Nvidia Video Card guide

[autoboy]

I have done extensive research on Nvidia video cards for my client and I thought i would share some of the information i have found.

First off, Nvidia Purevideo and Avivo from ATI produce both produce video comparable to some $2000 DVD players. Here (http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/ati_nvidia_video_quality_shootout_spring_06/) is a good Video that compares them and here (http://www.hardware.info/en-UK/articles/am9nY2pqZA/ATI_and_nVidia_crush__2000_DVD_players/) is a good article. Overall, the gist of the article is that AVIVO and Purevideo are even in the parts that matter even though AVIVO wins overall. Since Pureviedeo is better documented, I chose to go with Nvidia but both produce excellent video quality. I could not find as much information on the features of each ATI card as I could with Nvidia.

Here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2551&p=1) is a good article that explains things pretty well. This is an older article and shows where the quality has come with driver updates. It does give a good explanation for 3:2 pulldown.

The next important fact I learned was that Purevideo acceleration scales with clockspeed, not with the # of shaders. This fact was difficult to track down but I finally found it in an article (http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2798) concerning Purevideo HD (the HD-DVD and BlueRay player from Nvidia). I also talked with several others experimenting with clockspeed for H.264 acceleration and they confirmed this. Basically, the same programable video accelerator used to accelerate DVD video, can be used to accelerate H.264 and WMV. This silicon is in the 2D part of the card and so is independant from the 3D performance of the card. Memory bandwidth may make an impact here but it seems that only extreme cases like turbocache and the onboard video chipset 6150 are starved for bandwidth during video processing. There is still some speculation about whether Nvidia will eventually use the shaders to offload more video tasks. This is unconfirmed at this time but seems likely for BlueRay and HD-DVD. Most likely they will do some of the DRM decoding. This might allow single core cpus to play HD-DVD and BluRay.

There has been some question here whether or not VMR9 (delinterlacing) is handled in the 3D piplines. Since it is a Direct 3D feature, It is safe to say that it is likely. Whether it is handled in the 3D pipelines or in the 2D part of the card, all of the 7X00 series cards are capable of VMR9 acceleration for 1080i video. Nvidia cards seem to only work well in HD with FSE (full screen exclusive mode) enabled. So far I have only confirmed this for 720p monitors. Some questions still remain for 1080p monitors.

Despite the clockspeed being the most important part for H.264, VC-1, MPEG2, and WMV Purevideo acceleration, there are some Purevideo functions that are not available on some cards. A list of Nvidia cards showing the purevideo funcitons they support can be found here. (http://www.nvidia.com/page/purevideo_support.html)
Explanations of features can be found here. (http://www.nvidia.com/page/pg_20041215177473.html)
Clock speeds are as follows:
7300GT - 350mhz
7300LE - 450mhz
7600GS - 450mhz
7800GT - 450mhz
7900GT - 450mhz
7900GS - 450mhz
6150 - 475mhz
7300GS - 550mhz
7950GT - 550mhz
7600GT - 560mhz
7900GTX - 650mhz
etc. You get the idea

This indicates that the 7300GS and the 7600GT should be equal in their ability to offload H.264 and WMV. However, if we look at the features supported, the 7300GS lacks a key feature, HD Inverse Telecine. (Bad Edit correction is not that important) Inverse Telecine is an important feature for 1080i video. I'm still not sure why IVTC is good, but I think it basically correctly deinterlaces the 1080i signal to get a 1080p picture. Without Inverse Telecine, the card bobs to 540p then scales to your resolution. I could be wrong on this part though. Both cards support Inverse Telecine for SD content including DVD.

So this confirms that the 7600GT is the leader for HD video output. However, if you don't mind losing Inverse Telecine, the 7300GS is a great lower cost option. It can also be found passive.

The 6150 is also a good chip and can hold its own against discrete cards. However, the 6150 lacks HD Spacial Temporal Deinterlacing as well as HD Inverse Telecine. For SD content, it offers the same advantages as the other cards but comes basically free. Some have experienced problems running a full 1080p monitor with the 6150. It is probably best to run this chip at 720p. If you plan on running 1080p you might want to do some more research.

The 7300LE and the 7600GS are basically the same for purevideo. Both lack HD Inverse Telecine and both can be found passive. The 7600GS is a much better gaming card but the 7300LE is only $50 right now

The 7300GT is on the same chip as the 7600GS/GT but only has a 350mhz clock speed. It is the worst for HD Purevideo acceleration. During the Purevideo HD testing linked above, when they played with clock speed vs acceleration, 350mhz offered little acceleration, similiar to no acceleration at all. I have no experience with this card so I can't comment on its real world performance in regular HD programming. This card is also not listed on the purevideo comparison chart, likely because of its embarasing performance.

SLI is not used for video processing.

Purevideo HD is still very new so not much information exists yet. With Purevideo HD the video acceleration is very important to offload the cpu, allowing it to decode the crappy DRM. Sphere over at HTPCnews.com has sucessfully run a 7300GS with Purevideo HD acceleration. The high clock of the 7300GS enabled seamless playback of content. Since there is no deinterlacing on 1080p content the VMR9 features are not really that important. I'm pretty sure he used an analog connection because HDCP 7300 cards do not exist yet. VGA or component can still output 1080p content until the studios enable the content protection flag, limiting output to 540p, rumored to be in 2010.

The Nvidia website does not differentiate between support for 720p, 1080i, or 1080p high definition. There has been little written about powering 1080p displays and what kind of hardware is required to support 1080p. For now, until more information has been gathered, let's assume that all information presented here is for 720p displays only.

To sum it all up, any of these cards offer all features for SD video. If you primarily watch DVDs or analog TV, Purevideo will look great on any 7X00 card. For HD, the leader is the 7600GT and up. The 7600GT can also be found with HDCP and HDMI output allowing you to play BlueRay and HD-DVD with a digital connection when you get them. For users on a budget, the 7300GS or 7300LE are great alternatives and are often found passive. The features for 6X00 cards can be found on the purevideo link. I'll let you play with that if you still want or already own a 6X00 card. Some Purevideo features are missing on some 6X00 cards.

