Copernic Reporter Posted March 26, 2011 Reporter Share Posted March 26, 2011 CoreCodec CoreAVC 2.5 for Windows is a complete solution for playing high quality HD H.264 videos on your Windows based computer. CoreAVC comes (in part) from the creators of the Matroska MKV Container (.mkv), So you know it's gotta be good! CoreAVC fully supports GPU hardware acceleration with NVIDIA CUDA Technology, and works with other compatible NVIDIA Platforms like ION running on Windows XP, Vista, or 7. If you have a slow computer that is having problems with H.264 playback, you can try using it. CoreAVC is known in the industry as being the standard for playback of high quality H.264 video. The new CoreAVC Decoder allows you to offload video decoding to any accelerated decoder that works with either NVIDIA CUDA or ATI with Microsoft's DirectX Video Acceleration (DXVA) interface for any Windows XP, Vista, or Windows 7 PC. CoreCodec CoreAVC features Supports Windows 7 32/64 bit Support DXVA 1/2 Compatible NVIDIA CUDA GPU support ATI GPU support (DXVA) Multicore ready (16 CPU Cores) 8100x8100 Resolution Support Full Interlaced support Uses Directshow for MKV Haali Media Splitter Included CoreAVC H.264 Video Codec - Version 2.5.0.0 (20110326) ADD: DXVA1 support (with red tray icon) ADD: DXVA2 support (with red tray icon) ADD: new x64 blit asm code (unified with x86) FIX: SPS memory leaks FIX: Properly support SPS resolution changes (soft/cuda decoding) FIX: Bug in YUV->YUV blit code CHG: Unify x86 and x64 CUDA asm code CHG: Unify x86 and x64 AVC asm code, enabling SSE2/SSE3/SSSE3/SSE4 for x64 CHG: Increase max supported resolution (approx 8100x8100) CHG: Refactor directshow frontend code CHG: Modify CUDA locking method CHG: Rearrange/enlarge settings dialog OEM: YASM padding bug for OSX target OEM: Android support added to SDK Haali Media Splitter (20110303) ADD: AC3 in MP4 support ADD: WebM support ADD: More H264 aspect ratio options FIX: Show error code in GDSMux when muxing is aborted FIX: Accept more AAC media types in the muxer FIX: Use correct timescales when processing MP4 edit lists FIX: Scan the folder for more segments only if the file references external segments FIX: Fixed a lot of issues with the mp4 muxer FIX: Better support for VC1 in MPEG Transport Streams FIX: Aspect ratio processing in certain Matroska files FIX: Bug in uninstaller that prevented it from properly unregistering all filters FIX: Unrecognized video track in some transport streams FIX: Occasional excessive disk I/O when paused Notes: CoreAVC is not free. It's a commercial program and you have to buy it to use it. There are no free versions available. If you want to use CoreAVC, you will have to buy it from CoreCodec. CoreAVC Professional 2.5 (for Windows) Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/985432-coreavc-25-for-windows-released/ Share on other sites More sharing options...
