More Platform Comparisons

I will admit to being more familiar with the NVIDIA drivers, but I generally don't mind ATI cards or their drivers. In this case, however, I definitely feel that ATI needs to make some improvements and offer more flexibility and ease of use for connecting HDTVs. Since ATI's DVI port had problems, we looked at another option: using component-out cables instead of the DVI connection. The good news is that using component-out gets rid of the display problems; you can change inputs on the TV without the ATI drivers losing knowledge of the TV, and you can reboot and have it keep your settings. However, using the component cables in combination with certain TV tuner cards presents problems. (We'll say more on that later.)

We're using a slightly older ATI card, and it's possible that the new X1xxx cards will handle HDTVs via DVI better. It seems like a few changes to the drivers are all that's really needed to correct these issues, which is what we'd really like to see. I should also note that ATI has improved their HDTV support since I first tried connecting my HDTV to this X800 Pro back in February. When I connected the TV using the DVI port back then, I was limited to one specific resolution: 1080i, with no adjustments for overscan. While the Toshiba 46H84 is in fact a 1080i display - or really a 1920x540p display, if I understand it correctly - the picture generally looks more pleasing when using 720p output. Particularly when connected to a PC, the interlacing causes headache-inducing jitter (at least when using Windows; as mentioned, 1080i looks great for viewing videos).

In the process of switching from the Sempron system to the HP, the new Catalyst 5.11 drivers were installed. (We used both the CP and CCC versions, and decided to go with the CCC drivers.) Oddly enough, the experience of using the Xpress 200 IGP on the HP computer doesn't have quite the same behavior as the X800 Pro. Component output is no longer an option on the HP system, but the DVI port doesn't lose knowledge of the TV when changing inputs. The resolution still gets reset to 848x480 every time that the PC is rebooted, but that's easier to deal with than a blank display. The X800 Pro still has the same issues with using the DVI port, unfortunately, even with the latest drivers. Hopefully, ATI will make some further refinements to their drivers so that these concerns become a non-issue in the future.

Besides the difference in DVI port behavior, running an HDTV off of a cheap IGP is definitely an interesting option, particularly for HTPC builders. Unless you're planning on running games, you really don't want or need a hot, power-hungry GPU inside your case if you can avoid it. A system with a low power CPU like the Pentium M (or a mobile Athlon or some other cooler chip) could help quite a bit in making a cool and quiet HTPC. We plan to try out a board with the NVIDIA 61xx IGP in the near future and make sure that it works as well as their discrete cards for HTPCs.

One last point is that while we'd give the HTPC edge to NVIDIA right now, they're certainly not perfect. First, quite a few NVIDIA cards do not come with component out connections, which some people might find important. (Many of ATI's old R3xx cards include component out as a feature; for example, a 9800 Pro that I have behaves almost exactly like the X800 Pro.) Second, when you first start up the PC and load Windows, you need to have the TV input on the DVI port, or the NVIDIA cards default to 640x480 resolution. (We've used a 6800GT and a 7800GTX, with the same behavior.) These are minor issues, and either is preferable to failing to detect the display at all (like ATI cards), but they bear mention nonetheless.

The final conclusion on platform choices is to be aware of the idiosyncrasies of each. In my experience, the DVI port is preferred for NVIDIA, and the component out connections are better with ATI. With the platform considerations out of the way, here are the actual TV cards.

Platform Comparisons DVICO Fusion5 Gold
Comments Locked

77 Comments

View All Comments

  • JarredWalton - Thursday, December 8, 2005 - link

    Just to clarify, I'm speaking of overlay mode in general. The MyHD card overlay mode is limited to 720 x 484 reason. It does hardware decoding, which means it's generating the uncompressed HDTV stream on the card. A 720P compressed signal is up to 15 Mb per second. That presents no problem for the PCI bus. Uncompressed 720P, on the other hand, requires more bandwidth than the PCI bus can handle.

    1280 x 720 = 921600 pixels per frame
    4 bytes per pixel = 3686400 bytes per frame.
    60 frames per second = 221184000 bytes per second.

    The PCI bus is a 32-bit bus, running at 33 MHz, giving a maximum bandwidth of 133 MB per second. Uncompressed 720P would require about 211 MB per second. This is one of many reasons that the AGP slot was created. The CPU can render into an AGP cards memory at up to 2133 MB per second, at least in theory.

    So there is a reason that the my HD card doesn't render the overlay mode in anything more than 720 x 480. That doesn't mean I have to like that limitation. :-)
  • Crucial - Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - link

    I don't understand what the point of this review was. Why would you test a hardware based analog card with 2 cards that have software based analog? The addition of the theatre 550 card was completely unecessary and frankly makes no sense at all.

    A more effective test would have put the 2 HD cards up against the ATI HDTV wonder and another seperate test putting the 550 against the Hauppage pvr150 and an Avermedia card.
  • The Boston Dangler - Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - link

    Good one
  • JarredWalton - Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - link

    The review was because I had the cards. We've had complaints about putting out single item reviews. We've already looked at the HDTV Wonder, and it doesn't work for me - no QAM support and I don't want to get an expensive OTA antenna for a rental home. The whole article is a "state of the TV Tuner market" as well as individual card reviews, or at least that's how I intended it. Besides, the Theater 550 PCIe is really just a PCIe version of the PCI card we've already looked at, which is good to know.

    Previous analog tuners have been reviewed, and the ATI HDTV Wonder has also been reviewed. If you can get good OTA DTV reception, you probably have no need for something like the Fusion5 or MyHD. For people like me, though, the choices boil down to forgetting about DTV, getting a DVR upgrade to my cable box, and/or getting one of those two cards.

    After playing with all the cards, I would say your best bet for quality is to get two cards, one of analog and a second for DTV.
  • Ceramicsteve - Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - link

    Hey can you include a Mac based HDTV tuner in your round up? The only one I know of is EyETV from Elgato systems and it comes in a form of a breakout box.
  • scott967 - Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - link

    I take it none of these tuners support HDCP on the digital out?

    scott s.
    .
  • JarredWalton - Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - link

    That's correct, though I may have screwed up when I talked about my TV. I don't know if it has an HDMI or an HDCP port. I thought it was HDMI, but I could be mistaken.
  • Olaf van der Spek - Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - link

    > Using the Sempron 64 running at 2.50 GHz was more than sufficient for everything but the MyHD analog recording.

    There are no Semprons that run at 2.5 ghz.
  • JarredWalton - Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - link

    I had it overclocked -- I was trying to see if I could get it to work OK for the MyHD card.
  • Olaf van der Spek - Thursday, December 8, 2005 - link

    It may be a good idea to mentioned you were overclocking.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now