Athlon 2500+ Radeon9200, 512Mb

Under WInXP I used Zoomplayer+ffdshow - all was perfect.

Under Ubuntu I tried to run Mplayer and the default player. The performance is appalling - I get quadratization, the colors are off and there is absolutely no sharpness. How do I achieve that perfect playback (1:1 mapping, sharp filter etc.) under Ubuntu if at all?

Thanks.

First, try SMplayer, an mplayer front end that exposes a lot of the video processing parameters of mplayer in its config menus, like video post processing filters

http://smplayer.sourceforge.net/

then try KMplayer using both mplayer and xine codec engines.
http://kmplayer.kde.org/

Both are in Synaptic, including xine.

Also, be sure your desktop resolution is set to match your display, i.e. 1280x1024, 1360x768, 1280x720 or whatever your display resolution is.

Be sure to install the ATI or Nvidia driver using the sticky thread procedure.

Turn off Compiz (No Effects/None in the Appearances control panel) after the driver is installed with Envy.

What resolution and codec are you trying to play?

What driver are you using? ATI linux drivers have been weak at best in the past. running mplayer from the command line can provide you with some useful information about what mplayer is doing with your CPU & GPU.

Also check your CPU usage during playback, you might see you are getting 90%+ usage during playback which means your GPU isn't doing any decoding.

I run a Athlon 3500+ (4yrs old) 1GB ram, nvidia 6800GT 256MB, using the "nvidia" driver not the "nv" driver and I get 720p x264 playback almost perfectly.

when I was using the nv driver, the playback was horrible, changing the driver made a dramatic difference.

What driver are you using? ATI linux drivers have been weak at best in the past.

Not only that, you're probably using a generic driver provided by Ubuntu. I would install a real ATI driver http://ati.amd.com/support/driver.html

After several attempts to install ATI driver - I failed to do so. I started with the package from ATI site, tried the manual install, ended with Envy - no Luck :mad:

Envy said some crap like "your card is supported by the legacy driver. the legacy driver does not support your operating system (Ubuntu 7.10)"

Is that it? Is that the end of my Linux trial? May be I should install Mandriva?

First, drop the attitude!

I would not use Envy either, I tried it with my ATI All-In-Wonder 9600 card. I ended up using the driver downloaded from the ATI/AMD website.

What I did was use a function of the driver that creates a package for you to install. I am using Debian, so it created a .deb package (same as Ubuntu).

To see a list of all the packages that it will make, direct the terminal to the folder that the driver is in, and enter this command. sh ati-driver-installer-8-3-x86.x86_64.run --listpkg
The output will list, among others, these possible Ubuntu packages.Ubuntu Packages:
Ubuntu/dapper
Ubuntu/6.06
Ubuntu/edgy
Ubuntu/6.10
Ubuntu/feisty
Ubuntu/7.04
Ubuntu/gutsy
Ubuntu/7.10
Ubuntu/hardy
Ubuntu/8.04

To make a .deb.package for Ubuntu 7.10, you would then enter this command.sudo sh ati-driver-installer-8-3-x86.x86_64.run --buildpkg Ubuntu/7.10This gave me three files.fglrx-amdcccle_8.471-0ubuntu1_i386.deb
fglrx-installer_8.471-0ubuntu1_i386.changes
fglrx-kernel-source_8.471-0ubuntu1_i386.deb
Install the driver with this command.sudo dpkg -i fglrx-amdcccle_8.471-0ubuntu1_i386.deb fglrx-kernel-source_8.471-0ubuntu1_i386.deb
Now run this command, and then reboot.sudo aticonfig --initial
Here are some How-To's for more information.
http://wiki.cchtml.com/index.php/Ubuntu

Instead of using "sh" to run the installer, try this.
./ati-driver-installer-8-3-x86.x86_64.run --listpkg

waterhead thank you for your help

I did all as it says in http://wiki.cchtml.com/index.php/Ubuntu - only gets me the lowres 800x600 screen and some GLX error. :confused:

fglrxinfo
Xlib: extension "GLX" missing on display ":0.0".
Xlib: extension "GLX" missing on display ":0.0".
Error: couldn't find RGB GLX visual!

Segmentation fault (core dumped)

glxinfo
name of display: :0.0
Xlib: extension "GLX" missing on display ":0.0".
Xlib: extension "GLX" missing on display ":0.0".
Xlib: extension "GLX" missing on display ":0.0".
Error: couldn't find RGB GLX visual

visual x bf lv rg d st colorbuffer ax dp st accumbuffer ms cav
id dep cl sp sz l ci b ro r g b a bf th cl r g b a ns b eat
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Xlib: extension "GLX" missing on display ":0.0".
Xlib: extension "GLX" missing on display ":0.0".
0x21 16 tc 1 0 0 c . . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 None
Xlib: extension "GLX" missing on display ":0.0".
Xlib: extension "GLX" missing on display ":0.0".
0x39 32 tc 1 0 0 c . . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 None
Segmentation fault (core dumped)



Any ideas?

