Currently, my Myth box (AMD 64x2 3800+) is running integrated Nvidia 6150 graphics w/ max memory of 319MB shared (according to HPs specs on my computer - not sure what Ubuntu allows it to use) and connected to my TV (Sammy HLR4667W) via the VGA input. I was surfing around newegg the other day and came across a 256MB 7300GS PCI-e card:

MSI NX7300GS (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127267)

which would allow me to connect to my TV via HDMI. Should I expect a marked improvement, or degradation due to less memory, with this card, if I were to pick one up? Is it even worth it? My system currently is up to the task of doing HD and handles it fine, CPU usage is kind of up there, but not crazy. Could I expect system usage to go up or down? I know most recommend not wasting trouble on anything more than a 6 series card, as the Linux drivers don't really take advantage of the late series chipset capabilities.

The main reason I was interested in one of these (other than the fact that I simply like to tweak and upgrade computers) is the DVI/HDMI. The picture quality with VGA, at least when I am on the desktop, can best be described as a little 'fuzzy', even after numerous picture tweaking attempts. Though not a huge problem, I wonder if it could be better. I think it is a problem with the TV input, as other computers (my laptop) look similarly 'fuzzy' when hooked up through the VGA. Plus, I know my Myth box can look non-fuzzy as I used to have it hooked up to a Dell LCD monitor. It may very well be a fixable TV issue.

Just thought I would ask everyone's opinion on the higher series Nvidia cards.

Currently, my Myth box (AMD 64x2 3800+) is running integrated Nvidia 6150 graphics w/ max memory of 319MB shared (according to HPs specs on my computer - not sure what Ubuntu allows it to use) and connected to my TV (Sammy HLR4667W) via the VGA input. I was surfing around newegg the other day and came across a 256MB 7300GS PCI-e card:

MSI NX7300GS (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127267)

which would allow me to connect to my TV via HDMI. Should I expect a marked improvement, or degradation due to less memory, with this card, if I were to pick one up? Is it even worth it? My system currently is up to the task of doing HD and handles it fine, CPU usage is kind of up there, but not crazy. Could I expect system usage to go up or down? I know most recommend not wasting trouble on anything more than a 6 series card, as the Linux drivers don't really take advantage of the late series chipset capabilities.

The main reason I was interested in one of these (other than the fact that I simply like to tweak and upgrade computers) is the DVI/HDMI. The picture quality with VGA, at least when I am on the desktop, can best be described as a little 'fuzzy', even after numerous picture tweaking attempts. Though not a huge problem, I wonder if it could be better. I think it is a problem with the TV input, as other computers (my laptop) look similarly 'fuzzy' when hooked up through the VGA. Plus, I know my Myth box can look non-fuzzy as I used to have it hooked up to a Dell LCD monitor. It may very well be a fixable TV issue.

Just thought I would ask everyone's opinion on the higher series Nvidia cards.

Well, I'll chime in with my limited knowledge to at least give the real experts something to correct.

1) If this were a windows system, I'd say go with an 8500 ofr only a little more $$. Should improve picture quality and reduce cpu load.

2) I believe the aforementioned benefits would only be seen in Vista, xp drivers do not support pure video acceleration for the 8500.

3) in linux, this opens up a whole bag of driver issues. If what you have works, I'd stick with it for now until more solid drivers hit the street.

4) You don't need HDMI output on a video card, DVI with a converter cable from monoprice.com will give you the same picture. And only some card give you the option to integrate digital audio into the signal, so you may not be gaining a "one cable" solution.

I actually am considering THIS card in particular because:

1) my pc is small-form-factor and has only low-profile PCI slots. It seems this card is one of the few low-profile cards that will actually fit in a low profile system. I guess I could always make a L-P bracket for one of the other, cheaper cards.

2) As is, my pc has only a VGA out, no DVI or HDMI.

It looks like it includes a method to send digital audio over hdmi because it comes with a couple of digital audio cables.

It also looks like it requires two slots due to the height of the heatsink. Just make sure you have an empty slot next to it.

3) in linux, this opens up a whole bag of driver issues. If what you have works, I'd stick with it for now until more solid drivers hit the street.

How do you figure? The Nvidia driver is one of the more robust, I thought. Combine that with the ease of install in Ubuntu (clicking "Install proprietary driver") and I am not sure if this is an issue.

It also looks like it requires two slots due to the height of the heatsink. Just make sure you have an empty slot next to it.

