AVS Forum banner
1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
i have both of these cards lying around and was wondering which would be better for building an home theatre/work/backup gaming pc. these are the specs so far:


e8400 @3.0 | gigabyte ep45-ud3p | 4gb ddr2 | x-fi platinum | 1tb caviar black | westinghouse 37w3


i already have a gaming pc
i don't think i really need hdmi audio; i use headphones most of the time through the x-fi front panel watching late at night.


i watch mostly h264 encoded mkv's, some dvd's, and some divx/xvids.


i want the best video playback quality as far as color, fluid motion, no ghosting or smearing, etc.


higher cpu loads are no problem if it means better image quality. the ability for dxva to work properly is not a priority.


i've checked several sites and the HQV scores for both cards vary.


does anyone have any suggestions, input or advice about both cards? should i just get a totally different card?
any help would be great. dynamis
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,028 Posts
Either one.. I prefer Nvidia some others prefer ATI. The GT is built on the G92 GPU which is fully featured to play back HD video so no issues there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dynamis /forum/post/16982755


i have both of these cards lying around and was wondering which would be better for building an home theatre/work/backup gaming pc. these are the specs so far:


e8400 @3.0 | gigabyte ep45-ud3p | 4gb ddr2 | x-fi platinum | 1tb caviar black | westinghouse 37w3


i already have a gaming pc
i don't think i really need hdmi audio; i use headphones most of the time through the x-fi front panel watching late at night.


i watch mostly h264 encoded mkv's, some dvd's, and some divx/xvids.


i want the best video playback quality as far as color, fluid motion, no ghosting or smearing, etc.


higher cpu loads are no problem if it means better image quality. the ability for dxva to work properly is not a priority.


i've checked several sites and the HQV scores for both cards vary.


does anyone have any suggestions, input or advice about both cards? should i just get a totally different card?
any help would be great. dynamis
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,723 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by dynamis /forum/post/16982755


i have both of these cards lying around and was wondering which would be better for building an home theatre/work/backup gaming pc. these are the specs so far:


e8400 @3.0 | gigabyte ep45-ud3p | 4gb ddr2 | x-fi platinum | 1tb caviar black | westinghouse 37w3


i already have a gaming pc
i don't think i really need hdmi audio; i use headphones most of the time through the x-fi front panel watching late at night.


i watch mostly h264 encoded mkv's, some dvd's, and some divx/xvids.


i want the best video playback quality as far as color, fluid motion, no ghosting or smearing, etc.


higher cpu loads are no problem if it means better image quality. the ability for dxva to work properly is not a priority.


i've checked several sites and the HQV scores for both cards vary.


does anyone have any suggestions, input or advice about both cards? should i just get a totally different card?
any help would be great. dynamis

If you want better looking SD (1080i or 480i DVDs) then go with ATI. If you care about 24p (and have a TV/Monitor that supports it), go with the Nvidia.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by candre23 /forum/post/16983373


Frankly, both cards are overkill for just watching HD video. They'll both get the job done, but so will a 4350 or a 9400 GT. You can get either of those cards for ~$40.

yeah, i've read a few articles that they are more than enough. i just had these lying around from old builds. if i had to get a card, i would've probably gotten something along those lines.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iteki /forum/post/16983470


If you want better looking SD (1080i or 480i DVDs) then go with ATI. If you care about 24p (and have a TV/Monitor that supports it), go with the Nvidia.

yeah, my tv doesn't support 24p. how is ati better for interlaced dvd's? sharper or something like that?


--


what i like about nvidia is the dxva support; it always works. i get the opposite for ati; their drivers are killing me (dxva shows corruption on all the videos from http://nunnally.ahmygoddess.net/watc...os-using-dxva/ now using catalyst 9.1, 9.4, and 9.7) other then that the movement also seemed less smeary, but i will have to re-investigate since i didn't view each one side by side or even one right after the other.


i can't seem to get the colors right on the nvidia. it's always a little too dark. if i make it brighter, i see weird things like little blocks in the black areas. skin tones won't look natural without messing something else up. been playing around with it for a bit, but haven't been able to get it look like ati's color. also tried the different pixel depths. using the Limited RGB that my screen supports. does any one have settings they could recommend?


is there a big difference between the built in MPC ffmpeg decoder and the recent ffdshow tryouts? what about CoreAVC? all i know is that it uses less cpu, nothing about quality. i also heard that all h264 decoders must show the same exact output before postprocessing. is that true for all of these?


thanks for getting back to me so fast for the previous questions.
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
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