torrentthief Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 shame there is no trial, would be nice to know how it handles 4000 bitrate 720p x264 files on my sister's laptop as its jerky, 3200 bitrate is smooth on it, not worth paying $10 to test it. Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/985432-coreavc-25-for-windows-released/#findComment-593826652 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Udedenkz Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 Recommended Hardware Configurations for proper CoreAVC? Playback The CoreAVC? H.264 Video decoder for windows directshow has the following 'recommended' hardware configurations below: Noting that the recommendations listed are measured for full screen video playback and a more powerful system will deliver the best playback experience. But because of how efficient CoreAVC is, you may find that what it takes to perform at these levels can be achieved just as well on a slower PC too. CoreAVC? for Windows CPU - 800 MHz or faster Intel Pentium class or equivalent AMD processor RAM - At least 256MB of RAM OS - Windows 98, 2000, XP, Vista, 7 480p video at 24 frames per second CPU - 1.4 GHz or faster Intel Pentium 4 or equivalent AMD processor RAM - At least 256MB of RAM- 64MB or greater video card OS - Windows 98, 2000, XP, Vista, 7 720p video at 24-30 frames per second CPU - 2.2 GHz or faster Intel Pentium 4 or equivalent AMD processor RAM - At least 512MB of RAM GPU - 128MB or greater video card OS - Windows 98, 2000, XP, Vista, 7 1080p video at 24-30 frames per second CPU - 2.8 GHz or faster Intel Pentium 4 or equivalent AMD processor RAM - At least 1GB of RAM GPU - 256MB or greater video card OS - Windows 98, 2000, XP, Vista, 7 GPU Requirements for NVIDIA CUDA:* NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260/280/290/295, 9800, 9600, 9500, 8800 GT, 8800 GTS 512, 8700, 8600, 8500, 8400, Tesla S1070/C1060, Quadro FX 3700, Quadro FX 3600M, Quadro FX 1700/FX 570/ NVS 320M/FX 1600M/FX 570M/FX 370/NVS 290/NVS 140M/NVS 135M/FX 360M/NVS 130M and higher. * You will also need drivers 191.07 or higher from NVIDIA Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/985432-coreavc-25-for-windows-released/#findComment-593826688 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kool Box Posted March 27, 2011 Share Posted March 27, 2011 Seems good, just one minor glitch is that I cannot seek in WMP 12 with a MKV file but v2.0 works fine. Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/985432-coreavc-25-for-windows-released/#findComment-593827472 Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleNeutrino Veteran Posted March 27, 2011 Veteran Share Posted March 27, 2011 Think i will stick with CCCP Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/985432-coreavc-25-for-windows-released/#findComment-593827494 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singh400 Posted March 27, 2011 Share Posted March 27, 2011 On 27/03/2011 at 00:08, littleneutrino said: Think i will stick with CCCP Had to move from CCCP to Shark's. But I have also tried CoreAVC. It is very very good. Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/985432-coreavc-25-for-windows-released/#findComment-593827520 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Udedenkz Posted March 27, 2011 Share Posted March 27, 2011 On 27/03/2011 at 00:08, littleneutrino said: Think i will stick with CCCP Why you use WMP (WMP = the only reason for external codec pack)? Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/985432-coreavc-25-for-windows-released/#findComment-593827996 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avi Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 Quote CoreAVC H.264 Video Codec - Version 2.5.1.0 (20110328)- FIX: Windows Media Player seeking with MKV - FIX: MediaPortal crashing - FIX: Graphstudio crashing Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/985432-coreavc-25-for-windows-released/#findComment-593843506 Share on other sites More sharing options...
epk Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 I wish someone would make a comparison between this and the lastest DivX plus. There's only really outdated ones around. Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/985432-coreavc-25-for-windows-released/#findComment-593843516 Share on other sites More sharing options...
bryonhowley Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 Might give it a go now that they have added ATI GPU support as it was completely useless with only Nvidia Cuda. Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/985432-coreavc-25-for-windows-released/#findComment-593843522 Share on other sites More sharing options...
figgy Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 DivX Plus HD was the fastest h.264 decoder and adds mkv support for windows media player. Plus its free! (install DivX Plus Codec Pack) I think Divx still wears the performance h.264 performance crown. So there is very little reason to use corecodec as far i am concerned. Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/985432-coreavc-25-for-windows-released/#findComment-593843538 Share on other sites More sharing options...
epk Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 On 31/03/2011 at 18:27, figgy said: DivX Plus HD was the fastest h.264 decoder and adds mkv support for windows media player. Plus its free! (install DivX Plus Codec Pack) I think Divx still wears the performance h.264 performance crown. So there is very little reason to use corecodec as far i am concerned. That's why I'm curious about performance, DivX being free (and quite good) makes CoreAVC a hard sale. Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/985432-coreavc-25-for-windows-released/#findComment-593843550 Share on other sites More sharing options...
