-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10.7k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Option to disable hardware accelerated video decoder / switch to image (macOS) #1673
Comments
Note that there are both hardware decoding and hardware rendering. You could disable hardware rendering (i.e. not use OpenGL/DirectX/Metal):
|
Thanks, I missed that option. Sadly it does not seems to use integrated GPU :(
Btw with the software renderer I only get (regardless of the resolution) the top left quarter of the screen. EDIT: I just noticed I was on v1.14, updated to v1.16, same report/behaviour. |
No, it uses CPU for rendering (but it does not change hardware decoding).
Oh, that's probably related to #15. Thank you for the report. |
For the time being, use https://codyschrank.github.io/gSwitch/. Also very helpful for other applications. |
I know this may sound strange, but please hear me out :)
On macOS, if you use hardware acceleration, it switches to the discrete GPU (if you have one). Since the integrate one is more energy efficient and generate less heat, I think it could be useful, if it is not too hard to do. AFAIK there's no way to completely choose the GPU/disable the discrete GPU on macOS on the user side.
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Hardware acceleration / video decoding on macOS forces switching to the discrete GPU, generating more heat and eating battery.
Describe the solution you'd like
Option to disable hardware acceleration on (macOS only?) video decoder.
Describe alternatives you've considered
An alternative could be using static images instead of video streaming, perhaps when the fps is set very low (I've noticed It can't be set below 1 fps), but I believe it would be way longer (harder) to develop.
Perhaps #1632 could be some sort of alternative.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: