AVS Forum banner

Let's set this straight - No one can do 24p consistently well

Tags
nvidia
185K views 1K replies 180 participants last post by  myst4ry 
#1 ·
Let's set this all straight and start to re-educate people. I am probably the loudest critic of the whole "24p" bug.


Intel continues to get slammed by most of you yet actually can do 24p as well as any of the others.


As tested by AVS users (and others) the big three companies output the following when trying to do correct 23.976...

ATI: 23.978 (+0.002)

There are numerous reports of ATI being inconsistent at best with correct 24p playback.
http://www.google.com/search?q=ati%2023.978&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a&um=1&hl=en&biw=1366&bih=593&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=iw#sclient=psy&hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=XsL&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&biw=1366&bih=593&source=hp&q=site:avsforum.com+ati+23.978&aq=f&aqi=&aql=f&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=44b3839bd44fe786

NVidia: 23.972 (-0.004)

One example: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...&postcount=480

UPDATE: NVidia with recent drivers and custom resolution seems to be more consistently getting 23.976 +/-0.002 which is about as good as you can get out of the box.

Intel with UAC off: 23.973 (-0.003)

Intel with UAC on: 24.000 (+0.024)



So for those of you with the opinion that Intel is the only one that can't get this correct I would think again.


I would also question what those of you who bought an ATI or NVidia card to "fix" the Intel problem are really seeing/experiencing in regards to the "24p bug".


Looking forward to your comments/backlash/criticism/anger/confusion/arguments.
 
See less See more
2
#2 ·
Well I have an ATI card, but I didn't buy it because of the 24p playback bug. I bought it because the integrated graphics of the intel i3 was not cooperating with my system at the time. I have considered trying it again since all the updates have come out. (SP1, driver updates, etc.)


However, I would really like to know the REAL WORLD effects of these frame rates. In other words, it seems like being off by 2 or 3 or 4 one thousanths of a second would not really affet the picture much. For myself, although I do not look for skipped frames or slight pauses, I never see them when playing back video at either 59.9~ (59hz) or 23.9~ (23hz).


So I am just trying to figure out what everyone else sees . . .
 
#3 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by rocketlaw /forum/post/20400982


Well I have an ATI card, but I didn't buy it because of the 24p playback bug. I bought it because the integrated graphics of the intel i3 was not cooperating with my system at the time. I have considered trying it again since all the updates have come out. (SP1, driver updates, etc.)


However, I would really like to know the REAL WORLD effects of these frame rates. In other words, it seems like being off by 2 or 3 or 4 one thousanths of a second would not really affet the picture much. For myself, although I do not look for skipped frames or slight pauses, I never see them when playing back video at either 59.9~ (59hz) or 23.9~ (23hz).


So I am just trying to figure out what everyone else sees . . .

I'd be interested to see what differences you notice, if any, if you tried the intel graphics again.
 
#4 ·
Is that "with UAC off" only for Sandy Bridge or does it work with Clarkdale too?


And how does the coordinate with having to have it on to use Shark007 to get HD Audio?


At any rate, I don't even notice a problem with it.
 
#5 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sammy2 /forum/post/20401385


Is that "with UAC off" only for Sandy Bridge or does it work with Clarkdale too?


And how does the coordinate with having to have it on to use Shark007 to get HD Audio?


At any rate, I don't even notice a problem with it.

Edit: Corrected. This seems to only apply to SB.
 
#9 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by mslide /forum/post/20401491


Me too. I've had an ATI card for a while now, tried the whole 59/60 vs 24p thing and never noticed a difference. So I just set it to 60hz and never looked back. Ignorance is bliss I guess.

That is not ignorance. This is having enough knowledge to be able to just enjoy what you have.

My eyes are my judge. When I like what I see, I am also content to watch the video/movie in its entirety.


In all my years of PC video playback, I have never once concerned myself with fps data.
 
#10 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shark007 /forum/post/20401927


That is not ignorance. This is having enough knowledge to be able to just enjoy what you have.

My eyes are my judge. When I like what I see, I am also content to watch the video/movie in its entirety.


In all my years of PC video playback, I have never once concerned myself with fps data.

Sage advice from Shark007. I just see so many people on here worried about the 24p problem or waiting until Llano/IvyBridge/etc to jump into a HTPC.


And this whole thing is really not an issue.
 
#11 ·
And would only be an issue if your TV was actually outputting at 24p *and* you have sensitive enough eyes to notice it. Pretty rare combination. Not to say it doesn't drive some people mad, but the vast majority will never see it, even if they do have a true 24p HDTV.
 
