DXVA Checker indicates the various capabilities of the AMD6550D, as exposed by the drivers.

The only puzzling aspect is the missing ModeH264MVC_VLD_Avivo entry which is present in the AMD 6xxx cards with UVD3. Instead, we have ModeH264_VLD_Multiview_Avido, which means that the Blu-ray players will have to interface with this new entry. AMD let us know that the 6550D doesn't have full hardware acceleration for 3D Blu-Rays. Some sort of extra assistance from the host CPU will be needed.

Our grouse with the low end AMD GPUs like the 6450 and 5450 was the fact that they were not certified for 1080p60 H.264 playback. Instead, they confined themselves to Blu-ray specs. With the advent of camcorders capable of 1080p60 recording, we believe this restriction should not be in place. What about the AMD 6550D?

We fired up DXVA Checker, and tried to benchmark a 1080p60 clip from a camcorder.

With all post processing steps enabled, I was pleased to find that the clip benchmarked at 77 fps, well beyond the 60 fps necessary to avoid frame drops.

With full hope, I tried playing back the clip in MPC-HC. As it turned out, approximately half the frames were dropped with ESVP on. Manually disabling all post processing options enabled us to play back the clip without frame drops (except for the initial startup trouble).

The discrepancy between DXVA Checker and MPC-HC was a surprise. They tallied without issues when we were benchmarking the discrete GPUs earlier this month. Either DXVA Checker or MPC-HC has problems with the AMD 3550D, and hence, we decided not to carry out the FPS benchmark for various codecs.

According to AMD, Blu-ray content shouldn't have any such issues. We took a 1080i60 clip from a Blu-ray (M2TS file) and tried playing it back in PowerDVD. Unfortunately, it looks like nothing other than Vector Adaptive (VA) deinterlacing is available, as shown in the gallery below.

In our opinion, it is not good for mainstream integrated GPUs to skimp on video post processing for Blu-ray videos itself.

All in all, even without running the DXVA benchmark, we have encountered a host of issues in playing back files at their native frame rate. Once the drivers get mature and the discrepancy between MPC-HC and DXVA Checker get resolved, we will probably revisit this. But, we wouldn't be surprised if AMD puts up its hands and says that the unit's functionality and performance are as per expectations.

 

 

Deinterlacing Performance Custom Refresh Rates
Comments Locked

104 Comments

View All Comments

  • formulav8 - Friday, July 1, 2011 - link

    I'm sorry but there are to many people complaining about your review and I doubt they are all AMD fannys. Maybe, just maybe the problem is you and your reviews? Or is it people are just all AMD fanboys? and couldn't have anything to do with you?

    Although I personally am not into the bias thing with you, you absolutely did NOT critque that Intel stuff near as much as you did AMD's. You need to go back and actually Expose Intels flaws. Not hide them or downplay them in a quote or something.

    In the end though, your article was way below many of the other Top 3 or 4 sites. Not because of being biased, but just the overall review is subpar imo. You do have alot of potential though :)
  • dragonsqrrl - Friday, July 1, 2011 - link

    No, I'd say the source of pretty much all the accusations of bias and favoritism following this review has been AMD fanboyism.
  • cjs150 - Friday, July 1, 2011 - link

    That at least up til now is what I have thought about each new HTPC review.

    Sadly this seems to be one step forward and at best at least one and a half steps back.

    The AMD A8 issues identified in the review show that, once again, AMD is launching a half tested product.

    There seems to be at least 2 or 3 different HTPC markets.

    I want something that sits in the main room and plays everything properly, with a bit of internet browsing on top. Game playing is something I leave to the main rig. Despite that, some game playing even if limited to older games would be nice.

    Other people want something that is much more powerful because they want serious game playing as well as proper HTPC work. That is not a criticsm of them, they have different priorities.

    Here are my thoughts

    1. AMD, INTEL, NVIDIA: dropped frames are totally unacceptable. I do not care if it one frame every 1000 frames or every 10,000 frames. The Blu ray playback rates are standard, it is the computer industry fault and no one elses if you cannot comply with the standard.

    2. INTEL (particularly): Audio, it may come as a suprise but people watch films with the sound on! Many of us have reasonable high end AV rigs playing 5:1 (or better), I rather like my AV rig where I simply plug an HDMI cable into Blu ray player and the other end into the AV receiver and get top quality pictures AND 5:1 sound. If you want to be in the HTPC market then you have to offer the same option (I am just wating for replies from all the audiophiles who will tell me that using the HDMI cable this way is sub-optimal - maybe it is but my ears are not good enough to tell the difference and I like the simplicity of fewer cables)

    3. SILENCE: would be nice. No small noisy fans

    Otherwise nice review
  • jabber - Friday, July 1, 2011 - link

    Their importance is waning in terms of reviews for CPUs and ram etc. I dont need to know how fast a chip is nowadays. Unless I want to run mega gaming resolutions or spend all day transcoding, anything off the shelf will do. I now laugh if I see a DDR3 ram roundup review and roll my eyes at the waste of lifetime it took to create.

    7-8 years ago you had to give a little thought to a build. I'd spend a couple of weeks going over the reviews etc. Nowadays I spend about 30 minutes and just use the retail sites.

