AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
686 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi,



in the last time there is a lot of discussion about the question for the better HTPC gaaphic card. I think the main opinion is that the ATI Radeon is the better package. A friend of mine and I took a direct comparison with some (for us) suprising results.


Tests systems:


2 PCs with the same Asus Motherbord, TB 900, Soundblaster Live.


PC1 with the ATI Player (newest drivers) and a ATI Radeon, PC2 with a Elsa Cinemaster Player 2.38.xx, GeForceGTS (Asus V7700deLuxe with latest NVidea drivers).


FP: Davis DL S8


Test DVDs (RC2): Galdiator, Mummy, StarshipTroopers, Titanic, StarTrek8


Results:

1) The general picture quality is nearly the same! There was no visible difference. BTW, both card were adjusted.

2) The stutter was slightly better with the ATI, but this was not a big problem for the GForce with the Cinemaster player.

3) The clour configuration was much better with the GeForce overlay control. The gamma adjustment of the ATI was not such a big deal. The GForce should some details more in some dark scenes of Gladiator (suprise for us).


Conclusion:

The most reports of people which switched from the GForce to a ATI were very positive for the ATI. We couldn't second this in general. Perhaps the big step is to use the Cinemaster based ATI player and not to switch the card, because when you use the player with the different card the picture is nearly identical. Because of the fact the they did both on the same time perhaps most of them think it's the card. FYI, Ralph said that the picture of WinDVD with the ATI is much better the WinDVD with the GForce.


CU


Frank


[This message has been edited by frbie (edited 05-11-2001).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
130 Posts
The difference for me, going from a Geforce 2-MX to a Radeon LE was very, very noticeable. Much sharper, more defined image. Better color saturation.


I was and still am using PowerDVD. I don't see any discernable difference between the video quality of the 3 players. I have 20/15 vision. I'm sure the people that do see the differences aren't imagining it. I must not know what I'm looking for and I don't mind keeping it that way. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif


Jack
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,653 Posts
I have tried them both and the Geforce 2 won for me. I'm still on the lookout for better cards, maybe Matrox will be next.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,912 Posts
For me, the difference was noticeable even on my 55" RPTV. In addition to looking better overall, the biggest difference for me was that with the GeForce2 I saw color-banding sometimes, and with the Radeon I don't. The other big advantage for me is a working 1080i resolution, which improves DVD playback considerably.


Jeff
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
686 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Hi,


the main point (IMHO) is to compare the best (?) player for the ATI (the ATI player) and the Cinemaster.


With PowerDVD and WinDVD the picture is, as Ralpg mentioned, better from the ATI. But in our opinion the picture of the ATI player with the ATI card is better than WinDVD and PowerDVD. And you can reach nearly the same quality with the Cinemaster and a GeForce. This is our point http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/wink.gif


To colour banding: We tried the opening underwater Titanic scene to test for banding. The ATI was better, but it wasn't a huge difference, but there was one.


The personal reason for the test was wether I should change my graphic card (my is the GeForce). In spite of te fact that the ATI seems to be slightly better my decision is not to change because the difference is not a big (120$) one.


Addition: I like strong colours. It seems that the colour adjustment is more difficult with the ATI player and card than with the GeForceGTS.


CU


Frank


[This message has been edited by frbie (edited 05-11-2001).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,836 Posts
The Davis projector has a resolution of 800x600 doesn't it?

I have read before that the cards and players perform somewhat differently at the resolution of 800x600 then they do at higher resolutions. I wonder if you would have obtained different results at higher screen resolutions.


Frank
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
686 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Hi,


Frank, you're right. The resolution we tested is 800x600. Maybe there are other results in different resolutions, but I cannot imagine that there will be a major difference in the results. The reports of advantages of the ATI vs. GeForce showed an advantage in areas outside the resolution, too (colour hadling, contrast, banding).

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
263 Posts
Hi Frank,


I might suggest the problem in your comparison is the DAVIS S8 Projector. I, too, used the DL450 and the DL S8 for more than 2 years and I´m still reselling DAVIS units, but I dropped them for HT use mainly because their color reproduction is clearly limited compared to a CRT projector (they use 18bit processing). To judge the differences between the two cards, you have to use a projection system able to produce "true colors", like a CRT.


I have to admit that the advantages of the RADEON over the GeForce are often exagerated... but I still prefer the RADEONs picture to the Geforce.


Yours,


Philip


P.S. btw, lack of sharpness often results in low-q rf filters on the card. There are some GeForce cards on the market with very bad filters, one of them being the ASUS 7100 TV Out, and some with very good filters (old Elsa Erazor X2). The quality of the ATI filters is great, really no need to remove them. Another (+) for the ATI in HT use.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
121 Posts
HI!


I've done a comparison on Monitor/NEC XG 75 CRT/ATI Player/WindDVD


The following Points are better/gold worth on the Radeon


1.) Better Scaling(1440*1080). Diagonals are much smoother

on the Radeon. (This is independent from the dvd player)

2.) No Banding

3.) The adjustable Gamma curve ist Gold worth.(This is

independed from the dvd player, even if at this time

only the ATI Player support this. But WinDVD 3.0 will

support this too)

4.) Contrast bigger

5.) I can adjust the Refreshrates much more precissly on

the Radeon. (i.e. On the the Radeon i can achive

50,000000 Hz. On the Geforce i can only reach 50,001

Hz. And thrust me, this makes a difference)


All in one not a superduper improvement, but big enough for me to stay with the radeon.


cya


Ralf





[This message has been edited by amigenius (edited 05-12-2001).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
686 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Hi, amigenius,


as mentioned at ****************** we had different results. In spite of playing with the ATI gamma the picture of the Cinemaster(GF2 unit was better or equal in dark scenes of galdiator. Colour and contrast were nearly identical, too.


I think the theme is our different FP configuration as Philip HS mentioned. Perhaps we couldn'n see some negative point with our DLP.


The refresh rate is no problem for me because my stutter is more than ok for me.


CU


Frank
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top