HTPC - TV Tuner Reviews
by Jarred Walton on December 7, 2005 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Smartphones
- Mobile
System Configuration
Initially, we weren't expecting hardware demands to be too great, so we had no intention of pairing the cards with higher-end components. We started the tests with a Sempron 64 3100+ system that was available, figuring that it would provide more than enough power. The PowerColor card was a later addition and made things a bit more difficult as we had already begun running tests. The problem is that the initial test system used a DFI LanParty UT 250Gb. Being an older motherboard – even though it remains one of the best socket 754 boards on the market – it lacks PCIe slots.
In order to accommodate the PowerColor card, we had to get a system with a PCIe slot. An HP DX5150 that we're also working on reviewing was available, so we used that. This is a socket 939 business PC and comes equipped with an ATI Xpress 200 chipset, 2x512MB PC3200 CL3 RAM, and an Athlon 64 4000+ (ClawHammer core). While it packs more CPU power, the important thing is that it has a PCIe X1 slot where we could plug in the Theatre 550. Other components were also different, but we're using this as an opportunity to look at several HTPC platforms as opposed to simply placing the three cards in a single system.
To be fair, we retested the MyHD and Fusion5 cards in the HP system as well. We found that the added processing power had little effect on performance in most situations, the exception being the MyHD card with analog channels. That brought a third test system into use, with an X2 3800+ processor. We'll have more to say on that later, but it was only used to verify that analog encoding with the MyHD was CPU limited on the other platforms. It's always good to get an idea of how cards like these perform in multiple systems, and we were happy to find that the installation of the hardware didn't present any difficulties.
In general, the CPU isn't the bottleneck in HTPC systems. The remainder of the platform is often more important, and we wanted to look at several different platforms: ATI vs. NVIDIA chipsets and graphics cards. We thought that we'd begin by looking at that aspect of the HTPC market before moving onto the cards themselves.
Initially, we weren't expecting hardware demands to be too great, so we had no intention of pairing the cards with higher-end components. We started the tests with a Sempron 64 3100+ system that was available, figuring that it would provide more than enough power. The PowerColor card was a later addition and made things a bit more difficult as we had already begun running tests. The problem is that the initial test system used a DFI LanParty UT 250Gb. Being an older motherboard – even though it remains one of the best socket 754 boards on the market – it lacks PCIe slots.
In order to accommodate the PowerColor card, we had to get a system with a PCIe slot. An HP DX5150 that we're also working on reviewing was available, so we used that. This is a socket 939 business PC and comes equipped with an ATI Xpress 200 chipset, 2x512MB PC3200 CL3 RAM, and an Athlon 64 4000+ (ClawHammer core). While it packs more CPU power, the important thing is that it has a PCIe X1 slot where we could plug in the Theatre 550. Other components were also different, but we're using this as an opportunity to look at several HTPC platforms as opposed to simply placing the three cards in a single system.
| Sempron Configuration | |
| Motherboard: | DFI LanParty UT 250Gb |
| Processor: | AMD Sempron 64 3100+ (Palermo) |
| RAM: | 2 x 512MB OCZ PC3200 Platinum Rev. 2 (2-2-2-10-1T) |
| Hard Drive: | Seagate 250GB 7200.8 SATA |
| Chipset Drivers: | NVIDIA nForce3 5.11 |
| Video Cards: | Sapphire X800 Pro AGP VIVO Leadtek 6800GT AGP |
| Video Drivers: | ATI Catalyst 5.11 (CP and CCC versions) NVIDIA ForceWare 81.95 |
| Operating System(s): | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
| Athlon 64 (HP DX5150) Configuration | |
| Motherboard: | HP DX5150 (ATI Xpress 200 chipset) |
| Processor: | AMD Athlon 64 4000+ (ClawHammer) |
| RAM: | 2 x 512MB Samsung PC3200 (3-3-3-8-1T) |
| Hard Drive: | Samsung 160GB SP1614C SATA |
| Chipset Drivers: | ATI Catalyst 5.11 IGP |
| Video Cards: | PowerColor X800 Pro PCIe VIVO XFX GeForce 7800 GTX 256MB (450/1250 clocks) |
| Video Drivers: | ATI Catalyst 5.11 (CP and CCC versions) NVIDIA ForceWare 81.95 |
| Operating System(s): | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
| Athlon 64 X2 3800+ Configuration | |
| Motherboard: | DFI nF4 Infinity |
| Processor: | AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ (Manchester) |
| RAM: | 2 x 512MB OCZ PC4800 EL Platinum (2-2-2-7-1T) |
| Hard Drive: | Western Digital 250GB WD2500JS SATA-2 |
| Chipset Drivers: | NVIDIA nForce4 AMD 6.70 |
| Video Cards: | PowerColor X800 Pro PCIe VIVO XFX GeForce 7800 GTX 256MB (450/1250 clocks) |
| Video Drivers: | ATI Catalyst 5.11 (CP and CCC versions) NVIDIA ForceWare 81.95 |
| Operating System(s): | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
To be fair, we retested the MyHD and Fusion5 cards in the HP system as well. We found that the added processing power had little effect on performance in most situations, the exception being the MyHD card with analog channels. That brought a third test system into use, with an X2 3800+ processor. We'll have more to say on that later, but it was only used to verify that analog encoding with the MyHD was CPU limited on the other platforms. It's always good to get an idea of how cards like these perform in multiple systems, and we were happy to find that the installation of the hardware didn't present any difficulties.
