU driver/card?

IMAC's Top graphics card frustration - Cheap and no support for Adobe Mercury Playpack Engine GPU Acceleration?

If anyone has a solution for getting the Mecury Playpack Engine GPU acceleration to work with Premiere Pro CS6 on an iMAC 2011, please let me know. Like I wonder if you could Thunderbolt an External graphics card somehow? Or is an upgrade possible? Ahh...not worth the risk.
Please, if you have a solution for me, let me know. Otherwise I find it pretty frustrating that I purchased a top-end iMAC, fully maxed-out in every way possible, and that the iMac doesn't support Adobe Premiere's Mercury Playback Engine GPU acceleration. Also, an old USB 2.0 Hub and thus the built-in SD card reader is slow. If you have SD cards with 95MB/s Transfer, Read and Write speeds, the iMAC will only transfer at around 30MB/s if you're lucky. Technically 480Mbs which is around 50MB/s but I haven't seen those speeds.
I figured this could at least be circumvented with a Thunderbolt SD card reader or a Thunderbolt to USB 3.0 adapter but of course no such thing exists.
Well, nothing with a reasonable price tag. This all might seem trivial to some but when you're uploading 24 hours of HD video footage from a 128GB SDXC card, the speed makes a big difference.
And come on, no BluRay support? Ridiculous. I get the politics of why but still, just ridiculous. It would be nice to be able to burn a BluRay to watch in my home theater system. There are other methods but BluRay is convenient and great for backing up large Video Files. Unfortunately BluRay looks like it's not going to make it. Maybe cable distribution companies will increase their Internet upload speeds one day and I can just store everything in the cloud and watch full length movies(that I've created) on Vimeo.
Anyways, I went and took a look at the hardware Apple stuffed inside my fancy (3.4 Ghz i7, 16GB 1333 DDR3, 2GB AMD 6970M, 256 GB SSD Internal and 2TB 7200 Internal) machine and it appears to be pretty middle of the range stuff. It's an iMAC, not a Mac Pro so why am I griping? Because my 2009 PC(which I tricked out over the last two years) is faster and does support the Mercury Playback Engine. I spent $2100 total on this PC which includes all my upgrades. I spent around $3300 on the iMAC. I feel ripped off.
Yes, I do love my iMAC on multiple levels but had I known my dated 2009 PC would render video projects faster, I would have gone with a MAC Pro or just a new PC. It seems that Mac is moving completely away from making high-end computers for niche markets(video editing) and focusing on their tiny laptops, IPADS and IPhones for the masses. Obviously smart from a capitalistic perspective(at present at least) but very frustrating for some.
I was actually told to purchase a MAC for video editing. I've been a PC guy for 15 years. I went with the iMAC because I had read many good things about it(probably just Apple propaganda) and also the MAC PRO was to be discontinued. Also the MAC Pro would have been triple the cost for what didn't seem like a whole lot more.
It's one's thing to prepackage a computer with inferior hardware(the iMAC I have is fast for most things and more than enough for 99% of the population) but to not allow us to pop open the computer and make a quit upgrade to the machine is what really makes me feel like I'm using a computer built for Grannies. I mean there is a reason my mother loves iMacs and Iphones. Amazing that I was able to upgrade my memory from 4 to 16GB but I've heard Apple has even done away with that. I get why they do it. Apple Warranty, Apple Care issues, Profit and World Domination: Apple wants a monopoly on everything.
Was great to see Adobe bounce back after the whole Flash/HTML5 thing and knock Final Cut Pro off the face of the Earth for good. People are still buying it b/c of the brand name but Final Cut is done. David Fincher used Adobe's Workflow for everything when he made The Girl with The Dragon Tattoo. Hollywood is making the shift and the world will follow. The Adobe Workflow has finally come together and there is just no way Apple can compete with Adobe Creative Cloud and an Engine that can just swap from Premiere to After Effects to Prelude to SpeedGrade to Photoshop to Story with speed for $29 bucks a month(or $49 for some). Apple better start supporting Adobe's Mercury Engine or they may have a problem. And if you're using Final Cut X, you're severely handicapping yourself. Problem is that people don't want to take the time to learn Adobe's products(steep learning curve for sure) which is where Apple's Granny software, and perhaps computers, comes in to play. Arnold Schwarzenegger once said "Milk is for babies, Real Men Drink Beer". I'm beginning to think that "Mac's are for Grannies, Real Men Use Adobe and PCs".
The major problem with Apple is you're forced to use Apple. Not sure but history has proven that people don't like to be forced into anything. Autocracies don't work. These systems eventually topple, even in the corporate world.
Amazon.com, now that's the company to emulate. What an amazing machine!
I've read that Apple may even discontinue the iMAC after 2013. Who knows?
If anyone has a solution for getting the Mecury Playpack Engine GPU acceleration to work with Premiere Pro CS6 on an iMAC 2011, please let me know. Like I wonder if you could Thunderbolt an External graphics card somehow? Or is an upgrade possible? Ahh...not worth the risk.
1) Graphcis Card - AMD Radeon HD 6970M 2048 MB (6990 would have been better or something from NVIDIA.
2) USB 2.0 Hub with only 480 Mb/sec
3) Seagate Baracude SATA I 7200 RPM drive with 3GB/s transfer rate and only a 32 GB Cach. It's ok. I would have expected at least a Western Digital Caviar Black 2 TB SATA III 7200 RPM 64 MB or the Velociraptor at 10,000RPM.
4)APPLE SSD TS256C Flash Drive. As you can see, it doesn't stack up so well against other SSD Drive.
Just average. http://www.harddrivebenchmark.net/hdd_lookup.phphdd=APPLE+SSD+TS256C