#12 ·
Having once been a diehard audiophile I have since learned that if you aren't aware that a problem exists, don't go looking for it. I don't know what to look for in detecting the "24p bug" and I have no desire to find out what it is I should be seeing. I'm perfectly content watching Blu-Ray rips on my HTPC the way things are. If I knew what the 24p bug looks like it would ruin whatever enjoyment I get out of the media.
 
#16 ·
UAC prevents somebody (your wife, children etc.)/something (virus) from changing the system accidentally/intentionally. If I were a system integrator, I would never recommend my customers to turn it off (as I can't take responsibility for results). Personally I never turn it off for the same reason.
 
#17 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by renethx
UAC prevents somebody (your wife, children etc.)/something (virus) from changing the system accidentally/intentionally. If I were a system integrator, I would never recommend my customers to turn it off (as I can't take responsibility for results). Personally I never turn it off for the same reason.
Eh. There are a lot of people on here that find it an annoyance and turn it off with no ill effect.
 
#18 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by renethx
UAC prevents somebody (your wife, children etc.)/something (virus) from changing the system accidentally/intentionally. If I were a system integrator, I would never recommend my customers to turn it off (as I can't take responsibility for results). Personally I never turn it off for the same reason.
You seriously leave that thing on on your own pc? I can see for someone you built or whatever, but that annoying thing is the first thing I kill after a reformat.
 
#19 ·
Is that so annoying? (Vista's UAC is surely annoying.) I tested virus and UAC was pretty effective to protect OS (perhaps those who mention disabling UAC casually have never experienced this). It has been also very good to stop my wife/kids changing the system. Anyway I would always add a comment on possible consequences when mentioning disabling UAC to somebody.
 
#21 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by hanly2
Ok so how does it benefit us to disable it? I haven't disabled it and so far everything seems to work, even movies in mb and live tv and I don't know what everyone is talking about stuff "breaking"?
Have you ever noticed stuttering every 42 seconds when you play movies with the desktop resolution set to 24Hz? If no, disabling UAC won't benefit you at all.
 
#22 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by hanly2
Ok so how does it benefit us to disable it? I haven't disabled it and so far everything seems to work, even movies in mb and live tv and I don't know what everyone is talking about stuff "breaking"?
If you don't notice it then don't change it (unless you are the only one using your HTPC and find the UAC extremely annoying which some do - as stated above).


Some users just can't be happy unless everything is "perfect" or "99.99% perfect" even if they don't notice anything wrong. These are mainly the people that constantly post/complain/wait to build/ about the "24p bug".


So for those users trying to achieve perfection even when everything is already perfect requires disabling the UAC to try to get closer to "correct" 24p.


In summary: Its mainly for the perfectionist that thinks he can see the 24p bug and can't/won't be happy until it is "fixed".
 
#23 ·
I have an ATI 5670 card and the 23.976 occasional stutter irritates me. I use TMT3 for Bluray playback and the occasional stutter seems to throw out the sync of TMT3 and then it will begin to stutter a lot. Some times I wish I had just stayed with DVD.


Well I've been considering trying another video card, but if all cards are having this problem I will just save my money for now. Thanks for the info.


Gary.
 
#24 ·
Intel HD Graphics supports only 24.000 Hz refresh rate (if you don't disable UAC [disabling UAC could cause A/V synch issue]), so if you play a movie of 23.976 fps, you will see an extra frame inserted every

1/(24.000-23.976) =41.666... seconds.
That's the cause of a periodic stuttering (but not everyone can notice it). If a Radeon card supports 23.978 Hz refresh rate, then you will see an extra frame inserted every

1/(23.978-23.976) =500 seconds = 8 minutes 20 seconds.
It's still a periodic stuttering, but it's even harder to notice it (and as a matter of fact everybody thinks it's practically perfect).


If someone feels stuttering is irritating, perhaps the cause is entirely different from the imprecise refresh rate.
 
#25 ·
For some people, turning UAC off is the cause of a mutitude of problems that I cannot explain.


I run my own (playback) forum and occaissionally a user with weird things going on can correct their problem(s) by removing my software, re-enabling UAC, and re-installing my software. For some reason (and for only some people) which is beyond my understanding, choosing to disable UAC does not allow codecs to register properly or the registry to be manipulated as designed by my settings interface.
 
#26 ·
UAC turned off can effect other software as well. I normally have it off on my non-HTPC's but when having a lot of trouble installing Logitech web cam software on my wife's computer and I turned UAC back on for her and it installed perfectly. So Shark, your software (or the codecs in general) isn't the only thing that seems to need UAC on to install/run properly.


It's weird. I personally just keep UAC on now on all my Win 7 machines. Frankly once I have everything installed I rarely ever see a UAC notice. It's really not that annoying on you're installed and all set.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top