I made a little test
Set both acording to this site:
http://imouto.my/results are like this (used same video):
DXVA - 12% - 20% + 1 once 40%
CoreAVC 1.9.5.0 - 13% - 25% + once 61%
CoreAVC 2.0 - 15% - 21% + once 69%
Video used:
ID : 1
Format : AVC
Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec
Format profile : High@L4.1
Format settings, CABAC : Yes
Format settings, ReFrames : 4 frames
Muxing mode : Container profile=Unknown@4.1
Codec ID : V_MPEG4/ISO/AVC
Duration : 1mn 29s
Bit rate : 13.3 Mbps
Width : 1 920 pixels
Height : 1 080 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 16:9
Frame rate : 23.976 fps
Color space : YUV
Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0
Bit depth : 8 bits
Scan type : Progressive
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.267
Stream size : 142 MiB (95%)
Writing library : x264 core 0000000000000000
So acording to CPU use, DXVA is better but
But there are limitations with the DXVA method, and they are (amongst others):-
* Only certain renderers can be used depending on operating system (overlay mixer and VMR9 for Windows XP, Enhanced Video Renderer for Windows Vista/7).
* Cannot decode videos that was encoded with numbers of reference frames that exceed certain levels.
* Cannot have any intermediate filters (such as ffdshow Video Decoder or DirectVobSub) between the video decoder and the video renderer.
first *, is not problem
** can be a problem ?! (or not?)
*** not sure if its a problem ? - why do i need something in between ?