AVS Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,613 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Are there any differences in picture quality between a Radeon 7200 and an 8500? I'm not a big gamer but would be interested in upgrading if there were performance issues relating to better image quality for DVD or HD file playback.


I am making the leap of faith that the current gamma issue with the 8500 will be resolved shortly. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,316 Posts
The final filter of the 8500 is probably less...there has been some not totally conclusive discussion about this.


Also, the 8500 has a more configurable gamma control when the fixed drivers come out "Real Soon Now."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,496 Posts
Well - Mr. Orr says they are.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
163 Posts
I haven't read any comparative reviews of the 7200 vs the 8500 with the new drivers. Right now I see no reason to upgrade unless there is a consensus that PQ is significantly better with the 8500. Also, right now TT doesn't seem to work with the new drivers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,716 Posts
I got an 8500 and compared to the 7500 using the newest 8500 driver. The 8500 picture, on MY setup with a projector, looked noticeably better to me (even at the default settings without an Avia calibration). However, I did have to turn off hardware acceleration in PowerDVD XP due to some issue with the new drivers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,006 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Rich4av
I got an 8500 and compared to the 7500 using the newest 8500 driver. The 8500 picture, on MY setup with a projector, looked noticeably better to me (even at the default settings without an Avia calibration). However, I did have to turn off hardware acceleration in PowerDVD XP due to some issue with the new drivers.
turning off powerdvd hardware accell is sorta a big deal. What OS did you have driver problems with? XP?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
830 Posts
The latest Catalyst drivers do have some 'issues' to say the least, DXVA is effected.


btw. I could not see much diff. btw. a retail 8500 and a retail 7500. I have an 8500 btw.


T.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,716 Posts
dm,


I use Windows 98SE. But, with a 1GHz PIII, Power DVD XP in software decode mode was OK even without hardware acceleration.


Tony,


I use the 8500 in 1024x768 resolution to match the projector's native res and 75Hz refresh. Again, YMMV due to different setups (which is why I put in a disclaimer). Also, my 7500 was the AIW 7500. Plus, on a single HTPC, it's hard to do A/B comparisons so it's all from memory :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
Dear all,


I just installed the Radeon 7500 and the CATALYST 02.1 driver for Windows XP on my HTPC. After the installation, I played DVD movies using PowerDVD XP with Hardware Acceleration Enabled.


Unfortunately, I could not change the Color or Gamma in the video option of PowerDVD XP. Then I used the ATI control panel and PowerStrip to change the color configuration. Both of them can change the color setting of my Desktop, but there was no effect in the movie window!


How can I change the color configuration of the movie playing screen in PowerDVD with Hardware Acceleration Enabled? Please help.


Thank you,


Vincent Kan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
697 Posts
try ati player after you did the changes to color depth
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
491 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Rich4av

I use the 8500 in 1024x768 resolution to match the projector's native res and 75Hz refresh. [/b]
What kind digital pj you are using?

Are you sure it can display 75Hz refresh rate?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,006 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by aibo99



Unfortunately, I could not change the Color or Gamma in the video option of PowerDVD XP. Then I used the ATI control panel and PowerStrip to change the color configuration. Both of them can change the color setting of my Desktop, but there was no effect in the movie window!
you should be looking for the color adjustments in the "OVERLAY" tab of the ATI control panel. these controls will be greyed out unless you have a DVD loaded and playing or on pause.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,716 Posts
Bubun,


The Panasonic LC75u projector handles high refresh rates as do many of the newer LCD projectors.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
532 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Rich4av
The Panasonic LC75u projector handles high refresh rates as do many of the newer LCD projectors.
Are you sure? Did you do tearing test?

If projector can display high refresh rate it does not mean that it handles it so well that you can use it to display video at higher refresh rate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
554 Posts
72Hz = 3x24Hz


Many DVD Movies = 24 fps.


Basically you shoot to avoid the 3:2 pull-down used to display 24fps content on 30fps or 60fps displays.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,091 Posts
I still don't understand the point of using a derivative of 24 frames. Refresh rates are the speed at which a single frame is drawn on the panel. The number of times a frame is displayed in time should not change, (should it?), if an image is suppose to be on screen for 1 second the number of times that it is drawn should not affect it. The information is stored on the DVD in 480 interlaced format which would pretty much require 3:2 pull down in order to display a smooth progressive image. I understand that higher refresh rates are great for CRT to reduce flicker. But if what is mentioned about using a higher refresh were true why don't all pjs and scalers use 72hz instead? or even better 24 hz. Although it is easier to achieve 60hz by using our common electrical source, 72hz isn't that hard to produce.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,270 Posts
The point of using a multiple of 24 is based on a few assumptions. Many have pointed out that 120Hz is the best choice of refresh if the projector supports it. This is because 120 is a multiple of 60 and 24...