Whining and ranting about how iMacs can't do this or iMacs/orMacs can't do that is not going to get you a lot of help here.
Your "I love my MAC" is typical of the ever ubiquitous PC whiner.
If your video work needs were that computer intensive and critical , you should've done some online research and you should have budgeted for a Mac Pro.
Mac Pros are completely expandable and upgradeable unlike the iMac.
Mac Pros have much more faster and more CPU cores than the iMac line.
iMac line is limited to CPUs with 8 cores. The Mac Pros, I believe, are up to 16 core CPUs, now.
The Mac Pros can have their GPU upgraded and you even add/expand to use specialty audio/video cards.
Mac Pros are the defacto standard for real video work.
iMacs, even the high end model, is not really designed to do really heavy and intensive video work.
iMacs do do video creation and editing. Just not on the level that is needed from a more "Pro" computer.
It seems to me you are asking your iMac to do more than it was originally designed for, in terms of professional video editing.
You get a lot more out of a Mac Pro than an iMac for any real serious video, CGI or animation work.
You just didn't want to spend that much cash on one.
iMacs are not user upgradeable or friendly to user upgrades at all!!!
If you purchased a Mac Pro, you could've had that better, faster HD, better faster SSDs.
That said, I can offer no real help to but because of the nature of your post and the fact you just simply annoyed me, I feel some advice and explanations are in order
First off, you picked Adobe video editing software suite as your video creation software on the Mac. It's no secret to long-time video content creators on the Mac that Adobe products, especially those for video creation and editing are very user unfriendly on the Mac. Even though Macs are supported from Adobe, Adobe for a long time has treated the Mac and Mac users as second class citizens.
Before purchasing and installing Adobe Premiere, did you even check Adobe's site for the preferred system hardware and software requirements? Hmmm?
This is why you should KNOW what software you are going to be running on a computer first then research what computer make and model will run said software.
That's why Apple has its own apps like Aoerture, Logic and Final Cut.
Despite your ignorance in this matter, Final Cut Pro X is alive and doing well, thank you, and using this software on your iMac would kick Adobe Premier in the you know whats.
Final Cut Pro X is a complete video solution for and completely designed around the Mac.
Why are you using USB 2.0 connections for video work when you have a perfectly good FireWire 800 connection.
In case you are not aware, FireWire 800 is called so because it has a max throughput of 800 Mbps.
Your 2011 iMac can take up to 32 GBs of RAM. Not just 16 GBs.
This changed when the 2010 model iMacs came out.
Blu-ray? I believe you can buy external Blu-ray writers that work with Mac using said FW800 connection.
So you cite one movie and one videographer using Adobe Premier for your premise that Final Cut is dead in Hollywood?
Your argument that Apple locks you into everything in their world can be countered by saying Windows and Windows PCs lock you into the Windows world. What's your point?
Apple is not discontinuing their computers platforms any time soon.
All you are regurgitating is rumor. Probably from all of the PC crowd.
iMacs and professional desktop Macs are not going anywhere.
Currently, Apple is the only desktop/laptop computer maker that is still making a profit on their Macs and increasing their market share percentages for the last 5 years during which the PC market has continually slumped/dropped in its market share.