Ummm....

I'll have to retract my recommendation on installing the driver that way. :o

I am running 64studio, which uses Debian etch. I thought that I had the driver installed from a package that I made with the binary. I soon realized that I had done this with a different OS that I had tried. I did it on JAD, which is SuSE 10.2 based, and it worked flawlessly.

So, I tried it on my 64studio (32-bit version) install, and problems started from the very beginning. First, 64studio uses a real-time kernel (whatever that means), and would not compile the driver. After finding a solution to that, I made and installed the .deb packages. The driver installs, but it is now worse than it was before! I don't even remember what I had installed before, so putting it back the way it was may be difficult.:confused:

I think that I had the driver install from the Debian repositories, so I'm gonna try and remove the installed driver and go back to that.

Sorry if I mislead you.

According to
https://a248.e.akamai.net/f/674/9206/0/www2.ati.com/drivers/linux/catalyst_83_linux.html#191896

the Radeon 9200 is not supported by Catalyst 8.3/driver 8.471 (the current releases).

You must use an older driver at
https://support.ati.com/ics/support/default.asp?deptID=894&task=knowledge&folderID=27

I could not locate the older driver there.
The lowest card supported with the current Catalyst/driver is a 9500/9550.

I think you should get a newer card with updated OpenGl support and current driver support, like

http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=VP5200SS11-CO-R&cat=VCD

Here's a great choice- Nvidia, Compiz capable, TV out, fanless, runs latest Nvidia driver, only $19.99 shipped (to US)
http://3btech.net/jenvfx128xag1.html

I sold off all my ATI cards lower than 9550 a year or two ago. I keep about 10 machines running most of the time, a combination of ATI 9550, 9600 and Nvidia cards (FX5200/5500/6200/7100/7300/7600). No issues installing the latest ATI or Nvidia drivers with Envy from the sticky thread on any of these.

There is a HUGE number of PCI/AGP/PCIe cards out there for around $50 or less that support the latest Linux drivers- save yourself the headache.

Nice catch Rgb, I totally missed that one.

There is a HUGE number of PCI/AGP/PCIe cards out there for around $50 or less that support the latest Linux drivers- save yourself the headache. I should probably just stick with XP until I buy my next rig.:rolleyes:

Thanks, guys, for your help. It was really an experiment for me. Just to get a flavour of what can be on my next machine. After all I am more than satisfied with xp+zoomplayer+ffdshow combo I currently have. It will pobably still be OK for the next two years or so. And then I shall bear in mind to check linux hardware compatibility issue.

Nice catch Rgb, I totally missed that one.

Thanks- I had a vague recollection about lower-than-9500 ATI cards, and thought I'd double check the ATI supported hardware page.

Note to self- always ask about the driver first! ;)

I decided to not to give up so easily - after all I love this stuff - and spent $57 on HD 2400 Pro to upgrade from 9200. Should get it tomorrow, will post how it goes with ubuntu install.

BTW, people are saying that for HD video ATI still completely outpasses Nvidia for picture quality. This was the case 4 years ago, when I built my current system - is that true now?

That may be true in Windows. However, ATI driver support for Linux is poor, so far, and Nvidia support is very good. Therefore, Linux users get much better HD video with Nvidia cards, even with obsolete ones (like the 5200 series). Since none of the advanced features (all geared towards Windows Gaming) are not used, so there is no advantage, in Linux, by going with the very latest versions of the Nvidia chips. Any of the Nvidia 6000, 7000, or 8000 series should work (pick the one that you can get for a reasonable price - preferably one with a dual DVI digital output).

BTW, people are saying that for HD video ATI still completely outpasses Nvidia for picture quality. This was the case 4 years ago, when I built my current system - is that true now?

You never heard that here.

More important than the card are the Linux drivers. The nVidia Linux drivers are superior to any ATI Linux drivers. ATI only recently started taking Linux a little more seriously, since AMD took over the company. Their drivers are better than before, but nVidia has a big head start.

I don't know what kind of card it is that you ordered, but if it doesn't have nVidia chips in it, you may be disappointed.