OK, so why 72 or 120 or any multiple or 24? The assumption is that the software is doing a pulldown to produce a real 24p image. How the video card in the computer manipulates the overlay buffer (video buffer being refreshed by the DVD software) comes into play here. If the overlay buffer is being redrawn when the video card is updating the screen then overlay buffer tearing can occur. This is not such a huge problem anymore since there are methods of synching the video overlay updates with the screen refreshes, but with older cards and older drivers it is still known to happen.


The second issue with using a refresh rate that is not a multiple of 24 is the judder introduced by the video overlay update delay while waiting for refresh. The overlay buffer is locked during a screen refresh to prevent tearing, and the overlay update must wait for the next refresh to be displayed. Worse case is that a frame of the movie will be almost 2 screen refresh periods late if the timing is just right. At 60 Hz that's 1/30th of second which is noticeable. So, it's better to have a multiple of 24 if you want the minimum judder from overlay updates. Unfortunately, there are other sources of judder that come from the DVD decoding software, system drivers, AGP bus issues, etc... It's a tricky thing to get right.


So given the case that the video card is correctly displaying a video overlay with minimal judder introduced by other sources it up to the projector to correctly display the image. At this point things get complicated since there is no set technique that all manufactures seem to use. Early projectors only would sync a fixed set of refresh rates. This approach kept things simple, but it made setting up the projector a little more challenging.


Modern projectors will sync a wide variety of refresh rates and resolutions. In order to achieve this two things need to occur. 1) Video scaling 2) Frame rate conversion.


Now, different projectors do better or worse in either category. There doesn't seem to be much in the way of consistency between manufactures or even with a product line of a given manufacture. Knowing where the sweet spot is for a given projector can be difficult. But, as a rule of thumb the resolution of the computer should match the native panel resolution of the projector. This is simply due to the poor scalers built into most projectors.


With few exceptions, almost any modern graphics card will scale an image much better than a projector. In some cases, a modern graphics card can scale a DVD image better than professional equipment costing several thousand dollars. This is a case of the video card industry spending millions of $$$ on R&D for 3D graphics, building very complex and impressive graphics processing chips, and oh BTW this fancy hardware for games that just happens to be pretty good for displaying movies.


OK, so the frame rate conversion is where the video card / projector issue really gets interesting. The frame rate conversion is necessary because almost all projectors (LCD, DLP, LCOS, but not CRT) want to operate at a set internal frame rate. Many DLP have color wheels which spin at a set rate. This sets the fundamental refresh rate of the such a projector. Other DLP projectors had variable spin color wheels and could match the rotation of the color wheel to the video refresh rate. In some ways the electronics of the projector is made a little simpler but the mechanics of the projector are more complex. At any rate, it's not as common today and most DLP seem to be using a fixed spin rate color wheel and triple buffering to solve this problem. Some older projectors used fixed spin rate color wheels and double buffering. These projectors exhibited lots of tearing if the refresh rate of the computer was not matched to the native refresh rate of the projector. Even if they were matched there is nothing to keep them synchronized and tearing can still occur. ;)


LCD and LCOS projectors don't use color wheels but still generally operate at some fixed internal frequency. The reason in this case is that the switching speed of the LCD and LCOS material is fairly slow and trying to force the material to switch too quickly produces bad results. I have no idea what frequency a given projector may be working at, but it would be a safe idea to assume something like 60 Hz for most application and MAYBE 72 Hz if it detects film based video. That's not to say that some manufactures don't adjust the internal refresh rate to match the source, but at a certain point the actual display panels will not be able to keep up if the output of the video card refreshes faster than the physical pixels on the LCD/LCOS panel can switch.


In the common case where the projector does some sort of frame rate conversion, the result can be tearing and judder if the projector does a bad job. Some projectors do a pretty good job (triple buffering again) and don't produce too many problems. It can take some experimentation to find the best refresh rate which minimizes the overall tearing and judder problem for a projector not that adept at dealing with video.


In the case where the projector is bad a frame rate conversion it is probably better to set the video card refresh to the setting which makes the projector happy. The overlay should maintain sync with the video card refresh if that part of the system is working right and this will prevent tearing (hopefully). Judder may or may not be better or worse with such a setup. My personal experience is that the judder from the computer is greater than any judder introduced by the projector. More particularly, judder from the video drivers and DVD decoder software can make horizontal pans less than smooth, but I've found judder much less of an overall issue now that I have the Cinemaster software DVD player with DXVA (Direct X Video Acceleration) and a Radeon based graphics card. So any frame rate conversion my particular projector is doing introduces very little judder.
 

·
Oppo Beta Group
Joined
·
11,939 Posts
JoeFloyd,


Thanks for that informative post.


I have had problems getting the timing right with my HTPC ATI 7500 running at approx. 72 hz.


At the default 60hz rate, there is a lot of tearing.

I have solved that problem but I still cannot completely get rid of the judder.


I have been playing for hours with the refresh rate.


Do you think a different video card like the 8500 would work better?


-- Rich
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top