HD200 v. Windows 7 Video Quality

[kmp14]

Wow, I am shocked. I spent a couple years messing with HTPC output (various nVidia cards), trying to get it to look as good as my TiVo S3. It was always a bit softer, with a bit of a haze compared to the TiVo S3 (yes I did all the stuff to get color space right, etc, on the HTPC). Finally I gave up and got an HD200. The HD200 output is indistinguishable from the TiVo S3. Clear, sharp, nice. I am no videophile, but I know when stuff looks off. Pretty sure the TiVo S3 is a good reference, since it is THX certified, even though I know they pay big $$ for that, it still has to pass muster.

I leave the HD200 at 1080i (I actually see some "stuff" I dont like when I set the HD200 to 1080p), and even 720p looks awesome. IMHO, one of the best looking HD shows is 'Brothers and Sisters' on ABC, and it is 720p. As far as the macroblocking, maybe the softer output of the HTPC is hiding/smoothing it out?

[Evil_Attorney]

I tried playing around with the TV scaling the picture, but it was about the same or worse. I also tried other setting on the TV to try to get it equivalent to the PC. No go.

The issue isn't that the HD200 picture quality sucks, it's that the Win 7 decoder is the best that I've seen for h.264 content. I am pretty sure it is giving me a fairly accurate picture. I have Directv, as does my neighbor. When I am at my neighbor's watching TV, I see almost the same amount of macroblocking/compression artifacts as the HD200.

As you can see in the pictures, much (but not all) of that macroblocking is somehow removed by the Win 7 decoder. It was very obvious to my non-videophile wife. I did a blind comparison and she said the win 7 decoder looked much cleaner and clearer.

[PLUCKYHD]

Something isn't right I have Win7 and hd200's running an a 106" lcd 1080p projection and can tell no inherite difference on the hd200 over windows 7. There was a major advantage to the hd200 in xp but I call them about equal with windows 7 definitely not worst on the hd200 by any means.

[Evil_Attorney]

Plucky, what graphics card do you have and are you using the Win 7 h.264 decoder?

[PLUCKYHD]

Originally Posted by Evil_Attorney

Plucky, what graphics card do you have and are you using the Win 7 h.264 decoder?

Got the 8500gt and yes running w7 decoder to decode h.264 files.

The hd200 looks just as good as my ps3 playing blu rays as well. (both are calibrated separately)

[Evil_Attorney]

It looks like both of our graphics cards are using the same version of Purevideo HD, so maybe that's not it. You probably wouldn't notice it on blu rays because of the high encoding. You would notice it on 720p sports.

So, are the pictures I put up from the HD200 representative of what other people are seeing? Are there any hidden "quality" settings on the HD200 that I'm missing? Maybe my HD200 isn't working properly.

I am going to do some comparisons with the Arcsoft decoder this weekend to see what the difference with that one is.

[whartsell]

Originally Posted by Evil_Attorney

When you say it it looked worse, how do you mean? Less artifacts? Less smooth?

Colors were softer, some visible artifacts and in general just not as smooth

[Evil_Attorney]

Well, can someone tell me if the pictures I posted from the HD200 (not the Win 7 pics) show a "typical" amount of macroblocking/artifacting compared with other HD200s?

I would appreciate if someone else could play some 720p sports, pause on a fast action frame, then take a picture of some of macroblocking.

[valnar]

Originally Posted by Evil_Attorney

Well, can someone tell me if the pictures I posted from the HD200 (not the Win 7 pics) show a "typical" amount of macroblocking/artifacting compared with other HD200s?

I would appreciate if someone else could play some 720p sports, pause on a fast action frame, then take a picture of some of macroblocking.

My HD200 doesn't look anything like that. Perhaps you have a bad one?

[HelenWeathers]

Originally Posted by Evil_Attorney

Well, can someone tell me if the pictures I posted from the HD200 (not the Win 7 pics) show a "typical" amount of macroblocking/artifacting compared with other HD200s?