I just noticed that one of the user reviews said they installed in my exact box (HP s3020n). Also says he noticed better performance, don't know if he's running Linux though. Another review said they used it to replace 6600GT graphics in Myth and it worked great, even using XvMC.

Anyone have experience with 7 or 8 series cards in Myth?

I'm just a Linux noob here, but from all I've read, the 7300 and 7600 chip sets are the newest versions that have Linux driver support. There are no Linux drivers (Nvidia or 3rd party) for any of the 8 series chips.

The HD feature set of the newer chipsets are not supported in Linux either (7 series & up), so this feature isn't a factor in any case. Until Nvidia decides to provide Linux driver information on their HD processing features (keyed to MS Vista MCE), these functions will be of no use to us. The only advantage of the Nvidia 6 series or 7 series (over the older 5 series - which works for HD under Linux) is their faster processing and faster onboard memory.

The only real advantage of a separate video card (my preference in any case) is that the functions are separated from the motherboard processing and don't use any shared memory. This results in improved video performance, along with the available digital video output.

DireWolf08 -- I suspect that even a 5200/5300 card might work better than your on-board 6150, simply because they have a DVI output (digital) and separated processing & memory. A low-profile Nvidia 7300 card, if it fits, should give you an improvement, but I certainlywouldn't entertain the use of any card using more than the Nvidia 7600 chipset.

DireWolf08 -- I suspect that even a 5200/5300 card might work better than your on-board 6150, simply because they have a DVI output (digital) and separated processing & memory. A low-profile Nvidia 7300 card, if it fits, should give you an improvement, but I certainlywouldn't entertain the use of any card using more than the Nvidia 7600 chipset.

Thanks Claus! We're neighbors! I live in Sunnyvale.

Here is something I have been thinking about recently as well, and I don't really have a good understanding for it. When does a piece of software choose to use the GPU and when does it choose to use CPU while decoding and playing a video? Is it a global behavior, or is it highly dependent on drivers, hardware (ie integrated gfx vs gfx card) codecs and the software doing the work? Are there any rules of thumb? How does XvMC make this better if the GPU is doing work anyway (other than taking load off of the CPU and giving it to the GPU)?

When does a piece of software choose to use the GPU and when does it choose to use CPU while decoding and playing a video? Is it a global behavior, or is it highly dependent on drivers, hardware (ie integrated gfx vs gfx card) codecs and the software doing the work? Are there any rules of thumb? How does XvMC make this better if the GPU is doing work anyway (other than taking load off of the CPU and giving it to the GPU)?

If you are using the standard xv driver in a piece of software (the default), then all the GPU is doing is scaling the video from its native resolution to the monitor's resolution, with your CPU doing the decoding work. If you use xvmc, then the GPU does some decoding work for MPEG-2 (the IDCT and MC steps). MPEG-4 and other codecs receive no GPU benefit on Linux. The Inverse Discrete Cosine Transform and Motion Compensation steps of decoding are mathematically intensive processes, so pushing those onto the GPU eases the load on your CPU. But, if you are not using XvMC and playback is fine, then there is no reason to turn it on.

To answer your earlier question, I am using a 7300GT, 128-bit/128MB DDR3. Video is the same as with my 5900 I was using before, but I also use it for gaming and the 3D performance of the 7300 is significantly better.

As for HDMI vs. VGA, I use analog VGA for my main projector. If you use a high quality cable, there is no reason you should get a fuzzy image. The projector I use has more image tuning options than the average digital display, so I am able to get a 1:1 mapping with minimal artifacts which aren't visible from a viewing distance (due to the extra long VGA cable -- running 5 BNC/coax cables would eliminate those). One benefit of sticking with VGA is that, if your display doesn't give you enough tuning options, you can adjust the modeline to try to get a 1:1 mapping. With DVI/HDMI, if your display forces overscan (i.e. it's a 1280x720 display, but scales the middle 1152x648 back up to 1280x720 - an evil practice IMO) there is nothing you can do to get a 1:1 pixel mapping, perpetuating the "fuzzy" image.

I'm thinking of upgrading from a 9800pro (mostly because it's a pain in the ass to get working properly). Was thinking of one of the 7300/7600/7800 series cards, i'm trying to do 1920x1080 (for a viewsonic n4280p tv). Wondering if this is reasonable to expect them to be able to do over vga

I am pretty sure 1920X1080 is a supported resolution for the 7 series cards. The card that I mentioned in this thread supports 1900X1200, according to newegg.

thanks direwolf08 -- i'll probably jump in and give it a shot

DireWolf08

You don't mention which MB Mfr you have for your 6150, but I thought that many of these 6150 MBs had a DVI output, sometimes optional.

