Does Chromecast support exotic resolutions like the 2560x1080p for 21:9 screens or 4K? Which HDMI-Version is used in Chromecast?
paradonym said:
Does Chromecast support exotic resolutions like the 2560x1080p for 21:9 screens or 4K? Which HDMI-Version is used in Chromecast?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With a rooted Chromecast it should be possible when someone optimizes the resolution selection during HDMI handshake - how well it would work with casting is a another question. (I intend to try this as I'm running the Chromecast on a 1366x768 display).
While it could probably display at those resolutions there is no way the WiFi could handle those streams to make it work.
The maker of the SoC is known, there should be technical specs on their site. I think the SoC is several years old and was developed as a FullHD multimedia device, and nothing more.
paradonym said:
Does Chromecast support exotic resolutions like the 2560x1080p for 21:9 screens or 4K? Which HDMI-Version is used in Chromecast?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Pretty sure it's HDMI 1.3 or 1.4
4K won't happen unless it's at 30p (which is poopy)
But mostly it's designed for standard televisions, so I doubt there is any testing or attention given to resolutions that aren't 4:3 or 16:9 720p or 1080p Heck, given the number of times support for 720p devices has been broken, I don't think they test on anything other than Full HD 1080p.
lecorbusier said:
The maker of the SoC is known, there should be technical specs on their site. I think the SoC is several years old and was developed as a FullHD multimedia device, and nothing more.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I once went looking and couldn't find any specs published. Maybe someone else will have better luck.
It's a Marvell Armada 1500-mini
bhiga said:
I once went looking and couldn't find any specs published. Maybe someone else will have better luck.
It's a Marvell Armada 1500-mini
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Apparently it displays everything at 1080P being it's highest Res, But can display 4K content as they have software that renders 4K content @ 1080P.
So it can play the content but it downconverts it to 1080P for display.
http://www.marvell.com/digital-entertainment/armada-1500/qdeo/
Okay, there's not much in terms of numerical specs to see in the product brief. The upper limit is the HDMI 1.4 spec, but below that, who knows?
Apart from limiting fps, you could use interlacing, or omit sync signals usually needed by crts only. This was necessary to display 1080p, 1200p and 1600*1200 via single link DVI, upon which HDMI is based. But probably the HDMI's link speed is higher, so you could go beyond DVI limits.
How could you connect chromecast to 1366x768 resolution monitor?
roneymathew32 said:
How could you connect chromecast to 1366x768 resolution monitor?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Depends on the monitor. Chromecast sends out a video signal on HDMI, not a computer signal, so unless the monitor accepts 1280x720 or 1920x1080 it probably won't work and you'll need a device to convert it. You could use a HDfury Nano GX or similar, but that would cost more than the Chromecast itself and closer to a new 1080p monitor.
If it's a 1366x768 projector or one of the early 720p televisions, or the display has native HDMI and supports HDCP 1.x, then it might stand a chance of working, but in general, unless that monitor is really special, it's probably not worth the trouble to try to make it work. If you already have a Chromecast you can try it though, it won't hurt anything.
Could you please answer which HDMI version Chromecast Ultra has? I have not found any information that there is exactly HDMI 2.0. And 4K 30 FPS is supported with HDMI 1.4.
Lucky_spirit said:
Could you please answer which HDMI version Chromecast Ultra has? I have not found any information that there is exactly HDMI 2.0. And 4K 30 FPS is supported with HDMI 1.4.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This forum is Chromecast 2012, the original model.
It's HDMI 1.x and not HDMI 2.0, supports only up to 1920x1080 resolution.
You might try asking in Google Chromecast (2015) - maybe someone there knows, but generally speaking non-standard resolutions are not of interest to mass-consumer devices - dealing with them requires more than just supporting the actual output resolution/rate, but involves have the applications handle the scaling for different aspect ratios as well, which is extra programming for little/no reward, not to mention extra testing/QA.
