Video Post Processing and HTPC Configuration Options

Our HTPC reviews over the last few years have used the HQV 2.0 benchmark to estimate and compare video post processing quality of the GPUs. We are at a stage where almost all GPUs end up scoring around 200, leaving very little differentiation. Put bluntly, the HQV 2.0 benchmark is dated, and presenting scores from it delivers no practical value to readers. That said, the tests themselves are relevant, but, instead of the HQV 2.0 Blu-ray, we used clips from Spears & Munsil's HD Benchmark (2nd Edition).

Intel has been paying particular attention to video post processing (courtesy of the pressure put by AMD's high scores in the HQV benchmark during the Sandy Bridge era). Haswell manages to clear common deinterlacing, chroma upsampling and cadence detection tests without issues, as shown in the gallery below

The disappointment comes in the form of the revamped Intel Graphics Control Panel. While the changes in appearance can be excused as migrating to be friendly with the Windows 8 touchscreen devices, the distribution of the various configuration options makes no sense at all. For example, it is only fair for users to expect the 'inverse telecine' option to be present under the Video category. However, it makes its appearance under the advanced display settings. Input range (Full / Limited for 0 - 255 / 16 - 235) is under advanced video settings, but the YCbCr / RGB setting is under the Display settings. It would make sense to have both settings under one category as users usually modify both when trying to calibrate and ensure that their setup is working optimally.

As I found out when trying to calibrate using Spears & Munsil's HD Benchmark, the mixture of settings in the control panel makes it very difficult to calibrate the correct output color space (amongst other things). For example, there is no way to choose YCbCr 4:2:2 / YCbCr 4:4:4 / Limited RGB / Full RGB. This is just one of the missing features in the configuration utility. I hope Intel's engineers try to calibrate a few displays by driving them using an Intel GPU and using the HD Benchmark 2nd Edition calibration disk (just to understand how badly the layout of the control panel is designed).

Andrew at Missing Remote also brings out the fact that clipping issues still exist. In addition, the current control panel completely removes the ability to create custom resolutions (in any case, the previous feature was also not very user friendly compared to NVIDIA's solution). The drivers and UI / UX still need work, but Intel hasn't been as responsive as we would like (partly due to the fact that casual HTPC users don't really care about these issues).

Note of Thanks:

Thanks to Spears & Munsil / Oppo Digital for providing us with an evaluation version of the HD Benchmark 2nd Edition Blu-ray

Testbed and Software Setup Refresh Rate Handling - 23.976 Hz Works!
Comments Locked

95 Comments

View All Comments

  • ganeshts - Monday, June 3, 2013 - link

    Haven't come across a 4Kp60 sample yet. All the stuff on YouTube is at a max. of 30 fps, and I have some samples sourced from other platforms that are QuadFHD at 30 fps. Please pass on any 4Kp60 clips that you have.

    I know there are two crazy scene encodes with 4Kp50 (Crowd Run 2160p) and a 250 Mbps one (Ducks Take Off). No hardware decoder I have seen has been able to handle either properly. So, I doubt 4Kp60 is going to work :| That said, if I get a chance, I will definitely evaluate the Iris / Iris Pro.
  • madwolfa - Monday, June 3, 2013 - link

    Why do you still need 23.96 support since "Smooth Motion" feature in MadVR? I couldn't care less now...
  • Dug - Monday, June 3, 2013 - link

    Because not everyone can, wants to, or even knows what MadVR is. Never mind setting it up properly.
  • HOSH - Monday, June 3, 2013 - link

    Personally this is going in the right direction, but I am wondering what low power settings we could use with the Core i7-4750HQ or the Core i7-4770R in an Mini-ITX HTPC style board since they both have the Iris Pro 5200. From reading the reviews here the Iris Pro 5200 should be closer to what NVIDIA or AMD currently has to offer in the HTPC discrete graphics, but on die for a cleaner system.
  • Aikouka - Monday, June 3, 2013 - link

    Is it worthwhile to assume that the poor QuickSync performance is just a software problem? I've been interested in gaining QuickSync support, but the performance presented isn't that enticing.
  • ganeshts - Monday, June 3, 2013 - link

    Very much possible. I am going to evaluate a driver downgrade to see if the issue is in the latest drivers.
  • superjim - Monday, June 3, 2013 - link

    Why do we need an i7 for HTPC duty? A 45W Core 2 Duo or Athlon II system is plenty using a 6570/430 and up GPU. Sure it uses more power but that's hardly a problem (both in money and heat). What is the usage scenario for an HTPC that needs an i7?
  • Aikouka - Monday, June 3, 2013 - link

    They probably didn't have access to a lower-end Haswell processor... especially since Intel hasn't released the i3 Haswell processors yet.
  • superjim - Monday, June 3, 2013 - link

    Makes sense but even an i3 is overkill for an HTPC as another commenter suggested. I think Trinity has a pretty tight grip on the bang-for-the-buck HTPC right now. Richland will only make that better.
  • Penti - Monday, June 3, 2013 - link

    It really depends on the amount of post processing done on the HEPC, a Trinity/Richland or Intel with integrated graphics or something like a HD6450 really isn't enough for all. Obviously a fast CPU is good as a fallback when there is no hardware acceleration too.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now