Help with new video card selection!!

[Kb-Smoker]

I'm looking to upgrade my video card from my HTPC. I'm running vista witha P4 3.2, 2 gb ram and need a new video card. My 6800 256mb is not cutting it anymore.

I don't want to spend more than $150. Right now i'm looking at the:

nvidia 8600 gts
ati 2600 XT

I really like the new ati hardware video decoding that should help my old P4 handle hd video. Plus the ati card comes with a hdmi adapter.

The 8600gts have a lot better performance but i'm not sure how needed this is with a HTPC.

Any feedback would be welcome!!

 

[Sobek]

I've seen quite a lot of debate about people choosing between these two cards. Initially, it seems the 2600xt was left for dead by the 8600GTS when it came out. But now things have changed quite dramatically and in a lot of cases the 2600xt is actually matching or outperforming the 8600GTS... You can chalk that up to driver development.

I think it might come down to what you personally lean towards, as I feel that with each successive driver release, the 2600xt is going to just get that much more better. Then again, time will only tell... The 8600GTS would definitely be the 'safe bet' out of the two.

I suppose there are other things to look at too, such as UVD support on the 2600 (the 2600 series does have it doesn't it? Thought it was just the 2900's that didn't ship with it) or there's AVIVO anyway. Up to you

 

[DeadlyNinja]

I've seen quite a lot of debate about people choosing between these two cards. Initially, it seems the 2600xt was left for dead by the 8600GTS when it came out. But now things have changed quite dramatically and in a lot of cases the 2600xt is actually matching or outperforming the 8600GTS... You can chalk that up to driver development.

That's very interesting. I saw the initial reviews and they were quite disappointing. Can you point the way to a few reviews based around the new drivers? The 2600XT thread doesn't have any right now.

 

[mrcorbo]

I'm looking to upgrade my video card from my HTPC. I'm running vista witha P4 3.2, 2 gb ram and need a new video card. My 6800 256mb is not cutting it anymore.

I don't want to spend more than $150. Right now i'm looking at the:

nvidia 8600 gts
ati 2600 XT

I really like the new ati hardware video decoding that should help my old P4 handle hd video. Plus the ati card comes with a hdmi adapter.

The 8600gts have a lot better performance but i'm not sure how needed this is with a HTPC.

Any feedback would be welcome!!

If you're desperate to buy something right now I would say go with the 8600. It is a better value IMO. And it has advanced hardware video decode acceleration as well so it should just as adequately fill that need. TBH, though, it doesn't seem like the right time to buy a new vid card. I'd recommend waiting for the next refresh cycle.

I realize this isn't what you were looking for, but at the opposite end of the spectrum with the recent price cuts there are some spectacular values in the CPU market right now.

 

[Kb-Smoker]

thanks for the replies.

I don't have to have a new card now.... but i would like to go and get this out the way. I do agree the 8600 seems like the better performer but it lack the full video decode acceleration that ati cards has. Ati calls this "UVD" which seems to be a eally big deal. Is this really a big deal like a lot of people make it?

The ati card is also built on the 65nm process so it will run cooler and use less power. Also the ati 2600xt is only $100 compared to the 8600 gt at $150+.

This computer is used just as a htpc so i want the best video card for that...

 

[ShaidarHaran]

No question the HD 2400 and 2600 cards are *the* cards to have for HTPC (where gaming is not a concern). Cooler, cheaper, best-in-class HD playback, lowest-in-class CPU utilization for said HD playback, and integrated HDMI w/audio = best video playback solution on the market.

 

[mrcorbo]

No question the HD 2400 and 2600 cards are *the* cards to have for HTPC (where gaming is not a concern). Cooler, cheaper, best-in-class HD playback, lowest-in-class CPU utilization for said HD playback, and integrated HDMI w/audio = best video playback solution on the market.

These test results paint a different picture. I get the feeling a lot of assumptions are being made here with very little actual research being done. The Radeons are shown here to have an advantage in VC-1 playback efficiency, but actually lose out to the 8600s in h.264 decode performance and this is reflected in both the CPU utilization and power consumption figures for both formats. Either way power consumption is within a few watts (for video playback).

 

[Tahir2]

These test results paint a different picture. I get the feeling a lot of assumptions are being made here with very little actual research being done. The Radeons are shown here to have an advantage in VC-1 playback efficiency, but actually lose out to the 8600s in h.264 decode performance and this is reflected in both the CPU utilization and power consumption figures for both formats. Either way power consumption is within a few watts (for video playback).