Related
http://blog.gsmarena.com/iphone-4-now-plays-1080p-videos-easily-does-some-xviddivx-magic-too/
Seems like some people managed to play 1080p on iPhone 4.
SGS has almost the same CPU with better GPU and option for overclock.
What is the reason that is preventing us from playing 1080p? Not good enough app or something else?
1080p on a 4" screen? no thank you.
We just seems to be needing a good codec to play 1080p. So it should just be a software limitation unless the GPU is capped at 720p!
ostendk said:
1080p on a 4" screen? no thank you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would never watch 1080p on 4'' screen (even though some people would)
I'm just curios about the hardware.
@Prankey,
I guess SGX 540 can play 1080p if SGX 535 can.
I'll make a wild guess here:
iOS has all the software needed for full hardware acceleration while Android don't.
How is this a development related question?
And I thought galaxy can play 1080 without problems (didnt try though, as its very stupid).
so iPhone display is 960 x 640 pixels?
1080P is 1920 x 1080 pixels
unless it can output HDMI, seems pretty pointless to me.
The screen resolution is 800x480 anyway so the extra resolution does not benefit you at all. It's just a minor convenience to avoid converting the video but you're wasting battery power to decode the video and a lot of space. 720p is enough of a battery and space waster.
mickeko said:
I'll make a wild guess here:
iOS has all the software needed for full hardware acceleration while Android don't.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1080p isn't even listed as a file which can be played. You can't even upload it via iTunes, so there is no official hardware acceleration built in for 1080p.
dupel said:
How is this a development related question?
And I thought galaxy can play 1080 without problems (didnt try though, as its very stupid).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess it is a development question, because it may be related with codecs, drivers, etc.
But no, it can't. I have tried it, even though I'm not about to watch full HD on my SGS
miker71 said:
so iPhone display is 960 x 640 pixels?
1080P is 1920 x 1080 pixels
unless it can output HDMI, seems pretty pointless to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We can use microUSB to HDMI and we have DLNA. So it would be useful to us. Anyway, as I've already said my interest is about hardware capabilities not watching full HD on my phone.
Maddmatt said:
The screen resolution is 800x480 anyway so the extra resolution does not benefit you at all. It's just a minor convenience to avoid converting the video but you're wasting battery power to decode the video and a lot of space. 720p is enough of a battery and space waster.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You still have to convert the video though for these devices still cause h.264 codec support for mobile devices don't support all of what the codec can do. It's also wasted bit rate as well. It's better to have a lower resolution video with a decent bit rate then it is to have a video with a massive resolution but not enough of a bit rate to smooth out artifacts. this resolution race for videos on mobile phones is a tad stupid.
Rock player plays 1080p for me.
The Video I tried was a bit choppy though but acceptable.
(I guess about 15-18fps). I only tried one Video wich I accidentally loaded on my device.
As far as I now Rock player does not use any GPU acceleration though pretty impressive what this little CPU is capable of.
Definatly plays full hd better then my atom netbook.
ostendk said:
1080p on a 4" screen? no thank you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
agree it's simply over kill
all the extra processing is wasted on a 4" screen
actually iphone4 is only 3.5" not even 4"
720p is more than enough on the 4"
jam3sjam3s said:
1080p isn't even listed as a file which can be played. You can't even upload it via iTunes, so there is no official hardware acceleration built in for 1080p.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wasn't talking about hardware accelerated 1080p playback. I was talking about how everything in iOS is adapted to support as much of the hardware features as possible, while Android is not adapted to support the SGS hardware in any other way than Samsung just tossing in (semi)working drivers.
jam3sjam3s said:
1080p isn't even listed as a file which can be played. You can't even upload it via iTunes, so there is no official hardware acceleration built in for 1080p.
I guess it is a development question, because it may be related with codecs, drivers, etc.