That may be true in Windows. However, ATI driver support for Linux is poor, so far, and Nvidia support is very good. Therefore, Linux users get much better HD video with Nvidia cards, even with obsolete ones (like the 5200 series). Since none of the advanced features (all geared towards Windows Gaming) are not used, so there is no advantage, in Linux, by going with the very latest versions of the Nvidia chips. Any of the Nvidia 6000, 7000, or 8000 series should work (pick the one that you can get for a reasonable price - preferably one with a dual DVI digital output).

Agreed, but I would suggest getting a card with one of each connector type- DVI, VGA analog, and Svideo, so you have every type of connector to handle any display. DVI is easily and cheaply converted to HDMI with an adapter or low cost cable.

Agreed, but I would suggest getting a card with one of each connector type- DVI, VGA analog, and Svideo, so you have every type of connector to handle any display. DVI is easily and cheaply converted to HDMI with an adapter or low cost cable.

I think that he'll be ok with that one. According to the picture on the ATI web site, it has all three.
http://ati.amd.com/designpartners/media/images/HD_2400_3qtr_B_lg.jpg

The ATI Linux drivers may work too. I am using a Radeon 9600 in a frontend running Debian 4. It only has VGA outputs, and the picture does have some faint "comb" interlacing artifacts. But it is very watchable. I am using the ATI drivers from the Debian repositories. I tried the one from the ATI web site, but it did not work AT ALL.

The moral to this story: Try the drivers available from the Ubuntu repositories first. If they don't work, then try the one from the ATI web site.

I went with ATI on purpose, since my current rig is primary the XP/ATI machine - therefore getting ATI upgrade should ease the migration. I shall see how well ATI works in Ubuntu and how well Linux HTPC compares to Windows HTPC. After I get some experience with HTPC under Linux I shall decide on whether or not to run Linux in the next rig and whether to get ATI or Nvidia. This might not happen until 2010. So I am planning well ahead.

What I like about ATI in HTPC is hardware decoding not only of H264, but also of VC1, MPEG1, MPEG2 etc.

The supplier offers me a choice of upgrading my AGP card to either ATI HD2400PRO/256Mb or GF7300GT/512Mb - same price. I understand that HD2400PRO is the last generation card, significantly better performing than GT7300 - but will I get HD video playback and compiz with ATI? Or should I get a technically inferior, but more Linux-compatible nVidia?

Need your opinion, do not want to spend money on lesser tech. Thanks.

The supplier offers me a choice of upgrading my AGP card to either ATI HD2400PRO/256Mb or GF7300GT/512Mb - same price. I understand that HD2400PRO is the last generation card, significantly better performing than GT7300 - but will I get HD video playback and compiz with ATI? Or should I get a technically inferior, but more Linux-compatible nVidia?

Need your opinion, do not want to spend money on lesser tech. Thanks.

As of today and the near future, I would take the Nvidia card.

ATI cards can't play video or run 3D apps like googleearth with Compiz enabled. If you disable Compiz, video playback and 3D apps are fine, at least with the current ATI Catalyst driver on the Radeon 9550/9600's I've tested.

From a practical, apples-apples standpoint, XP doesn't have Compiz-like functionality (at least from MS), so the Linux ATI driver is fine for most people coming from XP.

OK, I did that! I setup 7300GT in my system and finally got Ubuntu working. Not without some usual bit of frustration as my plasma resolution did not show up anywhere in the system, so had to edit the config file manually.

High Definition playback is good, however SMplayer lacks that life saving Sharpening for those overcompressed low resolution files ffdshow used to have. Any idea on where to get such capability?

Also, which video output drivers to use? Currently it is set to xv - is this the best option for picture quality?

OK, I did that! I setup 7300GT in my system and finally got Ubuntu working. Not without some usual bit of frustration as my plasma resolution did not show up anywhere in the system, so had to edit the config file manually.

High Definition playback is good, however SMplayer lacks that life saving Sharpening for those overcompressed low resolution files ffdshow used to have. Any idea on where to get such capability?

Also, which video output drivers to use? Currently it is set to xv - is this the best option for picture quality?

Try them all and see what works best for you.

re: sharpen filter-

You could try adding the appropriate mplayer sharpen parameter in the SMplayer Preferences/advanced dialog.

see http://www.mplayerhq.hu/DOCS/man/en/mplayer.1.html#VIDEO%20FILTERS

for parameter switches.

It will be nice when SMplayer and KMplayer expose all the mplayer switches and options in their GUIs like ffdshow. Should be a trivial GUI job, passing the parameters to mplayer when it's called. I guess it's just tedious work the developer's don't feel like doing.


Also, see

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=121229&page=22

Thanks for useful hints.

I found that I can switch on the filters manually via Options==>View info and properties==>Video filters in SMplayer, but same filters are not picked up via ~/ .mplayer/config. Any way to make them persistent?