SageTV Community

SageTV Community (http://forums.sagetv.com/forums/index.php)
-   SageTV Media Extender (http://forums.sagetv.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=37)
-   -   Sigma SMP8635LF (HD200) vs EM8620L (HD100) & Capability Video/Audio (http://forums.sagetv.com/forums/showthread.php?t=37533)

voidpt 12-09-2008 05:20 AM

Sigma SMP8635LF (HD200) vs EM8620L (HD100) & Capability Video/Audio
 
Thanks to this reference from DevNull to the unboxing with internals of HD200 (site: MissingRemote) we now know the Sigma chip to be SMP8635LF. Compared to EM8620L (or some subversion) for the HD100. Looks like good news, because the SMP8635LF is a step above the EM8620L when it comes to capabilities.

On Sigma's homepage there are some information. They have a selection guide that compares several of their chips. Also there is a more detailed PDF version. There are many references to SMP8634, the SMP8635 looks for most purposes to be the same, its just the "Non-Macrovision Version".

After taking a look at the sheets these are the most obvious differences I could find (between HD200 & HD100):
  • VIDEO DECODING says it is capable of 2 HD streams vs 1 on HD100. Could give possibility for picture-in-picture.
  • AUDIO DSP is (2)300MHz vs 200MHz (not sure what the '2' signifies). Anyway, more MHz, more possibilities.
  • HDMI with audio v1.2 xvYCC. On the HD100 the Sigma chip did not seem to support this directly and a separate Silicon Image SIL9030CTU solution was used (look MissingRemote article). Together with the AUDIO DSP and v1.2 HDMI with audio streems this might give better solutions for audio. It has already been hinted by SageTV that they are looking at TrueHD/DTS-HD decoding and passing it as PCM over HDMI. For future references, they are looking, NOT: it will come. Just be happy it is a theoretical possibility. ;)
  • HOST CPU is 300Mhz MIPS vs 200MHz ARM. Don't know the MIPS vs ARM on MHz. But going by the MHz alone it should be more powerfull.
  • SECURITY CPU 200MHz. Not sure if this is active in SMP8635 (non Macrovision). Sigma material says this: "Security CPU supports wide variety of conditional access (CA) and digital rights management (DRM) solutions". Yeah I know, bad bad stuff :p But if this could make some commercial streaming solutions accept the HD200 as a valid box, it could be a plus.
  • USB 2.0 host. On the HD100 the USB was not supported directly by Sigma chip but through a VIA VT6212L chip. Ports were there, with power, but not used for anything. Now that they are part of the Sigma solution it is probably easier to make things work through them. As we are already seeing with the stand-alone-mode for HD200.
  • On the VIDEO DECODING specs it still gives same capabilities. Except a "*" that says "L4.1 for Blu-ray applications". Also Blu-ray players/recorders is listed as TARGET MARKETS. Should indicate that the Sigma chip should be capable to decode Blu-ray video streams.
  • 512MB DDR400 RAM compared to 64/128/256MB on HD100 (depending on excact EM8620L model, if MissingRemote has correct RAM spec, it is 128MB). More in any case. And can't hurt.
  • 256MB Flash ROM compared to 64MB. More is better. And in this case probably needed, because of the stand-alone-mode.
Together this hopefully will give us a bright future when we throw high-bitrate 1080p material at HD200. Especially H.264 that has been problematic in some cases. Already several posts indicate that HD200 seems to be better at this. I have some files I know are problematic on HD100 that I look forward to testing on HD200. Will not get the time until the weekend. Getting the HD200 myself tomorrow.

valnar 12-10-2008 08:53 AM

Nice post. Thanks.


Quote:

Originally Posted by voidpt (Post 320535)
Together this hopefully will give us a bright future when we throw high-bitrate 1080p material at HD200. Especially H.264 that has been problematic in some cases. Already several posts indicate that HD200 seems to be better at this. I have some files I know are problematic on HD100 that I look forward to testing on HD200. Will not get the time until the weekend. Getting the HD200 myself tomorrow.

I can confirm that 1080p MKV files now work provided they are encoded correctly. This usually means keeping the number of reference frames at 3 or 4. The latest x264 GUI's like AutoMKV and meGUI have profiles which work for DXVA or hardware compatibility. I do not recommend Handbrake, though it could be made to work.

Taddeusz 12-10-2008 03:18 PM

I've never had any problems with my 1080p MKV files on my HD100. They work quite well. Of course the average bitrates are below 10Mb.

Not sure what you mean about Handbrake. It works just fine. It uses x264 just like everyone else. I've personally ditched AutoMKV for Handbrake. I just got tired of the author's misunderstanding of how anamorphic video and AR worked together. Never could get a cropped anamorphic video to be sized correctly without doing all the math by hand. Then it's not worth it. Then there were the audio sync issues with some videos. Subtitles not working right on some videos. Handbrake gets it right every time. The ONLY thing that's lacking in Handbrake now is the ability to mux in the original DTS audio. It works almost flawlessly otherwise.

valnar 12-10-2008 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taddeusz (Post 321089)
I've never had any problems with my 1080p MKV files on my HD100. They work quite well. Of course the average bitrates are below 10Mb.

Not sure what you mean about Handbrake. It works just fine. It uses x264 just like everyone else. I've personally ditched AutoMKV for Handbrake. I just got tired of the author's misunderstanding of how anamorphic video and AR worked together. Never could get a cropped anamorphic video to be sized correctly without doing all the math by hand. Then it's not worth it. Then there were the audio sync issues with some videos. Subtitles not working right on some videos. Handbrake gets it right every time. The ONLY thing that's lacking in Handbrake now is the ability to mux in the original DTS audio. It works almost flawlessly otherwise.

The presets in Handbrake are rudimentary at best. They won't give the best compression or results with x264 unless you tweak them manually, or make your own presets. Like I said, that can be made to work easily, but you have to know what you're doing. Why something that simple isn't included in the default Handbrake is beyond me, because it could easily leapfrog to the best program of it's kind with a little TLC.

Taddeusz 12-10-2008 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by valnar (Post 321124)
The presets in Handbrake are rudimentary at best. They won't give the best compression or results with x264 unless you tweak them manually, or make your own presets. Like I said, that can be made to work easily, but you have to know what you're doing. Why something that simple isn't included in the default Handbrake is beyond me, because it could easily leapfrog to the best program of it's kind with a little TLC.

Well, yea, I do have my own custom set of x264 settings that I use. Works quite well at 52% quality, which is a CF of 24.5. Give me a pretty decent size/quality ratio most of the time. But with Handbrake once you get your own preset made it's really dead simple. I don't find the need to tweak things with each movie like I did with AutoMKV. And the queue works in a logical way where you can actually add to the queue when it's already started. Why he can't do that is beyond me.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:23 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2003-2005 SageTV, LLC. All rights reserved.