But no, it can't. I have tried it, even though I'm not about to watch full HD on my SGS
We can use microUSB to HDMI and we have DLNA. So it would be useful to us. Anyway, as I've already said my interest is about hardware capabilities not watching full HD on my phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And what format have you tried yo play it in?
jam3sjam3s said:
http://blog.gsmarena.com/iphone-4-now-plays-1080p-videos-easily-does-some-xviddivx-magic-too/
Seems like some people managed to play 1080p on iPhone 4.
SGS has almost the same CPU with better GPU and option for overclock.
What is the reason that is preventing us from playing 1080p? Not good enough app or something else?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1/ there is no point, resolution-wise
2/ with iphone there is a VERY limited range of file formats you CAN actually play, so you will spend half your life converting to a format that apple can control. Most my 1080p movies are mkv format, a format that works on Galaxy S but not on iphone. All my SD movies are Divx and Xvid, again, not compatible with iphone.
Mark.
Well actually we can! Rockplayer can do it so please stop spamming this forum!
You apple fanboy
jodue said:
just ****ing stupid! 1080p on 800x480, wtf? even 720p is higher than the screen-resolution! also a movie in 1080p has ~10Gb which would almost fill my 16gb card. STUPID and completely SENSELESS!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well apparently the people with iphone4 are too rich and too <insert what you think here> to care about that.
they probably think they have super wireless and can stream a 1080p movie and watch it over the air
AllGamer said:
they probably think they have super wireless and can stream a 1080p movie and watch it over the air
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And why not? 802.11n is more than enough for that...
Anything that can be done on the iphone 4 can be done on the galaxy s, just needs the right software to be made.
The only difference between the iphone 4 and the GS is the software, the screen, and the galaxy s having one generation newer gpu
Anyway what's the point in this? sd cards have a 4gb filesize limit, 1080p would waste so much battery for no benefit over a 720p file
technical spec yes
real life usage, not so great
wireless N is what i use for my home teather, yes it "works" but load time is horrible, as well as the random cut offs, then waiting for the load time again.... it's a pain in the aussie
it's much more convenient to first copy the entire movie into the hard drive via wireless N, then watch it
but that defeats the entire purpose of streaming a movie
I currently have CM7 installed, and the HDMI mirroring works great. But when I view photos, the resolution is not 1080p, it's the resolution of the screen. Is this possible to view photos at 1080p resolution over HDMI on CM7 or stock ROM?
This is the main problem of this STUPID hdmi out. It's only mirroring. that means the resolution of the screen is the ONLY resolution in OUTPUT.
then the 800x480 resolution is upscaled.
Viewwing photos or video we had the same problem: also video in full hd that this phone can play smoothly, BUT the hdmi out is ONLY 800x480...so...it's useless that this phone can decode full-hd video....
When watching video over HDMI is look better than 800x480?
When I record an HD video on my phone, the play it via HDMI out, it seems to be full HD. I was hoping there was a way to do that for photos... I guess not. Perhaps it can be a feature in CM7 or something.
just last sunday i was watching 1080P on friends TV. no problems!
Or you think you did.
Everything is downscaled to phones screen resolution (480x800) and then on HDMI out stretched to 1080p just so that our TV's don't have problems with it. That's why it is not pure 1080p, and that's why it doesn't really make sense to force HD videos on phones.
Use PC, media players or anything else HD capable instead.
Dac0908 said:
Or you think you did.
Everything is downscaled to phones screen resolution (480x800) and then on HDMI out stretched to 1080p just so that our TV's don't have problems with it. That's why it is not pure 1080p, and that's why it doesn't really make sense to force HD videos on phones.
Use PC, media players or anything else HD capable instead.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No. True for photos displayed on the phone, yes, but not for video. When playing video (at least with the stock player) it no longer does mirroring, it outputs a true hd-image.
Dac0908 said:
Or you think you did.
Everything is downscaled to phones screen resolution (480x800) and then on HDMI out stretched to 1080p just so that our TV's don't have problems with it. That's why it is not pure 1080p, and that's why it doesn't really make sense to force HD videos on phones.
Use PC, media players or anything else HD capable instead.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you know you can see on 55" led tv if you are wathing 1080p or something ells!
