Webcam, MS Messenger and CPU load

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

All,

I'm going to try setting up MS Messenger to do video calls to my in-laws
across the pond. Presumably the webcam itself adds some CPU load to my PC
so are any particular webcams better than others in this respect?

Paul DS.

--
Please remove the "x-" if replying to sender.
5 answers Last reply
More about webcam messenger load
  1. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

    Paul D.Smith wrote:
    > All,
    >
    > I'm going to try setting up MS Messenger to do video calls to my in-laws
    > across the pond. Presumably the webcam itself adds some CPU load to my PC
    > so are any particular webcams better than others in this respect?
    >
    > Paul DS.
    >
    Which cam you choose won't make any diffrence. What will though, is the
    size/quality of the images you are sending. If I remember correctly MS
    Messenger doesn't give you much choice as to size though...max is
    320x240 I think.
    If you don't already have the cam, I would suggest going to the shop and
    having a look at various cams working so you can get the best quality
    image as cams vary wildly in their quality. If you are sending/receiving
    both video and audio, it is better if you are both on a broadband
    connection also.

    Kim
  2. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

    "kim" <relique_50@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
    news:424a9950@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
    > Paul D.Smith wrote:
    > > All,
    > >
    > > I'm going to try setting up MS Messenger to do video calls to my in-laws
    > > across the pond. Presumably the webcam itself adds some CPU load to my
    PC
    > > so are any particular webcams better than others in this respect?
    > >
    > > Paul DS.
    > >
    > Which cam you choose won't make any diffrence. What will though, is the
    > size/quality of the images you are sending. If I remember correctly MS
    > Messenger doesn't give you much choice as to size though...max is
    > 320x240 I think.
    > If you don't already have the cam, I would suggest going to the shop and
    > having a look at various cams working so you can get the best quality
    > image as cams vary wildly in their quality. If you are sending/receiving
    > both video and audio, it is better if you are both on a broadband
    > connection also.
    >
    > Kim

    We will both have broadband. I hate to think what the quality would be like
    over dial-up ;-).

    As to possible load, I was really wondering whether there was the same sort
    of issue as with ye olde "Windows modems" which were nasty Windows 95/98
    modems that relied on the processor doing a lot of work, as opposed to
    "real" modems which had dedicated hardware.

    Someone has to convert the video into something suitable for transmission.
    I wondered whether with USB modems there is a basic "grab the frame" from
    the camera and then the processor has to convert into something for
    transmission whereas with, say, a PCI card and camera, this might not be
    pushed off to the card, sparing the processor from this arduous task.

    I will go and take a look in the shops but frankly the UK shops are poor and
    staffed by people who might, on a good day, be able to tell a Mac from a PC!

    Paul DS
  3. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

    "Paul D.Smith" <paul_d_smith@x-hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:424aa7bd$0$297$ed9e5944@reading.news.pipex.net...
    > "kim" <relique_50@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
    > news:424a9950@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
    >> Paul D.Smith wrote:
    >> > All,
    >> >
    >> > I'm going to try setting up MS Messenger to do video calls to my
    >> > in-laws
    >> > across the pond. Presumably the webcam itself adds some CPU load to my
    > PC
    >> > so are any particular webcams better than others in this respect?
    >> >
    >> > Paul DS.
    >> >
    >> Which cam you choose won't make any diffrence. What will though, is the
    >> size/quality of the images you are sending. If I remember correctly MS
    >> Messenger doesn't give you much choice as to size though...max is
    >> 320x240 I think.
    >> If you don't already have the cam, I would suggest going to the shop and
    >> having a look at various cams working so you can get the best quality
    >> image as cams vary wildly in their quality. If you are sending/receiving
    >> both video and audio, it is better if you are both on a broadband
    >> connection also.
    >>
    >> Kim
    >
    > We will both have broadband. I hate to think what the quality would be
    > like
    > over dial-up ;-).
    >
    > As to possible load, I was really wondering whether there was the same
    > sort
    > of issue as with ye olde "Windows modems" which were nasty Windows 95/98
    > modems that relied on the processor doing a lot of work, as opposed to
    > "real" modems which had dedicated hardware.
    >
    > Someone has to convert the video into something suitable for transmission.
    > I wondered whether with USB modems there is a basic "grab the frame" from
    > the camera and then the processor has to convert into something for
    > transmission whereas with, say, a PCI card and camera, this might not be
    > pushed off to the card, sparing the processor from this arduous task.
    >
    > I will go and take a look in the shops but frankly the UK shops are poor
    > and
    > staffed by people who might, on a good day, be able to tell a Mac from a
    > PC!
    >
    > Paul DS
    >
    >

    For best quality pictures, which you may not need for video conf, take a
    look at the Philips Toucam pro 2 (840K) about £60 in PCWorld etc or for
    smaller image stuff the cheaper creatives / logitechs should meet the
    requirements at 320 x 240. Also give yahoo messenger a try against the MS.
  4. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

    [snip]
    >
    > For best quality pictures, which you may not need for video conf, take a
    > look at the Philips Toucam pro 2 (840K) about £60 in PCWorld etc or for
    > smaller image stuff the cheaper creatives / logitechs should meet the
    > requirements at 320 x 240. Also give yahoo messenger a try against the MS.
    >
    Umm. The yahoo specs look tempting since they support both Macs (my in-laws
    have Macs) and up to 30fps video, albeit a small picture.

    Paul DS
  5. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

    > As for your shop assistants...they sound like they are related to quite a
    > few of the ones here in Australia!!!

    They probably are, we promise not to send anymore, unless they are willing
    ;o)

    Regards yahoo messenger we use it regularly in a group with NZ, Caribbean,
    UK, Newfoundland. Tends to slow down a bit with more than one camera but
    some users are on dial up. Used it from OZ on dial up when I was there and
    we had 4 cameras on and it stayed stable for a good while.
Ask a new question

Read More

Webcams Messenger CPUs Peripherals