Does LR2 use GPU acceleration? Other system requirements?

Does LR2 use GPU acceleration as Photoshop CS4 does?
Do you think this machine will run LR2 for some time to come:
Dell Studio with Intel Q9400 quad core; 8GB RAM; 750GB hard disk.
Currently using integrated graphics, but there is a PCI x16 slot available.

>Does LR2 use GPU acceleration as Photoshop CS4 does?
No
>Do you think this machine will run LR2 for some time to come:
Yes that's more than beefy enough. To use that 8 gigs, make sure you run 64-bit windows vista on it.

Does GPU acceleration in Illustrator CC still work after disabling 'GPU Preview' and enabling 'CPU Preview' (on a workstation gpu)?

I'm using a workstation graphics card that allows for GPU acceleration in Illustrator CC.
Selecting 'GPU Preview' instead of 'CPU Preview' under the 'View' toolbar in Illustrator CC results in a more choppy experience.
Which leads me to wonder:
Does GPU acceleration in Illustrator CC still work after disabling 'GPU Preview' and enabling 'CPU Preview' (on a workstation gpu)?
Does GPU acceleration for my gpu actually improve the performance for my work?

If you disable the GPU acceleration in preferences then you'll be unable to enable GPU preview under the view menu. It will automatically go into CPU preview as the GPU is no longer enabled.
If you're experiencing choppy performance when you do have the GPU preview selected, something is amiss because any GPU that can support GPU acceleration should be able to do it without a performance hit.
What is the video card that's in the workstation?

Please speed up Lightroom using OpenCL/GPU acceleration and/or AVX support!

Hello,
for those, who don't look at the feature request site:
http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/please_speed_up_lightroom_using_open cl_gup_acceleration_and_or_avx_support
Hello,
I enjoy using LR. But there is still one thing that lacks: Performance, especially in the Develop Module and Zooming...
So please speed up LR using:
- OpenCL/GPU acceleration. Capture One pro 6 is doing this. If they can do this, Adobe can also!
- AVX support: Nik Software is using this. Processes got 1,5 to 2,6 times faster than before. So again... if Nik Software is capable of implementing this, Adobe should be able as well!
So, I am no expert, but from what I have read I think it is possible for Adobe.
Would appreciate to hear from other people who have more inside knowledge if this is possible for LR!
Thanks, Adobe for hearing us.
Christoph

Hello Keith,
thanks for the info!
It well might be that OpenCL causes some problems. On the other side sometimes I don't know how good a forum is to measure the problems.
Remember when a new LR Release comes out and the forum is flooded mit posts about the problems? If you just read alle the posts in the LR forum you could come to the conclusion that the new LR is completely unuseable. But in reality I never had a problem upgrading to the new LR version...
I understand your point and it might really by to early to implement this technology in LR.
But I still hope for the other direction: AVX .
I just think that we have the hardware possibilities to improve speed and LR should take advantage of this.
Kind regards,
Christoph

GPU Acceleration Not Supported in PS CS4 Standard

I was led to believe that GPU acceleration features (like smooth zoom and rotate) were supported in the PS CS4 Standard edition. Under GPU Settings, Performance Preferences, it states "No GPU options available with Photoshop Standard". To me this is misleading advertising - I would have considered the Extended version if I had known.
Maybe this will help others not make the same disappointing assumption I have. I think Adobe should make this clear in the future. It really does make me feel slighted.