TrymHansen said:
No. True for photos displayed on the phone, yes, but not for video. When playing video (at least with the stock player) it no longer does mirroring, it outputs a true hd-image.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well that's an improvement then. Good news, for some people.
HDMI was for me one of biggest advantages O2x had few months ago, and now I find it almost useless. Yes, it's there and it totally works, I bought the cable and HDMI coupler so I can extend it with another one - but never really use it. Photos were always too blurry to care (when displayed on TV, camera is decent), videos are not so practical even though they work better than I expected, some using stock player and some using MX Video Player.
I have PC connected to TV, Picasa, media server, and PS3 which work far better. Oh well. Still, phone makes a damned good remote controller
It's not an improvement. It's been that way since the phone was released.
Still its a pain in the ass that it won't work with photos.
Dac0908 said:
Or you think you did.
Everything is downscaled to phones screen resolution (480x800) and then on HDMI out stretched to 1080p just so that our TV's don't have problems with it. That's why it is not pure 1080p, and that's why it doesn't really make sense to force HD videos on phones.
Use PC, media players or anything else HD capable instead.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
your information is wrong, it outputs in full hd.
If it were outputting at just 800by400 on your hd tv you would bloody notice because it would be pixelated and difficult to make anything out if it had been stretched that far to fit a large tv..... .
OMG seriously, really?
My post was already debunked by TrymHansen. Try to write something useful, ok? Quoting it again is just counterproductive
Anyway, part about HD video is debunked, I was wrong and life goes on. But I still stand behind blurry low-res photo gallery and that is the topic here.
Dac0908 said:
OMG seriously, really?
My post was already debunked by TrymHansen. Try to write something useful, ok? Quoting it again is just counterproductive
Anyway, part about HD video is debunked, I was wrong and life goes on. But I still stand behind blurry low-res photo gallery and that is the topic here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm totally with you at this. I can not help the fact that most of the people are blind and can not recognise the quality and resolution of a picture or video.
The hdmi output for the photos are totally unusable, it displays the photos in low resolution and low color depth.
My TV is 720p old TV. Chrome starting up showing after that blank black screen only sound works. I tried with my friends TV its working Fine. Please tell me how to fix?
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda premium
Plzzz help me guys
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda premium
Bump
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda premium
afdals said:
Bump
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We have no idea or enough info to even try and help. It's like saying my car won't start but my neighbors does, what's wrong?
What TV do you have the issue with? Is it hooked up directly to the TVs HDMI port?
Have you tried a different HDMI cable?
How do you have the Chromecast connected, USB or outlet?
Dose it work with other HDMI TVs/monitors on YOUR network?
Have you tried casting from and Android device, PC or both?
Basically you have to give some details. All we have right now is:
1. older TV
2. 720p
3. Audio but no video
not much to go on.
I guess if it an older TV it's possible there's some kind of incapability.
I am having the same problem so I'll try and provide more info.
I am using Chromecast in hotels. These TVs have not been updated in ages. The current one I am checking on is a LG 32LC5DC TV. I believe it is a known issue that Chromecast can only display 1080p format. So basically the video does not work but audio does.
What I am curious about is that it worked one time on the same TV model. For the life of me, I cannot get it work again.
My chromecast works fine on an older 720P Samsung plasma that does not support a 1080P signal input. Not sure if the tv will accept 1080i.
Most likely the Chromecast is relying on the TV to report back via HDMI whether it supports 720p or 1080p, and then it selects the appropriate resolution. But if the TV is too old, it might not report anything, causing the Chromecast to default to 1080p.
I don't think the Chromecast does any auto-detect at all. On my 720p TV the info screen clearly shows that it's getting a 1080p signal. So Chromecast sends at 1080p no matter what, and if your TV does not display 1080p then it must be able to downconvert or it won't show any image at all.
In my experience the Chromecast does do some communication. I hooked it up to a VGA monitor through an HDfury2 (which doesn't scale) and the monitor reported a 720p (1280x720) signal.
Meanwhile my 1080p TV says it's getting 1080p.
On boot-up, the splash screen seems to be 480p, but I've never successfully gotten the Chromecast to output 480p past boot, despite disabling resolutions via EDID updates on the display end.
afdals said:
My TV is 720p old TV. Chrome starting up showing after that blank black screen only sound works. I tried with my friends TV its working Fine. Please tell me how to fix?
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have the same tv, i can not use my chromecast you have any solution ?????
sorry for my bad english
ricrob said:
I have the same tv, i can not use my chromecast you have any solution ?????
sorry for my bad english
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please provide the manufacturer and model number of your TV.
bhiga said:
Please provide the manufacturer and model number of your TV.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LG 32LC5DC
Model no: 32LC5DC - UA.AUSYLJT
Serial No.: 801RMJF135204
thanks
ricrob said:
LG 32LC5DC
Model no: 32LC5DC - UA.AUSYLJT
Serial No.: 801RMJF135204
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks. I do know that Chromecast can output 1280x720.
Your TV seems to be one of the types where different HDMI ports have different capabilities (I hate that).
HDMI 1 seems to support both Computer and Video resolutions/timings.
HDMI 2 supports only Video resolutions/timings.
Make sure you have the TV on when you plug power into the Chromecast. That'll ensure it can negotiate the supported resolution properly.
If that still doesn't work, remove power from Chromecast, move Chromecast to the other HDMI port, then power up Chromecast and see if that works.
2 to 1 Odds it's the TV not the Chromecast.
And Hotels are notorious for disabling HDMI Ports on their TVs!
All it takes is one bad pin on the connector to make the entire input not work.
Hey, I'm about to buy a chromecast, but there are something that stops me. If I have a phone with quad hd resolution, does it stream in that resolution on the tv, or does it stream up to 1080P?
Another question is, is there any known issues with the chromecast? I just want to be sure.
Sent from my Huawei Ascend P1 U9200 using xda app-developers app
Well you can't tab cast from your phone. It streams directly from the internet and doesn't display mirror. So it will stream whatever the source content and your TV resolutions are.
Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk
PortalOfGaming said:
Hey, I'm about to buy a chromecast, but there are something that stops me. If I have a phone with quad hd resolution, does it stream in that resolution on the tv, or does it stream up to 1080P?
Another question is, is there any known issues with the chromecast? I just want to be sure.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quad HD? Like UltraHD (3840x2160)?
Casting local media directly (via Avia, RealPlayer Cloud, or Allcast for rooted Chromecasts) is as-is, no conversion of the media happens, and Chromecast will play the media if it is capable of decoding it.
I don't think Chromecast can decode UltraHD as it tends to have trouble with 1080p and high (>10 Mbps) bitrates, but I'm not 100% on that. I can use AllCast to send a 1080p video I shot on my phone, but there's a little bit of pause now and then.
As far as known issues, some old TVs that report 1080p support but don't actually display correctly have trouble. Some Yamaha receivers are having some trouble with the latest firmware.
Most other issues are either in progress or have already been taken care of via updates on the application side.
A tiny number of reports of Chromecasts being "bricked" but probably normal or better for the number of Chromecasts out in the wild.
There is a phone with QuadHD resolution?!??!??!??!? LOL
There is a lot of Misinformation regarding resolution in the Phone business I assure you...
Cameras that say they shoot 1080P in most cases don't. The Chip (CMOS for the most part) does not have a REAL 1080P resolution. What it does is take the native resolution of the camera (usually much lower) and SAVE THE FILE in 1080P by simply upconverting it.
And Upconverting doesn't ADD resolution or Quality it just doubles the size of each pixel to fill in all the pixels of the higher resolution.
You may find a phone or Camera that says it supports 4K but in truth it is not a REAL 4K! The File will read and display on a 4K device but your not really getting the FULL RESOLUTION a 4K video has when captured natively in a TRUE 4K.
The Chips that receive the image from the lens are not large enough to do a true 4K. It is merely upconverted when saved to that format.
Like taking a single pixel and repeating it 3 more time to make a pixel 4 times the size of the original where in a REAL 4K each pixel can be different and rarely are the same (maybe similar but not the same)
Now these chips are improving by leaps and bounds so in time they may even do these resolutions for real...But by then we will also have things like 16K because the bigger cameras with have 3/4" and 1' CCDs or CMOS' will advance from the technology as well.
I'm sorry regarding quad hd, english is not my first language, and when I meant quad hd, I actually meant 960x540. I know alot about resolution, but I didn't mean 4K. Before 2K and 4K, there was quad hd as 960x540.
I have good internet, so I don't worry about that.
Thank you all for your answers, I'm going to buy a chromecast when I come home.
Sent from my Huawei Ascend P1 U9200 using xda app-developers app.
PortalOfGaming said:
I'm sorry regarding quad hd, english is not my first language, and when I meant quad hd, I actually meant 960x540. I know alot about resolution, but I didn't mean 4K. Before 2K and 4K, there was quad hd as 960x540.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ahh, I see qHD from the computer realm. Thanks for teaching me something new! :good:
I have some VGA (640x480) videos and from Avia they play picture-boxed (black border on all sides, because Avia does not alter the video). So it will likely depend on what application you use and what Chromecast decides to do in terms of scaling, if it has any (I don't know).
I think the biggest reason it can't do 1080p natively is because it's wireless G. I can only hope Google decides to release another chromecast or something else like it with wireless AC.
Sent from my LG-LS980 using Tapatalk 2
It's wireless N which is more than adequate. It depends more on latency and bitrate of their media compared to that processing power of the Chromecast hardware.
Sent from a device with no keyboard. Please forgive typos, they may not be my own.
bhiga said:
It's wireless N which is more than adequate. It depends more on latency and bitrate of their media compared to that processing power of the Chromecast hardware.
Sent from a device with no keyboard. Please forgive typos, they may not be my own.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It can't do 5GHz, and its horrible at streaming HD movies from Google Play movies. You mention processing as if the Chromecast is transcoding. None of this would be a problem if it could do 5GHz and had an AC chip.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7186/google-chromecast-review-an-awesome-35-hdmi-dongle/2
Edit - My Samsung UN46F6300 is also terrible at streaming HD content over it's Wi-Fi (also 2.4GHz), but connecting the tv's Ethernet to my WD wireless AC bridge alleviates all this.
Sent from my LG-LS980 using Tapatalk 2
Yes the 2.4 GHz band is not optimal as it's crowded but latency issues aside, it's fine.
The hardware still matters because most hardwareand appliance-oriented decoders have limits to the maximum bitrate it can decode due to buffer and memory limits.
It's much different to more general CPUs which can allocate more memory and have more CPU power to adjust.
Sent from a device with no keyboard. Please forgive typos, they may not be my own.
Jocelyn said:
It can't do 5GHz, and its horrible at streaming HD movies from Google Play movies. You mention processing as if the Chromecast is transcoding. None of this would be a problem if it could do 5GHz and had an AC chip.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well I'm pretty sure GPlay does some transcoding but not 100% sure. In any case If the unit is having issues playing the video over 2.4Ghz the issue is really the Video Bitrate needs to be lowered enough to stream without issue. In the end no one is getting full HD 1080P on any device over ANY wired or wireless network because Full HD uncompressed has a Bitrate of over 1.49 Gbps. Far beyond standard Ethernet standards which is why we use Fiber Optic for broadcast and even then we compress the hell out of it before you ever see it.
So pretty much all HD we are playing is not really full HD.
Can you play 1080P locally?
PortalOfGaming said:
I'm sorry regarding quad hd, english is not my first language, and when I meant quad hd, I actually meant 960x540. I know alot about resolution, but I didn't mean 4K. Before 2K and 4K, there was quad hd as 960x540.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ahhh no Problem...You meant quarterHD actually...
