What could this mean? With the quote " In addition to Intel, Imagination has licensed PowerVR MBX to Sony Ericsson, Texas Instruments, Freescale, ARM - which also has the right to sub-license the graphics technology - Philips, Samsung and others. "
Is the 2700G (the beauty of the x50v) now going to be surpassed in performance by this new SGX? I don't think the 2700G has "OpenGL 2.0 and DirectX 9 Shader Model 3 standard" or does it?
Does the 2700G have 8 pipelines? !!! I almost want to see a actualy white paper diagram of the 2700G at this point!
Anyone with some serious tech knowledge know the answer?
__________________
The machines we own, own us.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
There's a big difference between this GPU and the one that powers our Axims. This GPU in question is designed more for notebooks than it is for handhelds (that is, if I'm reading this right).
The support for OpenGL 2.0 and DX9, a combined vertex/pixel shader, and the many comparisons to GPU's like the ATI one powering the XBox 360 lead me to think this is designed for laptops.
(EDIT: OK, I missed the line about how Intel is already using the PowerVR MBX in the 2700G accelerator -- now I'm REALLY confused). Why the heck would we need H.264 decoding/encoding on a handheld (that's HD resolution for those who are unsure).
....OK, last edit -- perhaps the SGX is scalable -- in other words, an ultra low-powered version COULD be made by sacrificing certain features like the HD decoder and such (features that no handheld could take advantage of).
I would find it a shame if the 2700G doesn't even get it's chance to really shine before being replaced by something better! I sure hope some serious awesome games come out soon that make good use of it!
__________________
The machines we own, own us.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Why the heck would we need H.264 decoding/encoding on a handheld (that's HD resolution for those who are unsure).
H.264 is not another name for HD resolution video, here's a definition from Wikipedia:
Quote:
The intent of H.264/AVC project has been to create a standard that would be capable of providing good video quality at bit rates that are substantially lower (e.g., half or less) than what previous standards would need (e.g., relative to MPEG-2, H.263, or MPEG-4 Part 2), and to do so without so much of an increase in complexity as to make the design impractical (expensive) to implement. An additional goal was to do this in a flexible way that would allow the standard to be applied to a very wide variety of applications (e.g., for both low and high bit rates, and low and high resolution video) and to work well on a very wide variety of networks and systems (e.g., for broadcast, DVD storage, RTP/IP packet networks, and ITU-T multimedia telephony systems).
i just hope that WM2005 brings a good Direct X setup so that porting games will be easy and able to take use of the 2700. They better hurry up and release it though
__________________
I was born to be wild, but the cage was too small. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
X50v WM5 Unofficial A03 (WM5 AUK 3.5.2)
PPC6700 WM5 AUK 3.5.2
In the interests of science, this is the same clip ripped from DVD.
It's a 1:29:00 movie compressed down to 200MB with audio set at 128Kb/s 44.1KHz stereo. 320x240 frame size.
One is MPEG-4 with AAC audio and the other is H.264 with AAC audio. So the only differences between the two is the image quality encoder. The audio is the same. Both files are 200MB.
Notice how one is clearer than the other? These are native resolution, not enlarged.
So for the same file size H.264 gives a noticably better picture. Even better than MPEG-4. Imagine the benefits over MPEG-2! I don't have an MPEG-2 encoder handy to demonstrate....
__________________
Always read stuff that will make you look good if you die in the middle of it.
So what we have here is something that is capable of H.264 encoding and decoding whereas the 2700g doesn't. Which doesn't really bother me too much. As long as TCPMP can use the 2700g to play .avi , .mpg mpeg-4 and .mp4 files (which thanks to the PSP will become the industry and consumer norm) I am still plenty happy with my x50v. I just wish it could play mpeg-2 dammit.
If anyone else can spot other major differences or superiorities, post away.
__________________
The machines we own, own us.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
The PPC could still decode H.264 in software though could it not? Would it have the horsepower?
Yes it can, but it would involve using more of the CPU, since the 2700g doesn't handle H.264 natively. More CPU uage equals more battery drain. Kepp a spare battery!
__________________
The machines we own, own us.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
i2700g can hardware decode h264 (not all, 100%, but lots)
hardware h264 in i2700g:
- H.264 AVC (MPEG4 Part 10) Baseline Profile (no cabac)
- Inverse zig-zag scan with programmable scan ordering
- Deblocking filter acceleration
- Inverse H.264 intra prediction
- Full bi-directional prediction
- Half, quarter and eighth-pel motion compensation h264
from powervr:
"The reduction in CPU load achieved is typically in excess of 80% for H.264, thereby allowing the system designer to target lower cost and lower power systems. This is of increased importance when performing quarter-pel motion compensation"
Only good coder is required with lots of free time and i think -> typical movie: 640x272 h264 600kbps-1mbps -> 25 fps smooth on x50v
Follow Us
RSS Feed
Follow on Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
Addicted Member
