HTPC Decoding and Rendering Benchmarks: EVR / EVR-CP

In our Ivy Bridge HTPC review, we had covered the CPU / GPU utilization during playback of various types of clips. In the Vision3D 252B review, we had graphs of CPU and GPU loading with various renderers and codecs. Unfortunately, AMD doesn't provide similar data / sensors for use with their APUs. Hence, we had to resort to power consumed at the wall along with GPU loading in the Trinity HTPC review. In order to keep benchmarking consistent across all HTPC reviews, we started adopting the Trinity HTPC review methodology starting with the review of the ASRock Vision HT.

The tables below present the results of running our HTPC rendering benchmark samples through various decoders when using the Enhanced Video Renderer / Enhanced Video Renderer (Custom Presenter) (EVR / EVR-CP). Entries in bold indicate that there were dropped frames which indicate that the unit wasn't up to the task for those types of streams. Fortunately, none of the streams presented any problem to the system and there were no dropped frames. The recorded values include the GPU loading and power consumed by the system at the wall when playing back the streams using MPC-HC v1.6.5.6366 and LAV Filters 0.54.

Enhanced Video Renderer (EVR)

The Enhanced Video Renderer is the default renderer made available by Windows 8. It is a lean renderer in terms of usage of system resources since most of the aspects are offloaded to the GPU drivers directly. EVR is mostly used in conjunction with native DXVA2 decoding.

LAV Video Decoder (DXVA2 Native) + EVR
Stream GPU Usage % Power Consumption
     
480i60 MPEG-2 24.05 35.04
576i50 H.264 21.38 36.06
720p60 H.264 26.13 36.6
1080i60 H.264 28.9 39.95
1080i60 MPEG-2 28.19 37.06
1080i60 VC-1 31.23 45.57
1080p60 H.264 30.11 37.09

The GPU is not taxed much by the EVR despite hardware decoding also taking place. Deinterlacing and other post processing aspects were left at the default settings in the Intel HD Graphics Control Panel (and these are applicable when EVR is chosen as the renderer)

Enhanced Video Renderer - Custom Presenter (EVR-CP)

EVR-CP is the default renderer used by MPC-HC. It is usually used in conjunction with MPC-HC's video decoders, some of which are DXVA-enabled. However, for our tests, we used the DXVA2 mode provided by the LAV Video Decoder.

LAV Video Decoder (DXVA2 Native) + EVR-CP
Stream GPU Usage % Power Consumption
     
480i60 MPEG-2 26.69 38.78
576i50 H.264 24.43 37.88
720p60 H.264 32.76 40.4
1080i60 H.264 40.16 42.02
1080i60 MPEG-2 39.75 41.62
1080i60 VC-1 40.99 48.45
1080p60 H.264 41.33 42

In addition to DXVA2 Native, we also used the QuickSync decoder developed by Eric Gur (an Intel applications engineer) and made available to the open source community. It makes use of the specialized decoder blocks available as part of the QuickSync engine in the GPU.

LAV Video Decoder (QuickSync / DXVA2 Copy-Back) + EVR-CP
Stream GPU Usage % Power Consumption
     
480i60 MPEG-2 27.16 38.42
576i50 H.264 25.26 38.05
720p60 H.264 36.84 41.6
1080i60 H.264 44.2 43.41
1080i60 MPEG-2 44.32 43.02
1080i60 VC-1 43.56 43.26
1080p60 H.264 48.28 45.13

In general, using the QuickSync decoder results in a higher power consumption because the decoded frames are copied back to the DRAM before being sent to the renderer. Using native DXVA decoding, the frames are directly passed to the renderer without the copy-back step. The odd-man out in the power numbers is the interlaced VC-1 clip, where QuickSync decoding is around 5W more efficient compared to 'native DXVA2'. This is because there is currently no support in the open source native DXVA2 decoders for interlaced VC-1, and hence,  it is done in software [Clarification: This restriction is only on Intel GPUs. On both AMD and NVIDIA cards, DXVA2 native decode acceleration is supported for all VC-1 streams]. On the other hand, the QuickSync decoder is able to handle it with the VC-1 bitstream decoder in the GPU.