Hi David,
Unfortunately the wording in the performance preference needs rework. There is already a bug logged, but it was found too late for changes to be made.
There is no Photoshop Standard, just Photoshop and Photoshop Extended. It also fails to clearly note the condition. I apologize for the confusion it has caused. Photoshop and Photoshop Extended both support GPU acceleration features for supported cards.
The intention was to communicate that under the current conditions Photoshop can not enable any GL drawing features.
You can find more information on GPU and Photoshop CS4 in this article:
http://www.adobe.com/go/kb404898
Regards,
steve

Sorting, timecode positioning, cropping bug, GPU acceleration, AU support

There doesn't seem to be a way to sort the items in the queue. I added 126 videos to encode and it is terribly annoying to look at them all as a huge bubble rather than a single line with disclosure triangle.
There are no options for repositioning timecode burn-in. The title-safe options are in an awkward location, and the other options put it flush against the edge of the frame.
The cropping function looks proper in the preview but the export is actually applying it as a padding operation and strecting the cropped region to fill the fram unproportionally. Also, for some reason the crop affects the timecode burn-in and scales it as well as crops it off. I'd like the timecode placed in the letterbox area. Because of this bug, my workaround was to use Photoshop to create a 1920x1080 PNG with a 2.35 letterbox. I then used the watermark effect with full alpha to impose it onto the footage. In doing this I noticed another bug that resulted in a small artifact from the matte's edge at the line from black to transparent, almost like a scaling artifact even though there was no scaling applied.
Is there GPU acceleration? It is incredibly slow compared to Adobe Media Encoder on the same computer.
It would be awesome to have support for AU plugins to be used as effects on the audio track. The included peak limiter worked ok for the most part to boost volume, but I'd like to be able to use more professional plugins to do this. A LUT video effect would be great too.

Use this link for Compressor Feedback. http://www.apple.com/feedback/compressor.html
Here is an article on hardware acceleration.
Russ

Why does Silverlight install process state that my 64-bit Win Vista OS does NOT support the 64-bit version of Silverlight?

As of Monday 4/20, I've encountered a significant problem with Silverlight on my Vista PC.
Several weeks ago I read a brief item stating that Google would be dropping support for npapi and that it would affect Silverlight sometime in April. One of my key daily apps uses Silverlight, but I didn't receive notification from that software's author
about the pending change and how it would be handled. Successfully used the app every week (Mon-Fri) this month for 8-10 hrs/dy day (as I've been doing for the past ~5+ years: past year under Chrome, year before that under FireFox, ~3 prior years
under IE) and on Fri 4/17 shut it down for the weekend. When I booted up on Mon morning and tried to log into the key app however, it prompted me to download and install Silverlight, acting as though I never had it installed!
I recalled the earlier warning about Google dropping support, so I closed Chrome, started up FireFox, but got the same prompt from the app -- it directed me to install Silverlight. I downloaded it (had no choice as to which version, just got the "Silverlight_x64.exe"
file) and got part-way through the install when this error msg popped up: "Unable to Install Silverlight. Your operating system does not support the 64-bit version of Silverlight". WHAT?! Clicking on the "more info"
link led to this msg: "Message ID: 1518. Your operating system does not support the 64-bit version of Silverlight. Click here for the latest version of Silverlight." That link simply led back to the download page which resulted
in receiving another copy of the same executable file.
According to my system ( > Control Panel > System ), I'm running "Windows Vista Home Premium", with a "System Type: 64-bit Operating System". I've been using this same Vista PC since Sep 2008 and running Silverlight for
around the past 5 yrs.
? -- Why doe the Silverlight installer code flag my OS as not supported?
? -- Is there a way to get an older version of Silverlight that will run under Vista?
Thanks in advance for any helpful comments.

Andy -- Thanks for the link, but I'm not adventurous enough to download from a non-MSFT site.
Besides, since I didn't make any changes to my hardware/software config, I expect a MSFT rep to explain why their two programs suddenly stopped working together and then provide whatever code fix is needed. A phone call to their tech support (predictably)
led to nowhere but a recommendation to purchase one of the company's support offerings (which I declined to pursue). The Silverlight development team appears to participate in these forums, so I'd hope one or more of them offers a realistic solution.
Here's something I forgot to mention in my original post: In several of the threads on this subject (some dating back to 2008!), people have
suggested running IE as the browser vs FireFox or Chrome; however, that idea fails to note that the error msg (Message ID:1518) clearly states that "your operating
system does not support the 64-bit version of Silverlight"; it doesn't say anything about
what browser you're using.

Does Vista support natively h264 GPU accelerated decodign?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for