dknm Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 Quote ? or ATI with Microsoft's DirectX Video Acceleration (DXVA) interface Oh look , it's 2011 and I can pay 10$ to get my video accelerated (free isn't cutting it anymore). Mindblowing ! Maybe next time they'll toy with OpenCL or smth ... Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/985432-coreavc-25-for-windows-released/#findComment-593843552 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Copernic Reporter Posted March 31, 2011 Author Reporter Share Posted March 31, 2011 On 31/03/2011 at 18:20, epk said: I wish someone would make a comparison between this and the lastest DivX plus. There's only really outdated ones around. H.264 CPU/DXVA codec comparison UPDATE 31/3/2011: CoreAVC 2.5.1 (CPU & DXVA results added) http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=159486 Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/985432-coreavc-25-for-windows-released/#findComment-593843568 Share on other sites More sharing options...
epk Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 On 31/03/2011 at 18:37, Copernic said: H.264 CPU/DXVA codec comparison UPDATE 31/3/2011: CoreAVC 2.5.1 (CPU & DXVA results added) http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=159486 Interesting, thanks. So wait, it's faster to use the cpu? or am I missing something? Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/985432-coreavc-25-for-windows-released/#findComment-593843754 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Udedenkz Posted April 1, 2011 Share Posted April 1, 2011 On 31/03/2011 at 18:27, figgy said: DivX Plus HD was the fastest h.264 decoder and adds mkv support for windows media player. Plus its free! (install DivX Plus Codec Pack) I think Divx still wears the performance h.264 performance crown. So there is very little reason to use corecodec as far i am concerned. Better be trolling, - DivX is really slow compared to CoreAVC. - DivX is buggy compared to CoreAVC. - Everything adds MKV support for WMP. - I would avoid WMP and use MPC:HC for empirically higher quality and more performance friendly Haali Renderer as well as more performance friendly subtitles. Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/985432-coreavc-25-for-windows-released/#findComment-593847768 Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThaCrip Posted April 3, 2011 Share Posted April 3, 2011 maybe i am mistaken, but what's the point of this software? free video players like PotPlayer already supports hardware accelerated h264 video playback on my Radeon 5670 fine through dxva. CPU use with dxva on is around 5percent on my AMD Athlon 3600+ dual core (2.0ghz overclocked to 2.4ghz). 720p/1080p x264 (h264). without it... 1080p gets out of sync and 720p plays fine but CPU use is 30-40percent area. Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/985432-coreavc-25-for-windows-released/#findComment-593851788 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Udedenkz Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 On 03/04/2011 at 15:53, ThaCrip said: maybe i am mistaken, but what's the point of this software? free video players like PotPlayer already supports hardware accelerated h264 video playback on my Radeon 5670 fine through dxva. CPU use with dxva on is around 5percent on my AMD Athlon 3600+ dual core (2.0ghz overclocked to 2.4ghz). 720p/1080p x264 (h264). without it... 1080p gets out of sync and 720p plays fine but CPU use is 30-40percent area. Not all renderers support DXVA. If you want a quality presentation, you will use MadVR which doesn't support DXVA. With CoreAVC, you can use CUDA with MadVR for fast and great quality video. Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/985432-coreavc-25-for-windows-released/#findComment-593855958 Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThaCrip Posted April 6, 2011 Share Posted April 6, 2011 On 04/04/2011 at 21:07, Udedenkz said: Not all renderers support DXVA. If you want a quality presentation, you will use MadVR which doesn't support DXVA. With CoreAVC, you can use CUDA with MadVR for fast and great quality video. Well a standard x264 720p (7GB) file seems to be a negligible difference in image quality with a big CPU hit when using MadVR. (since DXVA is disabled) i.e. it's not worth losing DXVA for the slight (to negligible) image quality increase. note: i tested it on PotPlayer with madVR enabled and then it's default mode which uses dxva. (and like i say i can notice it did change the image some but it seemed to mostly introduce jaggies in the image where as standard dxva is more smoother. Link to comment https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/985432-coreavc-25-for-windows-released/#findComment-593861550 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts