Does anyone have DctFilter 0.0.1.5?

[VideoFanatic]

I've already got version 0.0.1.4. Does anyone have DctFilter 0.0.1.5? The download link in the wiki doesn't work. I've

Should I be using that or this version?:
https://github.com/chikuzen/DCTFilter/releases

[pandy]

I was able to find on my HDD only version 0.0.1.4 and something called DctFilter16.v8 (but dll says also 0, 0, 1, 4) - both filters for Avisynth, filter author is Tom Barry.

[hello_hello]

I've been using the chikuzen version for a while.
For the record, the help file says Vista SP2 or later is required, but it actually works fine on XP. I guess he just didn't/couldn't test it.

Here's version 0.0.1.5 if you still want it. I have no idea why the help file has a modified date of June 2016. I must have changed something. It's not the original zip file.

[VideoFanatic]

Thanks. In the DCTFilter-0.5.0 package, what does the DCTFilter_avx2.dll file do? Do I need both that and DCTFilter.dll?

Just curious, I've noticed that a few folks on here still use Windows XP. Why? Can you still use a present day browser such as Chrome or Firefox on it?

[pandy]

Thanks. In the DCTFilter-0.5.0 package, what does the DCTFilter_avx2.dll file do? Do I need both that and DCTFilter.dll?

Just curious, I've noticed that a few folks on here still use Windows XP. Why? Can you still use a present day browser such as Chrome or Firefox on it?

XP is faster, less memory and other resources hog, most of application is incompatible with XP not by functionality but by obscurity of developer (forcing compiler to produce non XP compliant code)... it is proven that simple patching (few tens bytes) application binary may remove XP incompatibility.
XP incompatibility is mostly outcome of planned obsolescence.

If sources are available then any application not using explicitly "above XP" functionality is target-able to XP ( i mean if Chrome is available on ARM platforms then why it can't be available for Core Duo with XP?)

For example you can use http://browser.taokaizen.com/ - once again - most XP incompatibility is planned by developer intentionally and it is not related to technology but to marketing decisions.

If you dig slightly deeper in Windows you will realize that newer versions are mostly GUI different - there are changes in architecture but this impact some limited area (like DirectX) and i'm fully convinced that this is Microsoft marketing decision to remove older Windows from market and sell new version (for Microsoft they loosing money on every sold copy after selling - they can only earn money by selling new copies so they must do everything to remove older Windows as soon as possible from use).

[poisondeathray]

Thanks. In the DCTFilter-0.5.0 package, what does the DCTFilter_avx2.dll file do? Do I need both that and DCTFilter.dll?

Not both. Use one or the other. If your CPU has AVX2 instructions, usually it will be faster, and you would use the AVX2 version. This is usually true for all filters

You can run diagnostics with avsmeter for your specific setup or scripts. A quick test on a 1920x1080 source with DCTFilter AVX2 vs. no AVX2 was about 30% faster at the same CPU usage in single threaded mode here

[hello_hello]

Just curious, I've noticed that a few folks on here still use Windows XP. Why? Can you still use a present day browser such as Chrome or Firefox on it?

I mostly use XP because I find newer versions of Windows annoying. Plus there's been no incentive to update the OS on an existing PC because there's been nothing to gain in functionality, at least from this user's perspective. Lack of software support for XP hasn't been much of a problem to date, but it's starting to happen. When I build my next PC, which I've been meaning to do for a couple of years, XP won't be an option due to a lack of drivers, so I'm planning a switch to Linux.

The latest Chrome & Firefox don't support XP, but the slightly older version of Firefox I use still works fine.

[Marsia Mariner]

Just curious, I've noticed that a few folks on here still use Windows XP. Why? Can you still use a present day browser such as Chrome or Firefox on it?

If my jurassic Pentium 4 hadn't died 2 tears ago, surely I'd still be using XP.
I might be using XP on my ancient multicore machine(s), but that would be a waste of resources, hardware-wise I mean.
OTOH, I probably would not be using Windows 7 if I couldn't make it look and feel like Windows 2000
I didn't like XP's Luna desktop theme, I hate the Aero fäggutry of Vista and Se7en, I also hate the Metro look of Windows 8, and Windows 10 doesn't move me.

[poisondeathray]

You can get various mods to make the OS work or "look" like XP or other OS's

What about CPU's, SIMD, instructions etc... for example can AVX, AVX2 run on XP ? Is there some hack or way of getting those things to work ? Related to "video" stuff - you get significant speedups in some avisynth processes/filters and encoding.

[Marsia Mariner]

I hope poisondeathray is talking to hello_hello (or to the OP), not to me.

You can get various mods to make the OS work or "look" like XP or other OS's

What about CPU's, SIMD, instructions etc... for example can AVX, AVX2 run on XP ? Is there some hack or way of getting those things to work ? Related to "video" stuff - you get significant speedups in some avisynth processes/filters and encoding.

[pandy]

You can get various mods to make the OS work or "look" like XP or other OS's

What about CPU's, SIMD, instructions etc... for example can AVX, AVX2 run on XP ? Is there some hack or way of getting those things to work ? Related to "video" stuff - you get significant speedups in some avisynth processes/filters and encoding.

This is not about look (and btw if you go sufficiently deep with windows then at some point you will see old looking window under fresh Widnows UI).

Excuse my ignorance but how you can prevent CPU to run machine code consisting legal (i.e. part of supported ISA) instructions?
IMHO if CPU support AVX2 then OS can't block those instructions...

[poisondeathray]

This is not about look (and btw if you go sufficiently deep with windows then at some point you will see old looking window under fresh Widnows UI).

It is for some people. If you're used to a certain workflow or way of doing things, it's a hassle to learn a different way to do things . Reduction in productivity

Excuse my ignorance but how you can prevent CPU to run machine code consisting legal (i.e. part of supported ISA) instructions?
IMHO if CPU support AVX2 then OS can't block those instructions...

I don't know, that' s why I asked

Officially not supported, but mixed results on the internet search. Some say doesn't work, some say it does. Might be application dependent . If you have an AVX/AVX2 CPU with XP, it's easy to run benchmarks in avisynth. Many filters have a CPU or OPT parameter where you can specify which to use . If XP cannot make use of new code paths, then in some applications scenarios , it's going to be much slower.

Newer CPU generations are not supported either, at least not officially. Maybe there are hacks for that too ?

I don't like changing either, but more secure applications, faster programs (newer FF is significantly faster, I just updated after resisting for months) are some decent reasons to change. It might be possible but I think programmers don't like extra work having to support legacy OS's . e.g. ffmpeg no longer supports XP, at least officially . Little reasons are starting to pile up. Most professional A/V programs have Win7 as minimum. Even the open source powerhouse blender no longer supports XP for the newer branches

https://github.com/FFmpeg/FFmpeg/blob/master/Changelog

- Dropped support for building for Windows XP. The minimum supported Windows
version is Windows Vista.

[VideoFanatic]

Thanks for your help. I'd love to use Windows XP but isn't there a RAM limitation where it only uses 4GB or something? I use 8GB RAM just for browsers. Upgraded to 64GB recently to make sure I never run out of RAM again! I don't think a 16 core CPU or M.2 SSD will work in XP? I like Windows 7 myself. All software still works with it. It doesn't have any annoyances except for Aero but you can turn that off.

Trying to use Windows 10 on a new PC recently but the LAN file sharing is crap. Mapped network drives keep disconnecting, never had that problem on Windows 7. Will probably go back to Windows 7 just for that reason. You can use a couple of reg files to disable spying by Microsoft.

[pandy]

It is for some people. If you're used to a certain workflow or way of doing things, it's a hassle to learn a different way to do things . Reduction in productivity

This is more complex - XP allow for audio HW acceleration where from Vista all audio processing is done by CPU, XP doesn't scramble memory where memory scrambling (encryption) is used from Vista up - there is relatively only few and limited new features introduced by Microsoft to Windows for customers/users - most of new features are designed for DRM - all those features impacting OS performance.
XP is last OS from MS with such low overhead and this impacting productivity. You could disable malicious GUI "enhancements" (do you really need shadow under windows or mouse cursor? are you really need gradients on window title bar etc - look at Windows 10 - after so many years translucency, rounded edges and gradients shadows MS was able to convince people to like something that look worse than any decent workstation OS from middle of 90's - look at Irix, Solaris, NexTStep), add some tweaks and receive OS responsive as NT4/Win2000 was.
And yes changing interface seriously impacting productivity - why 100 millions people must change habits because few high level managers says 'fetch' - after so many years i hate MS office for all those changes that focus on complicating life not on solving real user problems. This is not about learning something new - this is about learning how to do old things because someone think that previous way was actually not his favour.

I don't know, that' s why I asked

Officially not supported, but mixed results on the internet search. Some say doesn't work, some say it does. Might be application dependent . If you have an AVX/AVX2 CPU with XP, it's easy to run benchmarks in avisynth. Many filters have a CPU or OPT parameter where you can specify which to use . If XP cannot make use of new code paths, then in some applications scenarios , it's going to be much slower.

Newer CPU generations are not supported either, at least not officially. Maybe there are hacks for that too ?

I don't like changing either, but more secure applications, faster programs (newer FF is significantly faster, I just updated after resisting for months) are some decent reasons to change. It might be possible but I think programmers don't like extra work having to support legacy OS's . e.g. ffmpeg no longer supports XP, at least officially . Little reasons are starting to pile up. Most professional A/V programs have Win7 as minimum. Even the open source powerhouse blender no longer supports XP for the newer branches

https://github.com/FFmpeg/FFmpeg/blob/master/Changelog

- Dropped support for building for Windows XP. The minimum supported Windows
version is Windows Vista.

Yes but some changes in applications are architectural - like using libraries designed for Vista or higher - i fully understand (albeit with difficulty) why some application not works under Windows XP but i'm not convinced if such application is available for example on Android also there is proven that at least in Linux world some API wrappers exist translating for example DirectX 11 (XP support DX 9) calls to OpenGL or in future to Vulkan yet on Windows this is not possible (so it will lead to situation where on Windows some emulated Linux with wrapper will be used to run those application).
My impression is that OS can't restrict ISA set used by binary on CPU - if instruction is not supported by HW you will get HW exception that must be handled in sane way by any sane OS - i assume in Windows you will get just popup with error perhaps at worst BSOD.
However it is common habit to compile code with latest compilers where usually flag to not support XP is set explicitly... this is case for ffmpeg especially self sustained build (if you can build ffmpeg for Android then why not for XP? XP is not significantly different than Windows 7 where Android is significantly different).

Also another topic - security - many security reports says that newer OS are less secure than older despite marketing and more work on improving security - also very important - older OS are usually easier to be hardened as user may have more control over OS. I appreciate UAC introduced by Vista, this for sure improved security but still doubt that Windows 10 full of holes big like barn is significantly more secure than Windows 7. If we accept MS claims then it is not possible that new, significantly bigger (more lines of code) OS is more secure than older OS with so many centuries of man hours behind it - i can tell this as professional tester - this is not possible and that's why Windows 10 is not finished product but it is constantly in one serious beta testing - simply MS saved lot of money by pushing beta testing to end customers - all this of course after very big PR marketing campaign to convince people that Windows 10 is equal to air they breathe...

XP compatibility is developer (or person who do source compilation) choice in 99.9% there is small fraction where application really need to use particular solution which is only available on particular OS. Why developers decide to not support XP - many reasons, one for sure most important is policy of MS to deny XP right to exist as competition to Windows with higher version. For example MS may offer free VC compiler which may be not superior to Intel C compiler but offer anyway better code than GNU C compiler and this VC compiler may simply refuse to support XP.

It is good to read whole thread https://ffmpeg.zeranoe.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=10000#p10000 - living prove that few tens of bytes can magically fix "XP incompatibility" - for me this is nothing more that planned obsolescence.

Thanks for your help. I'd love to use Windows XP but isn't there a RAM limitation where it only uses 4GB or something? I use 8GB RAM just for browsers. Upgraded to 64GB recently to make sure I never run out of RAM again! I don't think a 16 core CPU or M.2 SSD will work in XP? I like Windows 7 myself. All software still works with it. It doesn't have any annoyances except for Aero but you can turn that off.

Memory limit is on every 32 bit Windows - 2GB for every application, for special applications compiled to use PAE it may be 3GB limit - when you go to 64 bit XP then this limit is removed (but XP was first Windows available as 64 bit and it suffered from many issues especially lack of 64 bit drivers). Kernel CPU limit rather design (compilation) than architectural limitation - every Windows for "desktop" has corresponding Server version where those limitations are significantly relaxed (of course you pay for this as usually MS sell "cores" in Server - license is per every core and you need to pay for this). I can assure you that Server 64 bit version of Windows XP will work perfectly with 64GB of RAM and with multicore, multi CPU configuration.

I usually disable all "beautifying" features - just select for "best performance" then enable back few options as "font smoothing" (subpixel font antialiasing) and you will get plain OS significantly more responsive than before (side to this i disabling service responsible for theme management plus many other services that trying to annoy me by helping me).

[VideoFanatic]

What's the name of the 64-bit XP edition that I should get? I can't see a server edition anywhere.

Do you know if M.2 SSD drives will work on XP?

[poisondeathray]

What's the name of the 64-bit XP edition that I should get? I can't see a server edition anywhere.

Do you know if M.2 SSD drives will work on XP?

Whhat ? Don't even consider it


Things are getting worse and worse for XP . Fewer applications are being longer supported.

You already have and like Win 7 . Stick with that or eventually upgrade. At this point XP is a massive downgrade. Too many things are becoming issues. (I'm a long time XP user and fan, I still have 1 computer with XP tucked away in the basement) . Almost none of the programs I use regularly (NLE's, video programs, audioiprograms , etc...) support XP anymore . 90% have Win7 minimum requirement. Check to see if the things you use in your situation will work in XP . For example, avisynth is beginning to feel the crunch - some things don't work anymore in XP, or they have slower versions. Some things might have workarounds or "hacks" like ffmpeg in the link above. But I wouldn't rely on that, and other programs might not have workarounds at all

XP doesn't have SSD Trim . It will get slower and slower. You need to reformat or use some external utilities if they exist

[pandy]

What's the name of the 64-bit XP edition that I should get? I can't see a server edition anywhere.

Do you know if M.2 SSD drives will work on XP?

64 bit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Server_2003#Enterprise support up to 64 physical CPU's and up to 1TB of RAM... but once again you may have issues with drivers... especially multimedia devices may be supported in limited way. Also practically lack of support for special SSD features may be serious limitation - mentioned TRIM is one of such cases and you may need SSD that doesn't require TRIM to be supported on OS level but they do TRIM like by themselves.
OS see disk and don't care if this is SSD or HDD.