well i wouldn't say one had really any better performance on my machine
running on a nvidia card.

ym has varied.

the goods thing is, both are free (beer), so it costs nothing to see
which works best for you!


On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 16:55:28 +1300
Chris Wilkinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi there,
> 
> Nick Rout wrote:
> > this is a flame war in the making, essentially xine versus mplayer (as
> > it seems totem is a wrapper for xine)
> > 
> > i find mplayer gives better quality, plays more codecs and generally
> > "just goes". it will play weird video files that my media player in
> > windows barfs at. I can play 6 or more video files windowed on my
> > desktop at the same time. (if i want to)
> > 
> > OTOH xine has better handling of dvd menus
> 
> Yes, a flame war is certainly possible when discussing preferencial
> movie player, however I will comment based on hardware specifics.
> 
> For me, mplayer is far more stable (especially since I installed
> Mandrake 9.2), but xine plays with vastly better video quality and
> menu handling (if it can run without segfaulting!).
> 
> On the quality issue, the reason that mplayer looks rough on my
> hardware is that the mplayer devs have excluded hooks in their
> video codecs to use hardware accelerated calls on nvidia cards,
> whereas the xine devs have used these hardware accelerated hooks
> into nvidia cards...the result is that scaled 1600x1200 res DVD
> playback on my GeForceFX 5600 looks breathtaking with xine, but
> has rough colour banding and lots of grain with mplayer.
> 
> If you have an nVidia card and xine can run reliably on your system
> I'd opt for that, since mplayer may not look as good on that brand
> of gfx card. I also cannot use many menus in many of my DVD collection
> with mplayer. If xine however is not cooperative, or you have an ATI or
> other graphics card mplayer might be your best shot...
> 
> -- 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Chris Wilkinson, Christchurch, New Zealand.
> 

-- 
Nick Rout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to