I ended up buying a 7300LE and it works great on 1080i and 720p material on my 720p DLP (FSE only. Tearing without FSE). DVDs look stunning. My system is a lowly sempron 2600+ and HD video uses 25-35% cpu. WMV encoded at 1080p uses 50%. My 9600xt could not accelerate 1080p WMV so I got 100% cpu usage and stuttering. When i get HD-DVD, i'll have to upgrade to an HDCP video card (and dual core if the video card does not offload more processing with future driver updates) so I decided to save money now. I want to make it clear that my experience with the 7300LE is with a 720p display. While it runs well for my application, it may not work the same for everyone. There are always other factors. Also, 1080p displays are still fairly rare and there has not been much first hand experience with these displays. They require more horsepower than 720p displays. If you have information about 1080p displays and purevideo, please let me know.

[ToxMox]

Great post! You basically did the leg work I was going to do in about 2 months :) Thanks for saving me some time.

[stanger89]

First off, thanks for the post, I'm sure it will help many here :)

I have done extensive research on Nvidia video cards for my client and I thought i would share some of the information i have found.

First off, Nvidia Purevideo and Avivo from ATI produce both produce video better than $3000 DVD players.

As much of an advocate for HTPCs as I am, I don't think I believe this. When you start talking $3000 for a DVD player, you must consider the Denon 5910, which is powered by the Realta HQV chip, probably the only chip which can manage a perfect score on HQV Benchmark DVD. I'd place the Genum VXP on the same level as the HQV, but with different strengths.

While far closer than previously, nothing on the PC side can match the Realta HQV or Genum VXP processors.

That said, I'd take and HTPC with it's far greater extensibility and only marginally inferior processing over a more expensive DVD player any day.

Here (http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/ati_nvidia_video_quality_shootout_spring_06/) is a good article and video that compares them. Overall, the gist of the article is that AVIVO and Purevideo are even in the parts that matter even though AVIVO wins overall.

I assume you're basing that off the better HQV scores AVIVO has seen in some reviews. Problem is, that only tells a very small part of the story, in addition, those reviews are far from consistent.

At this point I'd put AVIVO and PureVideo on a "theortecially" equal playing field, each with their strenghts and weaknesses (AVIVO is a bit better with diagonal filtering, while PureVideo is better with film detection (the only one with HD film detection).

The next important fact I learned was that Purevideo scales with clockspeed, not with the # of shaders. This fact was difficult to track down but I finally found it in an article (http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2798) concerning Purevideo HD (the HD-DVD and BlueRay player from Nvidia).

While definitely true, that doesn't come close to telling the full story. First, there's the issue of different chips, I'm sure GPU speed scales with clockspeed on a single GPU, but I don't see any evidence to show that 350MHz on X GPU is equal to 350MHz on Y GPU. It may be, I don't know.

But beyond that, there is more, specifically VMR9. All the best playback softwares out there today use VMR9 for rendering video, and VMR9 performance most certainly is affected by GPU (3D) power, as VMR9 uses D3D to render video, basically as a texture on polygons.

And one last thing, is the tests in that article seem only to relate to decode accelleration, it wouldn't/doesn't surprise me that the decode accelleration is done in the 2D part of the GPU, but what about deinterlacing? Deinterlacing is, I believe, done in the 3D pipeline. This is most clearly evidenced by the different deinterlace modes available depending on renderer chosen, ie:

Overlay or VMR 7 (ie "default")
[LIST]
Best Available
Display Fields Separately (ie Weave)
Combine Fields (ie Bob)
VMR 9

VMR Default
VMR Pixel Adaptive (ie Spacial-Temporal deinterlacing)
VMR Vertical Stretch


Further, if you look at the PureVideo product comparison, you'll see that the advanced processing (not decoding) functions (IVTC deinterlacing, etc) are tied to the more powerful GPUs.

This indicates that the 7300GS and the 7600GT should be equal in their ability to produce clean stutter free Purevideo images in HD.

On that note, did anyone notice that the firingsquad video stated that the ASUS 7600GS card offered HD IVTC, however nVidia does not list those features for the 7600GS GPU?

However, if we look at the features supported, the 7300GS lacks a key feature, HD Inverse Telecine. (Bad Edit correction is not that important)

Bad edit correction depends, with big-budget Hollywood films, no it's not a big deal, nor is IVTC, as most Hollywood films are well flagged, but in the case of SD, especially things recorded by Sage, both are very important. I've not looked into OTA HD to see how those are flagged, but they may well also be flagged poorly, in which case, again, both would be important there too.

My guess is that Nvidia disabled this feature on the 7300GS to sell more expensive video cards to people like you and me. :(

I suspect, no proof, that the IVTC/Deinterlacing is indeed done in the 3D portion of the GPU, and as such, requires the more powerfull GPUs to be possible.

Inverse Telecine is an important feature for 1080i video.

Quick correction, IVTC is important for HD film which is broadcast as video. Film is progressive, but most/many networks broadcast it as 1080i video. IVTC is required to reconstruct the progressive frames from the broadcast fields.

Adaptive deinterlacing is important for HD video.

I'm still not sure why IT is good, but I think it basically correctly deinterlaces the 1080i signal to get a 1080p picture. Without Inverse Telecine, the card bobs to 540p then scales to your resolution. I could be wrong on this part though. Both cards support Inverse Telecine for SD content including DVD.

That's one thing I've wondered, I've never seen Film Detection/IVTC/etc mentioned in the AVIVO documents... Is it really there, or does AVIVO just deinterlace everything?

So this confirms that the 7600GT is the leader for HD video output. However, if you don't mind losing Inverse Telecine, the 7300GS is a great lower cost option. It can also be found passive.

Yup, I'm still waiting for a 7600GT with passive cooling before I upgrade my HTPC.

The 6150 is also a good chip and can hold its own against discrete cards. However, the 6150 lacks HD Spacial Temporal Deinterlacing as well as HD Inverse Telecine. For SD content, it offers the same advantages as the other cards but comes basically free.

Judging by the comments here, it seems like the 6150 can barely get by, many have trouble with it, especially when trying to run VMR9 (again, 3D power).

