Previous "2900 XT Lacks UVD" Posts
- Thread starter thatdude90210
- Start date
- Status
It's thanks to those guys that we get more educated on the "problem" that is the foundation of the last two pages on this discussion. I think that people like Dave, or ChrisRay for that matter (who has a far more intimate relationship with nVidia without actually being an amployee) let us in on the corporate view on whatever is discussed here.
Although I don't need UVD that much, I thought it was a nice feature and now I'm only looking forward to see what the quality diffence would be between a 23/24/2600 versus a 2900.
I can imagine Unified Video Decoder on the 23/24/26 be limited in some cases becuase it is based on hardware and Universal Video Decoding on the 2900 be more flexible at that and occasionally and even faster product.
At least it decodes video streams, SLI1920x1080i, I'm looking at you.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Then you don't know jack pal. I and many others have these cards in our HTPCs. What are HTPCs you might ask (since you obviously don't know) they are PCs built for use as home entertainment center use, ie playback of HD content as well as others.
Waiting to purchase the 2900 vs. an existing card was most certainly based on UVD for many people. Does that mean everyone? Of course not. It also doesn't mean no one either.
As for you not caring, well, we don't care
Waaaaah. OMG, would you like some cheese with all your whine?
And a HD 2900 XT for your HTPC? You have got to be kidding me. Me, and any other HTPC owner/builder would never in a million years use a HD 2900 XT or any other high end card for a dedicated HTPC. It's too loud, too power hungry, too powerful for the use we'd put it to.
Those of us building HTPC's based on DX10 cards are all going to be using either HD 2400's, HD 2600's (for those that game) or Nvidia 8600's, 8500's.
And you paired up a HD 2900 XT with a celeron? Are you serious? I'm completely amazed at this whole series of posts.
I'm with Triniboy on this one. Almost everyone that got an HD 2900 XT won't really care that it doesn't have UVD. Sure I'd like it, but any machine I'd put a HD 2900 XT into (or a 8800 GTX/GTS) will have more than sufficient CPU power to handle the functions that the UVD offloads from the CPU.
Granted, I hope you get your money back from making an ill informed purchase, but it's hardly ATI's fault. Unless you find marketing documents from ATI specifying that UVD is in fact part of R600, you won't get anywhere legally either. Or unless you find documentation where ATI specifically ordered or encouraged AIB partners to put UVD on their packaging.
Apparently that last one will be a bit difficult, as it appears that as soon as ATI saw vendors putting UVD on packaging, they sent out notification that it was incorrect and should be removed from said packaging.
In other words, ATI has done everything it can to protect the customer by insuring that product packaging contains the correct information. However, if an AIB continues to market UVD as part of it, then they are open to lawsuits from both customer AND from ATI.
I'd imagine that if this somehow did make it to court, it'll be a very short trial.
Regards,
SB
PS - My Sapphire box has no mention of UVD anywhere on the packaging. It does mention, "HD DVD decoding via Universal Video Decoding technology..." Which is completely true, as it's using the same technology that is used in the onchip Universal Video Decoder (UVD), only it's done through shaders and CPU rather than through dedicated logic on chip.
Last edited by a moderator:
Silent_Buddha
Legend
For the HD 2900 XT, the functions that are performed by the UVD are done instead through shaders and CPU.
Regards,
SB
Yes. but he didn't use the word "dedicated", you did. There's seems to be a curious idea that a PC that is ever used as a multimedia device cannot ever be used for anything else, and a PC used for anything else (particularly gaming) cannot ever be used for multimedia.
That seems remarkably short-sighted to me. Sure, there does exist a market niche for a dedicated HTPC, and a dedicated HTPC would probably be SFF, low power, etc. but that doesn't mean that every single system that is ever used to perform HTPC functions must necessarily conform to that specification. Some people like to do more than one thing with their PCs!
Certainly the alleged combination of UVD and a decent HDMI implementation in R600 is the main reason I've held off buying a G80 card for the past several months: a hybrid system, capable of both high(ish)-end gaming and also hi-def video playback is precisely what I want to build. It's dissapointing to find out that I was misinformed about R600's capabilities.