    "That will do (click) that will do (click) that will do (click)!" Proce now counts for morw than out right performance. I do not need Intel's fastest CPU. I don't even need their second or third.....

    As far as I am concerned going forward these Llano cpus will be going into quite a lot of builds for my customers. Not Intels.
  • just4U - Saturday, July 2, 2011 - link

    Ram drives me crazy... even today. I'd say those reviews are still warranted.
  • rachotilko - Friday, July 1, 2011 - link

    What a triumphant boasts were made of Bobcat & Bulldozer. The lauch of chips have been postponed several times, only to reveal that in its core the Bobcat is still the same Sledgehammer Opteron of 2003. It took AMD 3 years to shrink the Phenom II to 32 nm and pair it with GPU (that I admitt is very decent). What a disgrace !
  • jabber - Friday, July 1, 2011 - link

    And that means what to Joe Average User?

    Absolutely nothing.
  • lestr - Friday, July 1, 2011 - link

    Hey Ganesh,

    Sorry you're taking so much heat. I appreciate your reviews because you DO point out shortcomings. I recall MANY, MANY reviews where Gary and Anand counted over 20 BIOS revisions they insisted upon in order to get a board remotely functional. (X58?) Unlike many of the Infidel fanboys here I don't have a photographic memory of every word in every Infidel review... and if they DID... they'd recall the many problems Anand encountered with Infidel chipsets, too.

    It has been a few months since the introductiion of the 1155. Have they ALL forgotten how bitterly everyone complained that you couldn't OC the CPU on one board and that you couldn't OC the iGP on another? Oh, that's because Intel wanted to soak the market THEN give them "Z" board they'd rather have had... makes sense now.. Why did they cut / limit the # of PCIe lanes? A VERY frequent comment was the only chip to get was the K series.. Talk about rabid dogs. No, they forget about all that. They forget about the extremely limited lifespan of the 1156 line all together? Did they even forget about the recent chip failure? I give credit where it's due and Intel handled that wonderfully while EVERYONE complained about having to wait and return their boards. Talk about the blind leading the deaf and dumb!!.. What ever Infidel does is ok by them regardless of how deeply they greedily dig into your pockets. They make you pay for each and every incremental improvement many of which AMD includes as native. SATA 6, USB 3 and NOW they're complaining that the HD6550D CF capable chip isn't good enough in a few limited areas? How long have people been waiting for Infidel to fix the 23.997 glitch?

    They'll sit and criticize AMD for purchasing ATI and in the next breath say the only way Infidel can fix their graphics is if they BUY NVidia? It's simply another example of near-sighted bigotry by self-assessed elitists.

    It would be nice if, for a change, the readers could think... some of them need to learn to spell, too! Ok Anand has discovered another glitch. They Published it while other reviewers passed over it. They - you - are responsible for getting a lot of glitches fixed on BOTH sides. No, they don't give you guys enough credit for that. I have to believe that the mfr's respect your openness and honesty and know you can't be bought or bribed. Anand is an advocate for the people.

    I own both brands of systems. I prefer AMD because they are more feature rich for the buck. Maybe they aren't as fast.. We're reaching a point of diminishing returns.. "DAMN! I had to wait and blink my eyes twice for the screen to change." I remember an 8088 costing 3 grand. No, it isn't a perfect world. It never will be. I happen to believe you're just as critical, if not more so with Intel on some of the products they've produced in the last few years. They're so much bigger and they should know better. I know some people won't change their opinions and there is always going to be bias on both sides. You're right, they do need to go back and read some of your Intel reviews.

    No, this readership isn't comprised of the average John or Jane Doe. They don't even know it exists. I was one of them about 5 years ago. Big box off the shelf crap forced me to seek alternatives. After extensively exploring more sites than I an count I selected Anand as my primary go-to source because you DO tell it like it is not because you sweep things under the rug. Keep pissing people off - isn't that the job of a good journalist? Another good, honest review. Thanks...

    Now.. about that G.Skill contest... if I "happen" to win... well.. let's just call that a coincidence, ok? :)~`
  • lestr - Friday, July 1, 2011 - link

    From another site 7/1/11

    AMD's launch of two Llano A-series desktop APUs yesterday comes a little over two weeks after the CPU/GPU maker made available its Catalyst 11.6 driver package. For whatever reason, AMD chose not to bake in support for its then soon-to-be-released A8-3850 and A6-3650 APUs, but don't despair, there's a hotfix available if you plan on running one of these chips.

    The AMD Catalyst 11.6a hotfix also adds support for the A8-3800 with Radeon HD 6550D (same as the A8-3850) and A6-3600 with Radeon HD 6530D (same as the A6-3650). Otherwise, there isn't anything new in this hotfix.

    In case you missed it, the Catalyst 11.6 drivers promise performance gains in a handful of titles, including Crysis, F1 2010, Far Cry 2, HAWX, and the Unigine Open GL tests. It also adds a few new features, such as Steady Video, Image Stabilization brought to you by YouTube, and decode acceleration of MPEG-4 part 2 content in Microsoft video player applications (through MFT support) for all Radeon HD 6000 cards.
  • ganeshts - Friday, July 1, 2011 - link

    Yes, we are aware of this. The 8.862 RC1 driver release we used has all the above features inbuilt. Basically, you can say that we tested with the hotfix Cat 11.6a.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now