The features for 6X00 cards can be found on the purevideo link. I'll let you play with that if you still want or already own a 6X00 card. Many features are missing on some 6X00 cards. The 6600 is still a good choice though.

In general, the only things missing on the 6 series are HD film detection, and on the AGP varients, H.264 accelleration.

Good work on the investigaiton though :thumb:

[Kirby]

Maybe some comments about Nvidia SLI as well? Or the newer single SLI cards like the 7950? If some of those features are tied to 3D GPU power, is there any advantage to be gained with SLI? And also, maybe some notes or comments about possible card compatibility with the new PureVideo HD? :)

[GTwannabe]

A big advantage of PureVideo over AVIVO is that PureVideo can be used with any DX9-capable GPU. AVIVO only runs on the Radeon x1x series.

[blade]

Great posts, I've just finished a lot of research on the subject myself and your post would have saved me a lot of time and effort if it had been made a few days sooner. :)

Despite the clockspeed being the most important part of Purevideo, there are some Purevideo functions that are not available on cards that should be able to use them IMO. A list of Nvidia cards showing the purevideo funcitons they support can be found here. (http://www.nvidia.com/page/purevideo_support.html)
Explanations of features can be found here. (http://www.nvidia.com/page/pg_20041215177473.html)


I would like to say you can pretty much throw Nvidia's feature chart out the window. I refer people to it all the time, but in reality you may or may not get the features and they may be removed at any time with future driver releases.

WMV9 acceleration was a feature of the 6xxx agp cards, but has been removed with more recent drivers. Also it seems h264 acceleration on the 6xxx agp cards is currently only possible with a SSE2 capable CPU for some reason.

While definitely true, that doesn't come close to telling the full story. First, there's the issue of different chips, I'm sure GPU speed scales with clockspeed on a single GPU, but I don't see any evidence to show that 350MHz on X GPU is equal to 350MHz on Y GPU. It may be, I don't know.

I've wondered this as well, but haven't seen any testing on the subject.

And one last thing, is the tests in that article seem only to relate to decode accelleration, it wouldn't/doesn't surprise me that the decode accelleration is done in the 2D part of the GPU, but what about deinterlacing? Deinterlacing is, I believe, done in the 3D pipeline. This is most clearly evidenced by the different deinterlace modes available depending on renderer chosen, ie:[list] Overlay or VMR 7 (ie "default")

I've also heard that deinterlacing is done in the 3d pipeline.

Maybe some comments about Nvidia SLI as well? Or the newer single SLI cards like the 7950? If some of those features are tied to 3D GPU power, is there any advantage to be gained with SLI?

Everything I've seen says SLI isn't used in anyway.

[blade]

How can you tell if a card is doing IVTC and bad edit detection? I have a 6200 agp that supposedly doesn't do IVTC or bad edit detection; however, when I use smart it does 24 fps for film and 60 for video and it adjusts itself for mixed content just like my 6600gt does. Does that mean it's using those features or is that something entirely different?

[ToxMox]

Yup, I'm still waiting for a 7600GT with passive cooling before I upgrade my HTPC.What about this Gigabyte:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814125025

[Kirby]

Everything I've seen says SLI isn't used in anyway.

Yup, same as I have heard. I basically was just offering suggestions as to what additional content could be useful, since we seem to be making a FAQ here :) (without actually providing the answers, I know, I suck!)

[autoboy]

Wow, ok, lots of responses. Stanger89, I'll try to address each response. You seem to have a lot of knowledge here and can help me make this thread better.

As much of an advocate for HTPCs as I am, I don't think I believe this. When you start talking $3000 for a DVD player, you must consider the Denon 5910, which is powered by the Realta HQV chip, probably the only chip which can manage a perfect score on HQV Benchmark DVD. I'd place the Genum VXP on the same level as the HQV, but with different strengths.

While far closer than previously, nothing on the PC side can match the Realta HQV or Genum VXP processors.

I have no experience with $3000 DVD players. There are however, $3000 DVD players that perform worse than either video card so my statement still stands. I never stated it was better than ALL $3000 DVD players. I just thought it would be nice to throw that in because it helps my justify the huge amount of money I have spent on this stupid thing.

While definitely true, that doesn't come close to telling the full story. First, there's the issue of different chips, I'm sure GPU speed scales with clockspeed on a single GPU, but I don't see any evidence to show that 350MHz on X GPU is equal to 350MHz on Y GPU. It may be, I don't know.

But beyond that, there is more, specifically VMR9. All the best playback softwares out there today use VMR9 for rendering video, and VMR9 performance most certainly is affected by GPU (3D) power, as VMR9 uses D3D to render video, basically as a texture on polygons.

And one last thing, is the tests in that article seem only to relate to decode accelleration, it wouldn't/doesn't surprise me that the decode accelleration is done in the 2D part of the GPU, but what about deinterlacing? Deinterlacing is, I believe, done in the 3D pipeline. This is most clearly evidenced by the different deinterlace modes available depending on renderer chosen, ie:[list] Overlay or VMR 7 (ie "default")

This was the thing that I was most interested in. I wanted to be able to ensure that my cheapo 7300LE would be able to perform the complex VMR9 rendering for HD. I put most of my effort into finding a good source on this. No source really stated this clearly. The best source i found was the one I linked for purevideo HD. This article does not make it clear whether or not VMR9 is linked to clockspeed or pipelines. 1080p video is not deinterlaced so this is probably not a good source for this. You may be right that VMR9 is done in the pipelines. However, it seems that all these cards can handle 1080i HD video and spacial temporal deinterlacing with the exception of the 6150. The 6150 has only two pipelines while the 7300LE has four. This could explain why the 6150 is not capable of more complex alogorithms. This could also be the case for inverse telecine. The 7600GS has the same number of pipelines as the 7600GT but 100mhz lower clockspeed so the inverse telecine may require lots of horsepower. I like my conspiracy theory better though :D. Really, as long as the card has enough power to do the VMR9 for 1080i then who cares how fast it is. We start to get into the my cpu runs cooler than yours arguement. Who the hell cares? My cpu is stable at 55C. However, it does matter how much acceleration you have for h.264 becuase it may allow you to do more with your cpu or allow you to run a slower cpu like mine.

So since these cards all all capable of rendering HD video, it comes down to features which my post tried to address. Maybe I will make it more clear what I mean by "speed."

Judging by the comments here, it seems like the 6150 can barely get by, many have trouble with it, especially when trying to run VMR9 (again, 3D power).

My 6150 has no problems with 1080i video scaled to my 1440x900 monitor. As far as VMR9 power goes, it can handle it no problem. My 5200 can certainly not handle 1080i in VRM9. Some of the more advanced features that may or may not be done by the pipelines are the question here. The 6150 does very well with video acceleration though. at 475mhz it is better than my 7300LE stock (except I overclocked my 7300LE to 525mhz to find out what the improvements where)

In general, the only things missing on the 6 series are HD film detection, and on the AGP varients, H.264 accelleration.

No, if you look at the charts the 6X00 series is all over the map for purevideo support. The video processor on the 6800 series was broken so it did not support H.264. People have been reporting that the 6600 has also been having other problems with some purevideo features. I am not familiar with it though.

That's one thing I've wondered, I've never seen Film Detection/IVTC/etc mentioned in the AVIVO documents... Is it really there, or does AVIVO just deinterlace everything?

There is really nothing that I found that shows a good comparison for AVIVO like the one I linked for Nvidia. This is a big oversite IMO because I really could not find enough information on what features the X1300 or X1600 supported. I did not consider buying them because of this.

[autoboy]

Ok, changed a bunch of stuff to make it less opinion and more fact. Added a few things from the suggestions.

[bcjenkins]

What about this Gigabyte:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814125025
http://www6.tomshardware.com/2006/06/02/graphics_card_quiet/

[stanger89]

How can you tell if a card is doing IVTC and bad edit detection?

The easiest way is to look at the decoder properties while you're watching an encoded-as-video clip (like a Sage recording). If it displays Film at least some of the time, you're getting IVTC, if it's always video you're not.

however, when I use smart it does 24 fps for film and 60 for video and it adjusts itself for mixed content just like my 6600gt does. Does that mean it's using those features or is that something entirely different?

Depends on what context you're talking in, in the case of most DVDs, they're usually film, and flagged as such, thus any flag-reading coded will properly detect them as film.

IVTC comes into play when you've got film content stored in video.

[stanger89]

I have no experience with $3000 DVD players. There are however, $3000 DVD players that perform worse than either video card so my statement still stands. I never stated it was better than ALL $3000 DVD players. I just thought it would be nice to throw that in because it helps my justify the huge amount of money I have spent on this stupid thing.

I don't have direct experience either, and yes, there are clunkers out there at every pricerange, but if we're going to use "$3000 DVD players" as a benchmark, I think it only fair to consider/use players that actually performa at the appropriate level. If you're dropping $3k on a DVD player, it better be special, today, that means HQV or VXP quality.

My 6150 has no problems with 1080i video scaled to my 1440x900 monitor. As far as VMR9 power goes, it can handle it no problem.[/QUOTE]

I don't think that's really a high enough resolution to cause problems, most of the people reporting problems with HD on a 6150 were running higher resolutions. 1080p seems to be all but impossible on a 6150, and supposedly it gives 6600 (non-GTs) trouble as well. Seems like you need a 6600GT or better to do HD at 1080p.

No, if you look at the charts the 6X00 series is all over the map for purevideo support. The video processor on the 6800 series was broken so it did not support H.264. People have been reporting that the 6600 has also been having other problems with some purevideo features. I am not familiar with it though.

The PCIe 6 series is pretty consistent, lacking only HD film detection. The AGP 6 series is pretty consistent as well, lacking HD IVTC and H.264 accelleration. Only exceptions are the 6800's which have screwed WMV accelleration, and the low-end cards that lack HD adaptive deinterlacing.

[peternm22]

The Purevideo chart on NVidia's website only has the 7600GS and 7600GT listed under PCIe, and not under AGP. Would the AGP versions of these cards support the same features as their PCIe counterparts?

Thanks.

-Peter

[autoboy]

Added information about 6150 1080p problems. I remember reading awhile back that the 6150 was not rated for 1080p. I had heard some good stories that it was working and assumed it was ok. The problems most people appear to have is with blocky video overlaying the picture with the latest drivers. I had this problem too and the MSI drivers fixed my problem. I've not heard other things about it. However, i'm not a regular poster here so I don't have that much experience with it. I AM having problems with my Dualtv and fusion card though. If someone wants to help me I would be very happy. The thread is herehttp://forums.sagetv.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20139

[autoboy]

The Purevideo chart on NVidia's website only has the 7600GS and 7600GT listed under PCIe, and not under AGP. Would the AGP versions of these cards support the same features as their PCIe counterparts?

Thanks.

-Peter

That's a good question. I'm not sure if there were supposed to be official AGP versions of those cards. I would assume that they support the same features, but becuase they are not listed here, I don't know. Appartently, according to Sphere at HTPCnews.com, this list is not well updated.

[blade]

The easiest way is to look at the decoder properties while you're watching an encoded-as-video clip (like a Sage recording). If it displays Film at least some of the time, you're getting IVTC, if it's always video you're not.


That's what I thought, but wanted to be certain. I only have SD Sage recordings so it appears my 6200 agp card is doing bad edit and IVTC even though it's not listed as a feature.

The AGP 6 series is pretty consistent as well, lacking HD IVTC and H.264 accelleration. Only exceptions are the 6800's which have screwed WMV accelleration, and the low-end cards that lack HD adaptive deinterlacing.

Nvidia broke (or removed) WMV9 acceleration for the 6600gt agp with one of their driver updates and removed it from the feature chart instead of fixing it. I don't know if any of the AGP cards have WMV9 acceleration anymore. It's no longer listed as a feature for any of them on the chart.

That's a good question. I'm not sure if there were supposed to be official AGP versions of those cards. I would assume that they support the same features, but becuase they are not listed here, I don't know. Appartently, according to Sphere at HTPCnews.com, this list is not well updated.

The list is wrong on so many counts I believe the only way to know is for users to confirm whether the features work or not. Even then you never know what will happen with the next driver release.

[Kirby]

one other point that should be made I think, Nvidia's numbering system does not increment based on which cards are better. Example, my 7800GTX sounds like it should be better than a 7600GT. In fact, mine has a core clock of 460mhz, 7600GT has 560mhz. I'm sure that there are more features that are like this, like pipelines and whatnot, that just from a new user's standpoint wouldnt be obvious based on model numbers.

So who has tried the 7600gt passive cooling? How's it doing for you? :)

[lobosrul]

one other point that should be made I think, Nvidia's numbering system does not increment based on which cards are better. Example, my 7800GTX sounds like it should be better than a 7600GT. In fact, mine has a core clock of 460mhz, 7600GT has 560mhz. I'm sure that there are more features that are like this, like pipelines and whatnot, that just from a new user's standpoint wouldnt be obvious based on model numbers.

So who has tried the 7600gt passive cooling? How's it doing for you? :)


Ehh... a 7800GTX smokes a 7600GT.

I remember when those babies came out last summer ('05) they were a giant leap forward in video card speed.

If you dont belive me: http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics.html?modelx=33&model1=523&model2=529&chart=231

Look for the two lines in blue.

Edit: my bad sort of (the GTX selected above is a 512MB OC'd modeled). See this chart: http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics.html?modelx=33&model1=525&model2=529&chart=231 Still much higher though. And yes the clock speed of the GTX is lower, it has way more pipelines though im sure.

[GTwannabe]

Ehh... a 7800GTX smokes a 7600GT.

I remember when those babies came out last summer ('05) they were a giant leap forward in video card speed.

If you dont belive me: http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics.html?modelx=33&model1=523&model2=529&chart=231

Look for the two lines in blue.

Edit: my bad sort of (the GTX selected above is a 512MB OC'd modeled). See this chart: http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics.html?modelx=33&model1=525&model2=529&chart=231 Still much higher though. And yes the clock speed of the GTX is lower, it has way more pipelines though im sure.

In 3D games, yes. However, PureVideo uses dedicated silicon on the GPU. That's why its performance scales directly with clockspeed and not the number of pixel pipes or memory bandwidth.

[autoboy]

We are not debating the 3D performance of these cards. 3D performance does not always scale with video performance. The 7300GT is an ok low range card for 3D but it gets smoked by a crappy 7300LE in 2D.

Also, I found that my Nvidia card has 2 different clocks that can be adjusted seperately. In Ntune, my 7300LE has a 2D clock at 450mhz, and a 3D clock also at 450mhz. When I do a manual overclock, I only adjust the 3D clock. When i do a custom automatic overclock, ntune adjusts both clocks seperatly. With a 20min test, ntune got my card to 521mhz in 2D, and 524mhz on the 3D test. Memory went to 850mhz.

This is interesting and could possibly help us experiment with purevideo speed. We can try increasing the 3D clock and see if anything improves with Purevideo.

That's why its performance scales directly with clockspeed and not the number of pixel pipes or memory bandwidth.

We can't say for sure whether or not the shaders are used for some advanced deinterlacing features. We also don't know whether memory performance is a factor. We know that H.264 acceleration is done in the 2D silicon and scales with clockspeed, but we don't know how memory bandwidth factors in.

In fact, we could be focusing on the wrong thing for the 6150. Perhaps the memory bandwidth is the limiting factor preventing smooth 1080p playback and not the limited pixel shaders. If the shaders are being used, shouldn't the power requirements rise? We should check the power useage under video load compared to 3D games.

[stanger89]

In fact, we could be focusing on the wrong thing for the 6150. Perhaps the memory bandwidth is the limiting factor preventing smooth 1080p playback and not the limited pixel shaders.

One user (don't remember if it was here or AVS, here I think) reported that going from single to dual-channel config on their 6150 board made a significant difference in high-resolution VMR9 performance. So memory bandwidth apparently is an issue.

If the shaders are being used, shouldn't the power requirements rise? We should check the power useage under video load compared to 3D games.

Probably depends on how their used, among other things.

[lobosrul]

You guys are telling me the fill rate of a card doesnt affect VMR9 playback? It only relies on the clockspeed?

I wouldve thought 2d clockspeed would only be relevant for Overlay playback.

Anyways, I had smooth playback with a 6600GT (when using purevideo). I only bought a 7800GT for gaming.

[Kirby]

I'm not saying that. AFAIK, VMR9 uses the 3D pipeline in the GPU.

[malore]

So who has tried the 7600gt passive cooling? How's it doing for you? :)

I'm using the GIGABYTE GV-NX76T256D-RH Geforce 7600GT in my main/game computer and it's been doing fine, no problems with overheating. However, it is very large, taking up three slots. I can't comment on it's HD ability, because I haven't tried it.

[stanger89]

You guys are telling me the fill rate of a card doesnt affect VMR9 playback? It only relies on the clockspeed?

I think what we can conclude, is that hardware decoding accelleration is not affected by fillrate, only by clockspeed (and 2D clockspeed probably).

Fill rate, does or probably does come into play for VMR9, including advanced deinterlacing/film detection, etc.

[blade]

According to walford over on the AVS forums you need 10 GB/sec of memory bandwith to handle full resolution 1080i. I have no idea how he came up with that number.

I did some testing with my 6600gt last night running at 1080i underscanned to 1688*1004. I used fraps and what I considered smooth was when I got the full fps. Playback would appear smooth at lower settings, but lacked full framerates. I had AF set to 16x and everything at the highest quality settings, also AA was off. I needed the following memory speed to get smooth playback with VMR9.

390mhz (128 bit bus) - 20 mbps, 1080p, film (24 fps)
780-980mhz (128 bit bus) - 18mbps, 1080i, video (60 fps)

For video content it varied a lot from clip to clip so I included a range. Notice that video runs at 2.5x higher fps and I needed 2.5x faster memory speed for most of my clips. I'm trying to download a clip that claims to be 40 mpbs and another at around 12mbps to see if the bitrate affects memory speed requirements.