In general, the CPU isn't the bottleneck in HTPC systems. The remainder of the platform is often more important, and we wanted to look at several different platforms: ATI vs. NVIDIA chipsets and graphics cards. We thought that we'd begin by looking at that aspect of the HTPC market before moving onto the cards themselves.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
77 Comments
View All Comments
Brian23 - Thursday, December 8, 2005 - link
I'm supprised more people aren't talking about this. I haven't downloaded them, but I assume they are recordings of OTA broadcasts. If that's the case, then I'm suprised Anandtech posted them. In the news section they're always posting stuff about how people are getting sued for sharing movies. Most of the movies out there on torrents have been broadcast OTA at some point which would make them public domain. Everyone is so quick to judge someone when they post a torrent of something, but mysteriously no-one has said anything about this yet.JarredWalton - Thursday, December 8, 2005 - link
They're basically 30 second clips demonstrating analog/HDTV videos. If anyone wants to come after me for posting sample content... wow, they have way too much time on their hands. I guess I didn't bother to get "express, written consent" though....Brian23 - Thursday, December 8, 2005 - link
I don't fault you for posting this, and I don't think you need express written consent. I think the whole lawsuit thing over p2p file sharing is a bunch of crap. My point I was trying to make in my previous post was that I was suprised that no-one was was posting anything about copywrite violations. Normally the people here at Anandtech scream and yell if there's something being distributed that's copywritten, no matter what it is. I think people should be able to share stuff that they recorded from OTA.valnar - Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - link
Perhaps I missed something in the review, but what's the point of posting screen shot comparisons of a transport stream? They would all be identical across all the cards, unless there were bit errors in the stream. Of course they all look good! They should also look the same too. The only way to show a difference would be through a video card, such as a particular ATI or nVidia in either overlay or VMR9 mode. Or with the hardware output of the MyHD series of cards, which is vastly superior to the software based cards. If you have an HDTV and have used the DVI or Component out of the MDP-1xx, they are fantastic. Of course, a screenshot wouldn't show that. Maybe a digital photo or something(?).It should also be noted that watching HDTV on overlay is a big no-no. The overlay was never meant to register more than 540 lines of resolution. While deciding between overlay or VMR9 for DVD (740x480/NTSC) watching is a matter of religious debate, overlay can never resolve HD properly. I would submit that the reviewer possibly didn't see any of those cards in their full glory.
-Robert
xtknight - Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - link
Where is this overlay limitation stated and what happens when you go above said lines? I'm sorry but I find that hard to believe. SIL overlay vs. SIL VMR9 looks the exact same to me as I remember it. What does 540 lines mean? What resolution is the max (x by y)?JarredWalton - Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - link
I'm a little confused by this overlay limitation as well. I mean, obviously the Fusion5 only works through overlay, but the video stream is transferred digitally from the TV Tuner to the graphics card. There should be no limitation other than bandwidth, I thought? Maybe I'm using the term "overlay" incorrectly here?As for the HD images, I mentioned that they are all identical for TP captures. They were included to show people exactly how much data HDTV contains (and how much better looking HDTV is) relative to analog/SDTV. The upsampled SDTV image is also there to show how poor that looks in comparison to a real HDTV stream - and I get far too much upsampled content on most HD channels.
valnar - Thursday, December 8, 2005 - link
These limits are discussed in all the usual forums, like avsforum.com.JarredWalton - Thursday, December 8, 2005 - link
Link please? I just don't see how the hardware overlay interface on your video card could possibly be limited to only 720 x 480. Windows Media Player uses the overlay mode for playing video. Last I checked, it's fully capable of playing 1080I resolution. NTSC signals have nothing to do with overlay mode inside computers.valnar - Thursday, December 8, 2005 - link
It not limited per se, but you won't see much of an improvement at a rez above 540 lines horizontal. Everything (like WMP) can use the Overlay, but if you were to truly show a video in 1080P mode, for example, it wouldn't be as sharp - because of most video card overlay limitations. It's hard to explain, as the resolution of overlay is more an "analog" style of limitation, to use that metaphor inaccurately. It simply doesn't resolve the detail of HDTV, period. Get a 100" screen and a projector and it becomes obvious. Forgive me for not being able to articulate it, hence my recommendation to visit Home Theater/HTPC specific forums.xtknight - Thursday, December 8, 2005 - link
I can't find anything about this limitation with google or avsforum search. Are you mixing up overlay with interlacing? It would be nice if you could provide us with a link because we effectively have no clue what you're talking about here...