Incidentally, for those who claim that hardware video acceleration is completely unnecessary with a gaming-calibre CPU, here's a benchmark from anandtech where software-only BluRay playback causes a Core 2 E6600 CPU (not exactly a celeron) to hit 100% utilisation.
Third graph on this page:
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2886&p=4
With any luck R600 will offer some hardware-acceleration, but to suggest that the CPU is all you need for video playback in any system that contains an R600 card is disingenuous.
I must say that the logic of using a high-end gaming PC as a HTPC at present eludes me. The main thing a HTPC needs to be is silent or, at the very least, very quiet. With current specifications, a high-end gaming PC can't really be silent or even quiet due to the huge amounts of heat pumped out by the GPU and high-end CPUs.
Obviously, it would be ideal if a one-size-fits-all computer could be built with both silence and gaming power but current technology just doesn't allow this IMO.
Obviously, it would be ideal if a one-size-fits-all computer could be built with both silence and gaming power but current technology just doesn't allow this IMO.
That might say more about you than it says about the logic. :sly:
Seriously, though: there are always other options for those willing to explore them. Simply using a sound-proofed case combined with low-noise water-cooling components can produce a system that is surprisingly quiet but very powerful. (And that's just one possibility).
Jawed
Legend
http://www.hardspell.com/english/doc/showcont.asp?news_id=622&pageid=644
No, HD2900 performance relies upon you having a high-end CPU.
The performance of HD2400/2600 is extremely impressive, but HD2900 clearly depends on an enthusiast class CPU. I think AMD has failed to make this clear, you know "in black and white" and that's the real problem.
Some people want a single PC to do their gaming and their video replay. I don't see anything wrong with wanting to use HD2900 in such a PC.
Also, it seems extremely unlikely to me that UVD won't appear in HD2900 refresh or other, future enthusiast (or ultra enthusiast) graphics cards. R600 is seemingly as limited as G80 in this respect, die space prolly played its part in both cases.
Jawed
A Sempron 2800? That was a year and a half old when R520 was released a year and a half ago! Who puts a high-end GPU with a 3 year old CPU (which was a value CPU when released, so far as that goes) and expects to get the highest performance?
But, yes, the UVD numbers there for 2400 and 2600 are nearly eye-poppingly impressive. Never argued it's worthless.
But, yes, the UVD numbers there for 2400 and 2600 are nearly eye-poppingly impressive. Never argued it's worthless.
What being discussed here is the video decode process, which is more or less separate from post processing which is where the major factors that will affect quality (outside of what the codec demands) occur. As the slide Geo posted indicates, right now HD 2900 sets the bar in terms of quality, with (I believe) all the quality functions that are applicable to SD already applicable to HD.
HD 2600 is still being worked in for HD quality and last I heard it was approaching that of 2900.
As far as I know this happened prior to the release of the product, however it appears that some vendors must have still had some printed.
Aerows
Regular
It certainly doesn't affect me, but it is disappointing for the customers that it does affect. I don't think I'd put an HD 2900XT in an HTPC, either, due to the power requirements and the heat, but that's just me
.
Yes, a sempron, and that's why my choice of Celery 347 for HTPC...and a "supposedly" monster HD card, so to ensure I can push the content onto the screen....
but if you look, they use 4800+ for 2900XT...and the x1950 performs better!
Sheesh. Guess I'll be trying one my r580's for HTPC...it's better than the 2900XT!
And yeah...thanks Dave.
Lol I feel like I'm talking to myself tho...
Decode acceleration is enabled under the next release of Catalyst for HD 2900 XT, it wasn't in the drivers that were sent out to press.
So we can positively expect support for that in the official Cat 7.5 release?
Well, that's going to make a difference, of course. Dunno if it's still going to be buttery smooth 1080p if someone wants to pair it with a three year old Sempron! My X1800XL and a X2 4200 did in the 60%-ish range for h.264 1080p, is what I remember.
Bravo, well said
I guess by your logic if one already has a HD 2900XT with a cpu that's less then E6700 then they should afford to buy a 2400 or 2600 for their HTPC needs?
I am not sure if the two cards can work together. But it's far cheaper then having to buy a new CPU (depending on setup) new MB and ram (in some cases...again depending on current setup).
- Status