Maybe someone else can confirm this, because I'm not all that great at testing this junk. Also does anyone have any thoughts to explain exactly what is going on?

[peternm22]

I e-mailed nVidia a few days ago asking why the AGP variants of the 7600GS and 7600GT weren't listed on their chart. I haven't received a reply from them yet, but the chart has been updated http://www.nvidia.com/page/purevideo_support.html

It now has the 7600GS AGP listed (however no 7600GT).

The supported features of the 7600GS AGP are identical to the PCIe version. Which is good news for us AGP folks.

-Peter

[lobosrul]

According to walford over on the AVS forums you need 10 GB/sec of memory bandwith to handle full resolution 1080i. I have no idea how he came up with that number.


Hmm that sounds high. Even after decoding the uncompressed video isnt nearly that big.

[blade]

The supported features of the 7600GS AGP are identical to the PCIe version. Which is good news for us AGP folks.


Hopefully it is good news, but it may not be. They re-added WMV9 acceleration to the chart for the agp versions of the 6600gt and it still doesn't work. Also the h264 acceleration still doesn't work unless you have a SSE2 capable cpu.

[peternm22]

Hopefully it is good news, but it may not be. They re-added WMV9 acceleration to the chart for the agp versions of the 6600gt and it still doesn't work. Also the h264 acceleration still doesn't work unless you have a SSE2 capable cpu.

My enthusiasm has now been tempered.

-Peter

[blade]

Well it seems everyone has lost interest in this, but just in case anyone still cares.

A quote from this (http://techreport.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=43404) thread.

To perform advanced motion adaptive deinterlacing with PureVideo at 1080p resolutions requires - last time I checked, which was a while ago - 10GB/s of graphics memory bandwidth minimum, which made the 6600GT entry level for true HD deinterlacing.

If you compare the cards that do Spatial-Temporal De-Interlacing for HD Video with their memory bandwith according to this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_NVIDIA_Graphics_Processing_Units#GeForce_6_series) chart it does appear that the only cards capable of doing it have over 10 GB/sec of memory bandwith. I have no clue if the guy knows what he's talking about or if it is just a coincidence.

[blade]

FiringSquad: How much of PureVideo is done with the dedicated VPU components of the chip versus the 3D pipeline?

Scott Vouri: I’m really glad you asked this because it is one of the coolest things about our programmable video processor. Our PureVideo technology actually does processor load-balancing across all the video cores and the 3D rendering engine. That way we can process multiple tasks at once or process different stages of the video pipeline at the same time.

[Alan's comments: That wasn't as much detail as I was interested in hearing, but in a follow-up question, NVIDIA suggested the example of performing hardware accelerated decode and some post-processing effects on the internal VPUs and then doing additional color-enhancements or post-processing on the 3D engine.]

From this (http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/nvidia_purevideo_interview/default.asp) old interview.

[malore]

As is usually the case for me, I find out what I really need after buying something and using it for a while. I purchased a cheap Geforce 6200 and was very happy with it until I tried to watch my first 1080i HDTV show and the stuttering was head ache inducing. It's outputting underscanned 720p. After much trial and error with different decoders and overlay versus VMR, I've found I can get reasonably smooth playback by overclocking the videocard. I highly recommend Fraps and wish I had used it sooner, because it easily verifies what you think you are seeing. I have my card overclocked to 415/700 and Fraps shows a fairly steady 60 with only an occasional blip which might be from noise in the recording. When I returned it to the stock 350/650 the frame rate was in the 50s. I'm using the nvidia purevideo decoders (223) with VMR9 and FSE. I have the 92.91 beta drivers installed.

1080i playback definitely stresses the GPU which runs hotter than during 720p playback. If you choose to overclock, test the playback while nothing critical is recording, because I've had the video lockup after watching a show for a while when I had it overclocked ever higher.

[blade]

I highly recommend Fraps and wish I had used it sooner, because it easily verifies what you think you are seeing. I have my card overclocked to 415/700 and Fraps shows a fairly steady 60 with only an occasional blip which might be from noise in the recording. When I returned it to the stock 350/650 the frame rate was in the 50s.

I agree about fraps. I've been using it for months and it is very useful especially when over or underclocking things to see how they affect playback.

My 6200 has no problems with 1080p film (24 fps), I only run into problems with video (60fps). You should see the same thing. This may be why some shows playback smooth and others stutter for some people.

[blade]

Out of boredom I keep tinkering. I only tested this on 1080i video content because the requirement for film is so low there isn't any point. Again this was on my 6600gt and I underclocked to the lowest speed that still allowed me the full 60 fps for video content according to fraps for vertical stretch deinterlacing. Then I switched back to Per-Pixel Adaptive to see what sort of frame rates it would get at the same speed.

550 mhz GPU / 500mhz (128 bit) Memory
Vertical Stretch Deinterlacing - 60 fps
Per-Pixel Adaptive - 40-50 fps

335 mhz GPU / 1 ghz (128 bit) Memory
Vertical Stretch Deinterlacing - 60 fps
Per-Pixel Adaptive - 40 fps

To get smooth playback with Per-Pixel Adaptive I needed 500-550 mhz depending upon the video clip. Some were more demanding than others. Since many other cards operate at a slower clock speed and can still do per-pixel adaptive it seems the deinterlacing is mostly dependent on fillrate and memory bandwith. Since h264 and wmv9 is broken for my card I can't test acceleration, but others have already confirmed it is dependent on gpu speed. I've never noticed any difference in cpu usage for hd mpegs whether I'm at 350 or 550mhz so I guess it only really applies to decoding wmv and h264.

I've played around with my 2d clock speed and have yet to see any differences with it. Not sure if it plays any role or not.

[AtariJeff]

As is usually the case for me, I find out what I really need after buying something and using it for a while. I purchased a cheap Geforce 6200 and was very happy with it until I tried to watch my first 1080i HDTV show and the stuttering was head ache inducing. It's outputting underscanned 720p. After much trial and error with different decoders and overlay versus VMR, I've found I can get reasonably smooth playback by overclocking the videocard. I highly recommend Fraps and wish I had used it sooner, because it easily verifies what you think you are seeing. I have my card overclocked to 415/700 and Fraps shows a fairly steady 60 with only an occasional blip which might be from noise in the recording. When I returned it to the stock 350/650 the frame rate was in the 50s. I'm using the nvidia purevideo decoders (223) with VMR9 and FSE. I have the 92.91 beta drivers installed.