 

Refresh Rate Handling HTPC Decoding and Rendering Benchmarks: madVR
Comments Locked

138 Comments

View All Comments

  • Death666Angel - Monday, January 21, 2013 - link

    I have no issues with Win8. The desktop experience is virtually no different than the Win7 experience for me, I have no had any program or driver issues and the few things that are changed are for the better (the copy dialogue being the one I love the most).
    I'm not saying you have to like Win8, but I don't see the downsides personally. :)
  • damianrobertjones - Monday, January 21, 2013 - link

    So... you're KNOWINGLY refusing business. I would instantly walk out and never use you or your services again.

    When you're out of a job please return here.
  • johnsmith9875 - Monday, January 21, 2013 - link

    As a network admin I was horrified to find out that Server 2012 shares the Window 8 interface.

    As an IT professional I have better things to do than be forced to re-learn how to use Windows Server because they decided to slap the goofy Win8 UI on their server products.
  • nikon133 - Monday, January 21, 2013 - link

    Having to learn new things is part of MS experience. Refreshing exams and all that.

    All our senior engineers are excited with Server 2012. We do a lot of Hyper-V, and improvements in management, switching between core and GUI (among other things) are considered worth the change.

    It would be great if once learned stuff in IT can serve for whole professional life, but with dynamics IT have, that expectation is a bit optimistic. Being an IT professional means learning one's whole life.
  • lotharamious - Monday, January 21, 2013 - link

    And there it is. People get in to IT because they love using computers, most likely playing games on Windows. I know that's how I got into computers. But decided on a diffferent career path.

    But then you IT guys say to yourself "I already know how Windows works". So when it changes, man are you guys pissed because heaven forbid you actually learn something new.

    I don't buy this "I used it for a few days, hated it, and reinstalled 7" crap. If you seriously can't figure out the Start Screen after a few hours, you can't adapt at all, or (more likely) never tried it and decided to h8 because that's what your buddies do.

    Sure the current metro apps are bad, but the paradigm is solid. Even with mishmashed desktop, it's no different that Windows 7.
  • LoneWolf15 - Monday, January 21, 2013 - link

    It has nothing to do with "figuring it out". I figured it out, and found that on the desktop, it's a big step backwards in usability.

    In my daily job, I run a dozen apps at once, and switch back and forth rapidly between them. Four web browser windows with ten tabs each. Word. Excel. Outlook. Notepad++. Call handling software. A password safe. Remote support software. A terminal app. And so on.

    Windows 8 doesn't multitask well (as a UI, not the core OS) for what I do, and its multi-monitor setup is lousy. If the interface was an IMPROVEMENT, then I'd be more than willing to see it. While I skipped Vista as an OS, I migrated my whole house to Windows 7 within a month of its release. There is a difference between Win7 and Win8, and after running all of the release previews, I haven't upgraded, even though I have the licensing to do so.
  • JlHADJOE - Sunday, January 27, 2013 - link

    So long as Win+R is still there I'll manage somehow.
    It's all about the CLI or launching .msc files anyway.
  • LoneWolf15 - Monday, January 21, 2013 - link

    After using Server 2012 Essentials, I can honestly say it's not the huge deal like Win8 is.

    How often are you using Server as a multitasking OS, that is, running multiple apps on dual monitors, etc.? Server 2012 Essentials starts at the desktop, and stays there unless you click for the start screen; since you probably only have a dozen apps you use tops, you can have them pinned to the Taskbar or on the desktop and never worry about it again.

    I dislike Win8 on the desktop, but Server 2012 works fine, and I haven't found the UI to be a pain as usage is different.
  • dobdo99 - Saturday, June 14, 2014 - link

    Ah, sane old Microsoft arguments, the exact same issues I commented on for windows 3 and 3.1 and 3.11. Corps don't change, or very rarely, best to suck it up and stick to an OS that works "Linux", its supported way better than windoze anyhow. stop beating yourselves up.
  • lexluthermiester - Monday, January 21, 2013 - link

    Quote "You just want an excuse to hate."

    Nope you got it wrong. Windows 7 is like XP, almost universally loved. I don't know anyone who doesn't like or respect 7. However, I only know ONE person who like 8. 8 Offers few REAL advantages to 7. But it does offer a lot of headaches, annoyances and inconveniences. Not to mention it's ugly as hell to look at. Windows 8 is a fail for oh so many reasons.

    I think this sentiment sums it up for many; Why should we PAY to downgrade our OS to something as loathsome as Windows 8? Why should we PAY to make our computing experience more difficult and less enjoyable? Eh? Why?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now