Example:
Asus M2NPV-VM Socket AM2
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131014
Foxconn 6150K8MA-8EKRS Socket 939
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813186086

I do not have either, but have been researching for a HD MythTV box.

The DVI should be DVI-D, which just requires an adapter to HDMI (as mentioned above). Even with the adapter, I think it would be video only and the audio would have to be handled some other way.

This may not provide the same quality as a separate video card, but it may be worth a try if you think the video interconnect is suspect.

JP

Thanks for the tip jake. Alas, my experiment with the particular card I mentioned in the first post was short-lived, I thought my Hauppauge PCI tuner card might make this card not fit (with its monster heatsink) and I was right; I should have just listened to the poster who mentioned this!

Ehh, no bother. The system works well enough as is, and I have been playing with the picture settings (even venturing into the dreaded service menu -GASP!) and things are looking better all the time. I might spring for a professional calibration . . .

I'm thinking of upgrading from a 9800pro (mostly because it's a pain in the ass to get working properly). Was thinking of one of the 7300/7600/7800 series cards, i'm trying to do 1920x1080 (for a viewsonic n4280p tv). Wondering if this is reasonable to expect them to be able to do over vga

Video cards have been able to do resolutions well beyond HD over the VGA port for quite some time (I did 2048x1536 with a TNT2 or Voodoo 3 if I remember right). The limitations have mostly been with the DVI port. The 7-series cards added dual-link DVI, allowing them to support very high resolutions over DVI, as well. I bought my 7300GT specifically to allow me to upgrade to a 2560x1600 30" LCD "some day."


Ehh, no bother. The system works well enough as is, and I have been playing with the picture settings (even venturing into the dreaded service menu -GASP!) and things are looking better all the time. I might spring for a professional calibration . . .

As someone who has calibrated a few displays myself, from CRT TVs older than I am and workstation monitors heavier than I am to my projector, I would recommend making sure that any professional calibrator uses the exact source you will be using. In other words, he/she better understand modelines, and how to display test patterns with X (this advice is intended for a general audience, not just you).

Further, though I haven't done this yet, you could first calibrate the output of your video card with an oscilloscope, showing a ramp from full black to full white, making sure there is no clamping on either end, and the slope of the ramp is appropriate for your display's gamma. Then, you would display test patterns in X11 (not from a video DVD - these need to be ordinary graphics), and calibrate your display to those. Finally, you would run a test DVD like DVE, and use that to calibrate the xv brightness/contrast/etc settings in the video application.

Really though, it's not too difficult. As long as the cutoff and gain levels are appropriate for each color channel, everything else should require minimal or no adjustment. As for the more relevant resolution issue, that's more a matter of trial and error with modelines and service menu settings. My older projector has to be run at 61.67Hz refresh rate for optimal display quality.

Video cards have been able to do resolutions well beyond HD over the VGA port for quite some time (I did 2048x1536 with a TNT2 or Voodoo 3 if I remember right). The limitations have mostly been with the DVI port. The 7-series cards added dual-link DVI, allowing them to support very high resolutions over DVI, as well. I bought my 7300GT specifically to allow me to upgrade to a 2560x1600 30" LCD "some day."


Thanks, maby i'll should go back to my 4400Ti and see if i can get it to drive the tv then (the 9800 seems to be no end of trouble).

I am pretty sure 1920X1080 is a supported resolution for the 7 series cards. The card that I mentioned in this thread supports 1900X1200, according to newegg.
My MythTV frontend has a 7100GS and I'm using it at 1080i via DVI, though it required using a custom ModeLine. The built-in modes only display the top half of the screen as per the bug disussed here:

http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=90084

The only issue I have would only be an issue for those with interlaced displays (I have a Samsung 51F500 RPCRT), and that's the fact that the nVidia linux drivers just don't seem to handle display of interlaced content (ie 1080i broadcasts) at 1080i via DVI without tearing issues, unless you configure the player to deinterlace the content. This has apparently been an issue just about forever and may never get addressed...especially given the increasing rarity of CRT displays.

Tom

I wound up with the 7600GS (I believe) works like a charm -- the 9800pro and an X1600 (which worked under windows) would not generate 1920x1080p in linux even using the same modeline from Powerstrip...