1080i playback definitely stresses the GPU which runs hotter than during 720p playback. If you choose to overclock, test the playback while nothing critical is recording, because I've had the video lockup after watching a show for a while when I had it overclocked ever higher.
Are you happy with the PQ of the 6200 with the newer drivers? I had stair-stepping so bad I had to, yet again, back out to version 84.21. Now its great.

[autoboy]

According to walford over on the AVS forums you need 10 GB/sec of memory bandwith to handle full resolution 1080i. I have no idea how he came up with that number.


This was from the Windows Media Player website. It was a kinda arbitrary number that was supposed to eliminate the slower video cards across all GPUs. This # is why I chose to use a 9600xt because the memory was just about 10Gb/sec. It turned out to be less than ideal. There are so many more factors than just memory fill rate in 1080i video.

This is good testing. Once you guys get a finalized fraps test with all the info i'll update the guide. It has been wrong too many times for me to keep putting my own views up there. I need facts supported by evidence for your bandwidth issues. BTW, i've still never had any problems with my 7300LE in 1080i video except when i ran out of main memory. I'm only using 512MB and sage can use 160MB sometimes.

[Tighr]

So what are the best options for us AGP folks that want good HD playback?

I've currently got an ATI Radeon 9600, and was looking for a good AGP card to upgrade to since my HD playback isn't very smooth. The cheapest 7xxx on newegg is a 7600GS for $125.

[malore]

Are you happy with the PQ of the 6200 with the newer drivers? I had stair-stepping so bad I had to, yet again, back out to version 84.21. Now its great. I switched back and forth between a HDTV show being recorded on SageTV and the direct broadcast and the pictures were nearly identical. I was surprised that I couldn't see any differences in the brightness and color. The only difference I noticed was that the CBS logo wasn't perfectly round on the SageTV output, most likely caused by scaling to underscanned 720p.

Analog recordings are another matter. Using the purevideo decoders with hardware acceleration, I get some noise speckles in the picture. They can be clearly seen on the Sci-Fi logo and on the back of the woman’s shirt. The grass, water and building look sharper and more detailed with intervideo decoder (WinDVD4). The SageTV decoder looks almost as good, but the logo has jagged stair steps. Selecting the nvidia postprocessing decoder, which seems to force software decoding, removes the speckles, but still doesn't have as much detail as the intervideo decoder.

Anyone know what is causing the speckles with hardware acceleration? I briefly tried a trial of WinDVD7 and it suffered the same speckling with hardware acceleration, plus HDTV playback wasn't as efficient. Also, as far as I can tell, HDTV shows and DVDs are rendered fine.

[willemse]

Autoboy and others thank you for the extensive information.

I have the following question though;
I use: Sage V 6.0.15, Sage MC Version 6.13, Graphics card Gigabyte 7600GS and Nvidia DVD decoder and SDTV output.

It is not clear to me whether picture quality improves when I use the Pure Video Decoder?
Any experience and/or input is appreciated including recommended settings for the Decoder.
Tks

[Surtr]

Follow up question on all of this great information:

I'm upgrading my sage client (XP 1700+, radeon 7000) to an athlon 64 3400+ and a geforce 7300 GS. Does the amount of video memory effect HD playback?

Would I notice any difference in HD playback between the 128MB and 256MB versions of a 7300 GS?

-Justin

[justplainnuts]

I have been reading this post and searching throughout the forum in an effort to find the best choice of a video card to output true 1080p x 1920 resolution. Any suggestions?

[Polypro]

HD Played back fine when I had a 128 Meg 6600GT.

7600GT is the recommended minimum to get all supported PureVideo features.

...that being said...

With a 7950GT, 93.71 ForceWare, and PureVideo Decoder .223 - Inverse Telecine (Invoke Jaggies Please) and "Smart" are still broken.

If you watch any SD content at all, ticking the "Inverse Telecine" box will make every line look jagged/combed. (Tested on a hockey game - look at the face off circles and sticks).

"Smart" mode still hiccups in and out (Tested on BSG, watch the Sci-Fi logo and any lines around it when it switches).

HD and DVD looked ok, but if you watch any SD at all, "Automatic" and no IVTC is what you want.

...which could mean a GT is overkill and a 7300/7600GS is fine since the "Advanced PureVideo Features" don't work properly.

P

[Surtr]

Here's an update on my experience:

Upgraded my sage client (formerly athlon XP 1700+, radeon 7000) to an Athlon XP 3400+ and a PCIE geforce 7300GS - passively cooled.

Well, HD played back quite smoothly and looked excellent, but unfortunately the machine would lock up hard fairly frequently -- multiple times per hour. Tried different drivers, checked temps, etc. Only thing I could think was that maybe the gfx card was overheating -- it showed a temp of > 70 degrees C.

Long story short, I tore everything out, put my old CPU, motherboard and radeon 7000 back in and am returning the new stuff. I'm gonna try an actively cooled AGP radeon x1300 or something next. :nono:

[GTwannabe]

HD Played back fine when I had a 128 Meg 6600GT.

7600GT is the recommended minimum to get all supported PureVideo features.

...that being said...

With a 7950GT, 93.71 ForceWare, and PureVideo Decoder .223 - Inverse Telecine (Invoke Jaggies Please) and "Smart" are still broken.

If you watch any SD content at all, ticking the "Inverse Telecine" box will make every line look jagged/combed. (Tested on a hockey game - look at the face off circles and sticks).

"Smart" mode still hiccups in and out (Tested on BSG, watch the Sci-Fi logo and any lines around it when it switches).

HD and DVD looked ok, but if you watch any SD at all, "Automatic" and no IVTC is what you want.

...which could mean a GT is overkill and a 7300/7600GS is fine since the "Advanced PureVideo Features" don't work properly.