I've never seen this this kind of macroblocking either on any my three HD200s and I've paused sports from ESPNHD (and many other channels) many, many times over the last five months. I am in the process of recording something now to see if anything's changed with the new 0118 firmware. If it has I'll take/post a pic.

[HelenWeathers]

Here's a pic from ESPNHD. Players were running full bore. A little motion blur but no macroblocking.

[autoboy]

Looks like some sharpening issues. Notice how much sharper the edges look in the HD200 images.

This is pretty interesting. I've never noticed any issue with the HD200.

The 9500GT does some post processing by default. Look in your Nvidia control panel under Adjust Video settings. Note what you have the settings at, and then try Use the Nvidia settings and turn them all the way off. Then compare.

Also, what is the native resolution of your content? Is this 720p or 1080i? Verify it in the file information. We know the 9500GT can do better with interlaced content than the HD200 but I didn't think there was a difference for progressive.

[MattHelm]

Originally Posted by autoboy

Looks like some sharpening issues. Notice how much sharper the edges look in the HD200 images.

Oh yes, check the sharpness. I've seen artifacts like that on a TV when the TV's sharpness settings were screwed up (anytime my brothers visits).

[Evil_Attorney]

Ok, I think I have this figured out. I think some of you are correct. The NVIDIA is performing post processing and my TV's settings were set to medium sharpness (actually, it is a Sony Bravia with edge enhancement and detail enhancer set to medium and sharpness set to 40 out of 100).

Turning off all sharpness enhancements on the TV results in the Win 7 decoder being softer than the HD200. Also, the macroblocks on the HD200 were barely apparent. I tried turning the post processing off from the NVIDIA panel, but it didn't seem to want to turn off.

I tried adjusting the TV's noise removal settings and sharpness settings to replicate what I had done with Win 7. However, the TV would not remove the macroblocks.

I did also notice that the PC did a better job of deinterlacing.

The end result is that if the sharpness is basically turned off, the HD200 does not show macroblocks, but looks a bit fuzzy. The Win 7 decoder does an amazing job removing the macroblocks to produce a fuzzier picture, but with the sharpness turned up, the picture looks sharper and clearer than with the HD200 having the sharpness turned down.

I have been using the HD200 all weekend, but am still on the fence about which one I am going to use.

[valnar]

In my experience, the only thing a PC does better is deinterlacing. You are correct about that. The difference is only noticeable if you have badly mangled/authored sources. I set my HD200 at native resolution though because my TV does a better job. The downside is the extra second it takes for my TV to sync to the resolution.

I have a Sony KDS-55A3000 RPTV and leave the sharpness at about 32. Edge enhancer, black corrector, noise reduction, clear white, live color and MPEG noise reduction I leave off. I think I leave detail enhancer on low, but I'm not home to verify. I find all those post processing enhancements make it look unnatural.

[Evil_Attorney]

The one setting I was not able to mess around with on my Sony was the MPEG noise reduction. It is grayed out as an option on 1080P content. It becomes available on lower bit rates. I suspect it is because you would not want to use it on Blu Ray movies. I will play around with the HD200 in native resolution mode with the MPEG NR to see if I can achieve better results.

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by Evil_Attorney

The one setting I was not able to mess around with on my Sony was the MPEG noise reduction. It is grayed out as an option on 1080P content. It becomes available on lower bit rates. I suspect it is because you would not want to use it on Blu Ray movies. I will play around with the HD200 in native resolution mode with the MPEG NR to see if I can achieve better results.

IMO you should use 1080i from the HD200 (actually native switching ideally). The HD200 has rather mediocre deinterlacing, you're quite likely to get better results letting the display or VP do the deinterlacing, especially if you've got a new-ish mid to high end.

[autoboy]

I really prefer a softer image because it tends to smooth out the imperfections of the source content. It always seems that the sharpening tools (and many TVs have multiple sharpening tools that all interact with each other) are just enhancing the artifacts in the image.