Yes but then take it in this context and now you have a different picture painted once again:
http://techreport.com/reviews/2007q3/radeon-hd-2400-2600/index.x?pg=11

The Radeon HDs may have good reason for consuming a few more CPU cycles and a little more power than the GeForces in H.264 playback: they're doing quite a bit more work in post-processing. Both of the RV630-based cards post perfect scores of 100, and their competition from Nvidia flunks out of the noise reduction and film resolution loss tests.
We could chalk up the GeForce cards' poor scores here to immature drivers. Obviously, the current drivers aren't doing the post-processing needed for noise reduction and the like. However, I received some pre-release ForceWare 162.19 drivers from Nvidia on the eve of this review's release, which they claimed could produce a perfect score of 100 in HQV, and I dutifully tried them out.
Initially, I gave these new drivers a shot at 2560x1600, our display's native resolution. With noise reduction and inverse telecine enabled, I found that our GeForce 8600 GT 620M stumbled badly in HD HQV, dropping way too many frames to maintain the illusion of fluid motion. After some futzing around, I discovered that the card performed better if I didn't ask it to scale the video to 2560x1600. At 1920x1080, the 8600 GT was much better, but it still noticeably dropped frames during some HQV tests. Ignoring that problem, the 8600 GT managed to score 95 points in HD HQV. I deducted five points because its noise reduction seemed to reduce detail somewhat.
The faster GeForce 8600 GTS scored 95 points on HD HQV without dropping frames, even at 2560x1600. That's good news, but it raises a disturbing question. I believe Nvidia is doing its post-processing in the GPU's shader core, and it may just be that the 8600 GT is not powerful enough to handle proper HD video noise reduction. If so, Nvidia might not be able to fix this problem entirely with a driver update.
Also, even on the 8600 GTS, Nvidia's noise reduction filter isn't anywhere near ready for prime-time. This routine may produce a solid score in HQV, but it introduces visible color banding during HD movie playback. AMD's algorithms quite clearly perform better.

 

[mrcorbo]

Yes but then take it in this context and now you have a different picture painted once again:
http://techreport.com/reviews/2007q3/radeon-hd-2400-2600/index.x?pg=11

Well that's what I get for posting iwhen rushed. Kinda proves my point, though, about doing proper research (especially when the additional info is within the same article.)

++ for the Radeons, though I actually have some issues with the testing methodology used here. Their test bench introduced some variables that really should have been eliminated. Specifically, they should have used a 1920X1080 panel to eliminate any scaling. Running image quality tests on a 2560x1600 panel and then sending it a 1080p signal introduces the monitor's image processing into the result and that's just sloppy. I wouldn't expect it to affect this result, since all the cards were tested the same way, but it is not ideal.

Edit: Oh yeah, and what's with the results in the table not matching the text in the article?

 

[mrcorbo]

And now we have Anandtech with an article that gives the 8600 series the quality nod (including 100 on HQV) because of the ability to adjust the level of noise reduction being applied. Just goes to show you how subjective these kinds of quality assessments can be. Even on something like the HQV benchmark suite.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3047

Interestingly, they note that when the noise reduction setting is set too high in the Nvidia drivers it introduces artifacts. I wonder if these are the same artifacts referred to in the Tech Report article.

http://techreport.com/reviews/2007q3/radeon-hd-2400-2600/index.x?pg=11

 

[Rainbow Man]

Why would you want your graphics card to noise-reduce the image?

There's no universally foolproof method to detect unwanted noise; there's all the chance in the world it could filter out intended details instead.

I'd prefer if the video card presents the original movie as accurately as possible with the least load on the system. Thanks,.

Peace.

 

[Tahir2]

Due to compression used "accurately as possible" is not sometimes possible... one of the best methods to combat noise is using high bit-rates.

 

[pascal]

The first impressions with my 8600GT are good.
It is driving my Panny HDTV with 1080p signal and x264 movies

My CPU is only a slow Athlon 64 3500

 

[Luminair]

The first impressions with my 8600GT are good.
It is driving my Panny HDTV with 1080p signal and x264 movies

My CPU is only a slow Athlon 64 3500

Curious, what decoder are you using for the x264 stuff? Last I heard (and a quick google revealed much confusion on a number of forums) was that the new video cards might not be able to decode the popular mkv x264 media yet. That seems like BS to me though.

I see that the PRs for the cards says that you need the Cyberlink or WinDVD decoder to use the UVD/Purevideo features... in which case it would come down to them to support the fine details involved with mkv x264. I guess no free decoder supports the video card features yet.

 

[pascal]

Sorry for the confusion.
I was testing the new toys Panny G10 plasma panel with the 8600GT (DVI>HDMI) using WinXP, Windows media player, VLC player and the Purevideo decoders.

- The VLC player using the CPU did a good job with x264 and 1080p signal.
- The Windows Media Player/purevideo worked great with MPEG-2 videos, but did not worked well with x264.

I think it is a driver maturity problem. Some people say that new beta drivers work very well with purevideo/x264. I will test it.