P

PureVideo works properly; I can play back the same video files in Windows Media Player with PureVideo and get perfectly smooth playback. It's Sage's implementation of MPEG playback that introduces the stuttering.

[Polypro]

I don't have stutter.

http://www.missingremote.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=907&Itemid=166

The "Smart" problem (which has been around a loooong time) is noticed in the above review. It's present with SD as well. He doesn't mention the IVTC problem, but if you put up SD in a windowed program and the Driver panel in another...tick and un-tick IVTC while watching something with a lot of lines. I get a hockey stick that goes from normal to candy-cane/barber pole look.

P

[justplainnuts]

Ok, I didn't understand most of that stuff. I consider myself an advanced computer user/builder, but I guess I am not up on all the graphix card lingo.

The one thing I did get is that the 7600GT is the minimum I should consider. Does that mean a 7800GT/GS would be even better? I have found an AGP 7800GS which will work great with my motherboard (I have not entered the world of PCI express just yet). Will the 7800GS display 1080p x1920 without problems? :confused:

[GTwannabe]

Ok, I didn't understand most of that stuff. I consider myself an advanced computer user/builder, but I guess I am not up on all the graphix card lingo.

The one thing I did get is that the 7600GT is the minimum I should consider. Does that mean a 7800GT/GS would be even better? I have found an AGP 7800GS which will work great with my motherboard (I have not entered the world of PCI express just yet). Will the 7800GS display 1080p x1920 without problems? :confused:

The 7600GT is recommended because it combines full PureVideo acceleration features with a high core clockspeed (560-580mhz). PureVideo performance scales with clockspeed, so the 7600GT @ 560mhz will outperform a "better" 7800GT @ 400mhz.

The AGP 7800GS is a good overclocker. Mine was 375mhz stock, but I overclocked it to 460mhz w/o a hitch. It can play 1080P Windows Media sample videos (scaled to fit my 1600x1200 screen) with low CPU usage and no stuttering.

[mattdcknsn]

Here's an update on my experience:

Upgraded my sage client (formerly athlon XP 1700+, radeon 7000) to an Athlon XP 3400+ and a PCIE geforce 7300GS - passively cooled.

Well, HD played back quite smoothly and looked excellent, but unfortunately the machine would lock up hard fairly frequently -- multiple times per hour. Tried different drivers, checked temps, etc. Only thing I could think was that maybe the gfx card was overheating -- it showed a temp of > 70 degrees C.

Long story short, I tore everything out, put my old CPU, motherboard and radeon 7000 back in and am returning the new stuff. I'm gonna try an actively cooled AGP radeon x1300 or something next. :nono:

One thing you might want to look at is the power supply. I was getting lock ups constantly on a smaller PS, once I switched to a 350 watt PS it works great. Its worth a shot.

[camus]

With a 7950GT, 93.71 ForceWare, and PureVideo Decoder .223 - Inverse Telecine (Invoke Jaggies Please) and "Smart" are still broken.

If you watch any SD content at all, ticking the "Inverse Telecine" box will make every line look jagged/combed.

"Smart" mode still hiccups in and out (Tested on BSG, watch the Sci-Fi logo and any lines around it when it switches).



FWIW, I am using the same Forceware and PV versions with a 7600GS.

I get the same problem with "Inverse Telecine" on with SD, it isn't horrible but certainly noticeable. Wasn't sure what was causing it until I read this post and checked.

I do use Smart and it works for most SD, except for some older movies, pre early 90's on certain channels it really gets jumpy, I was attributing it to poor transfer and/or weak signal.

[justplainnuts]

So are there other higher-end cards that perform better than the 7600 as far as 1080P x 1920 video performance? I see a lot of people using the 7600 but not higher-end cards. What about the 7900, 7950, 8800?

[paulbeers]

So are there other higher-end cards that perform better than the 7600 as far as 1080P x 1920 video performance? I see a lot of people using the 7600 but not higher-end cards. What about the 7900, 7950, 8800?


I think why you see most using the 7600GT, is because it is powerful enough to do everything you would want and it isn't quite the space heater (which means loud fans) that the 7900/8800's are. Plus, most users just want to watch videos, so anything above "powerful enough" to do what I want, is lost (i.e. not gamers). Oh and the cost plays in. Why buy a 7900, when I can get a 7600GT and tuner for the same price and we could all use more tuners!

[elaw]

So here's a question for those of still in the stone age with AGP slots...

From nvidia's feature chart, it looks to me like a 7600GT (AGP version) isn't any better for Sage purposes than a 6600GT.

Is that right or am I missing something?:confused:

[justplainnuts]

Yes, us cavemen would like to know. Geico commercials are not our only favorite shows you know!

[Surtr]

One thing you might want to look at is the power supply. I was getting lock ups constantly on a smaller PS, once I switched to a 350 watt PS it works great. Its worth a shot.

I've got a Seasonic S12 in there, should be more than adequate. I just can't decide what the heck to get for a graphics card now; looking to spend not more than about $100. Right now the x1300 and x1600 pros are looking like they are leading the pack.

[Surtr]

Quick update in case anyone is listening -

I ended up getting a Radeon 9800 pro (brother-in-law had one sitting around unused). I really wasn't expecting too much from it as I was planning on getting something newer and faster, but I threw it in there and it works great. Using the latest powerDVD decoders and overlay and HD (from HDHomeRun) looks outstanding. Picture is awesome, playback is smooth. :jump:

Here's my client stats:

Athlon XP 1700+
384 MB RAM
Radeon 9800 pro
Overlay renderer
Latest PowerDVD 7 decoders

-Justin

[Fluffdaddy]

Tip/advice. Buy a spare fan for your Radeon 9800 pro , I had two Radeon 9800 pro's and both had fans that stop working after about 8 months. You will know when your system start locking up on you, because vid card is overheating ;)

[edgley]

Thanks for the tip about Fraps, got it working a treat with Sage.

Should it also work with WMP or ZP, as I cannt seem to get it to display a fps.

Thanks.

[stanger89]

Should work with anything using FSE VMR9, possibly even just plain old VMR9.