5 ms·
I understand this is important mainly for Nvidia GPUs. Is there any benefit at all for this (vs the existing VA-API) on Intel and AMD graphics? VA-API seems to
by prima-facie 2mo ago
I understand this is important mainly for Nvidia GPUs.
Is there any benefit at all for this (vs the existing VA-API) on Intel and AMD graphics?
VA-API seems to work very well on both of these platforms, as far as I've tested.
- saibotk 2mo agoVA API has some caveats and also requires one to disable sandboxing of the media process.
- saibotk 2mo agoSorry my comment was related to the nvidia vaapi driver
- atomicUpdate 2mo agoConsidering Intel has vulkan video disabled in Mesa for recent chips, I’m guessing very little. https://www.phoronix.com/news/Intel-Vulkan-Video-Disable-New https://www.phoronix.com/news/Intel-Vulkan-Video-Disable-New
- adrian_b 2mo agoNo, that is not true. That link says that only the Vulkan video encode functions have been disabled, due to bugs. Vulkan video decoding remains enabled also in the Intel GPU drivers.
- adrian_b 2mo agoIt is important in the sense that many Linux programs did not bother to support both the Intel video API and the NVIDIA video API, so they work only with the Intel video API, which is also supported by AMD GPUs. Programs that are converted to Vulkan should work with any GPUs. VA-API works very well with the GPUs that support it, while the NVIDIA video API also works very well with the GPUs that support it, i.e. the NVIDIA GPUs. The Vulkan video API has worked well for some time on NVIDIA, I switched my video player to it long ago. Eventually the Vulkan video API should work well on all GPUs, so there will be a unified video API on Linux.