You wouldn't have confused us if NHK and a Consortium hadn't actually invented QuadHD for Broadcast! bhiga and I both work in broadcast and were recently talking about it.
Well, I forgot that it was Quarter HD, but it's okay now, since I have aleardy ordered it. Again, thanks for your help guys.
Sent from my Huawei Ascend P1 U9200 using xda app-developers app.
I am in the market for a cheap laptop, but having recently acquired a chromecast, I'd like it to be powerful enough to tabcast HD video.
Many of the cheaper machines have an i5-4200U processor. This has a 1.6GHz clock speed, with a turbo mode speed of 2.6GHz.
The tabcasting min specs say 2GHz for an i5, so I'm not sure whether the i5-4200U would be powerful enough.
Has anyone here tried one?
AleT said:
I am in the market for a cheap laptop, but having recently acquired a chromecast, I'd like it to be powerful enough to tabcast HD video.
Many of the cheaper machines have an i5-4200U processor. This has a 1.6GHz clock speed, with a turbo mode speed of 2.6GHz.
The tabcasting min specs say 2GHz for an i5, so I'm not sure whether the i5-4200U would be powerful enough.
Has anyone here tried one?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Difficult to say. If your intent is to tab-cast a video, I would say that's probably not enough CPU horsepower.
The minimum tab-casting spec is likely just for casting a static tab (like a web page), not including the additional CPU load for video playback.
Do you have a specific use case in mind?
bhiga said:
Difficult to say. If your intent is to tab-cast a video, I would say that's probably not enough CPU horsepower.
The minimum tab-casting spec is likely just for casting a static tab (like a web page), not including the additional CPU load for video playback.
Do you have a specific use case in mind?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi,
I want to cast sites that don't yet have casting enabled natively, like like itvplayer, BTSport and 4od (UK only). Mainly flash based video.
I can cast a static tab using a ~6yr old celeron laptop, but if I try one of these video sites, it stutters and tells me my computer may not be fast enough.
The minimum spec I quoted is from https://support.google.com/chromecast/answer/3209990?hl=en, and refers to tabcasting high quality video.
AleT said:
Hi,
I want to cast sites that don't yet have casting enabled natively, like like itvplayer, BTSport and 4od (UK only). Mainly flash based video.
I can cast a static tab using a ~6yr old celeron laptop, but if I try one of these video sites, it stutters and tells me my computer may not be fast enough.
The minimum spec I quoted is from https://support.google.com/chromecast/answer/3209990?hl=en, and refers to tabcasting high quality video.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ahh, I see. Then you might be okay, though it's always nice to have more "headroom."
Definitely make sure you have 4 GB or more RAM and of course 64-bit Windows, rather than 32-bit.
Best if the hardware can provide hardware acceleration for Flash as well.
I tab-cast from my desktop system, i5-3570K 4.2 GHz. It still stutters slightly, no difference at 720p or 480p, even though the overall CPU utilization stays low. I keep retesting with each new update of the Google Cast extension, but there hasn't been any improvement.
Plex can cast the same video stream to the Chromecast from the same desktop computer without stuttering. It's just poor coding by Google.
Raw GHz isn't really the best measure of performance anyway. The i5 notebook will definitely be good enough for 480p, not sure about HD. Also Windows 8.1 supports wireless screen sharing so if you can find an affordable receiver you'd get smoother results that way.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
DJames1 said:
I tab-cast from my desktop system, i5-3570K 4.2 GHz. It still stutters slightly, no difference at 720p or 480p, even though the overall CPU utilization stays low. I keep retesting with each new update of the Google Cast extension, but there hasn't been any improvement.
Plex can cast the same video stream to the Chromecast from the same desktop computer without stuttering. It's just poor coding by Google.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The stuttering with Tab Casting has more to do with the method they are using to stream as it does the power of the machine doing the streaming...
Tab Casting is (I Think it is anyway) using an M-JPEG to stream to the CCast...
Which is just what it sounds like sending JPG frames in series like it's some sort of Webcam.