All about Graphics Cards
 Latest Graphics Cards articles
All Graphics Cards articles

Newsletters


  • Ask your question about IT issues
  • Post

Partners

The Games selection

adventure : Ray Adventure game, South Park style. Pick the way the story goes by picking an answer among those offered.
crazy : Interactive Boogy Pick one of the 3 songs, hit on the correct keys matching this boy's dance moves.
Ads

Sponsored links

HD Video Playback: HQV Blu-ray Benchmark

Previous Next
2:50 AM - 10/12/2009 by Don Woligroski

One of the tasks that the cards in this price segment will be expected to perform is home theater PC (HTPC) duty. To asses that, we used the HQV Blu-ray quality benchmark with the following results:

HD Benchmark Totals
(100 possible points)
Graphics ProcessorScore
Radeon HD 4670/4650 100
GeForce GT 220
100
Radeon HD 4550
100
GeForce 210 @ 720p
100
GeForce 210 @ 1080p 75

First, the good news: all of these solutions are able to achieve superlative image quality enhancements, delivering HD noise reduction (25 points of the total score), video resolution interpolation (20 points), jaggy reduction (20 points), and inverse telecine (35 points).

To get these scores, we had to enable noise reduction in the Radeon drivers (at 60), and both noise reduction (at 70) and inverse telecine in the GeForce drivers. These noise-reduction settings produced similar ideal results to my admittedly subjective eye.

The only test I could discern any difference in as far as quality was the jaggy-reduction test. Both the Radeon and GeForce cards did a fine job with this task, but the GeForces seemed to do it just a bit better. I gave them both full marks because the difference didn't seem enough to warrant extra points for the GeForce cards. The point is that any of these products offer the same level of HD-video playback quality as a standalone Blu-ray player.

There was one card that did have trouble performing all of the quality enhancements at the same time if tasked to do so beyond 720p: the GeForce 210, which stuttered during playback with noise reduction enabled at 1080p. With noise reduction turned off, the GeForce 210 was able to play back video without stuttering at 1080p (or 1920x1080).

The rest of the cards, including the GeForce 210's competition, the Radeon HD 4550, were able to play back Blu-ray video with noise reduction enabled and no skipping at 1920x1080. They could even play the video smoothly when the desktop resolution was set to 2560x1600.

The only other limitation we could find was that the Radeon HD 4550 driver doesn't allow noise reduction to be enabled at the same time as the dynamic contrast feature. Since I'm not a fan of dynamic contrast, this isn't much of an issue for me, but for those of you who put it high on the list, it might be a notable limitation.

If you are wondering why I haven't tested Blu-ray playback CPU usage with these cards, it's because it has become almost completely irrelevant. As I demonstrated in the last Avivo Versus PureVideo Versus Clear Video review, even today's lowest-end CPUs can play back Blu-ray movies on a relatively weak integrated GPU utilizing 20% or less of its available resources.

Talkback
kalliman 10/12/2009 9:12 AM
Hide
-20+

Too late for nVidia. They should release these cards 1 year ago...

ColMirage 10/12/2009 9:13 AM
Hide
-0+

Soooo tiny itsy bitsy!

lemonade4 10/12/2009 9:25 AM
Show
Proximon 10/12/2009 9:30 AM
Hide
--1+

They have a lot of loyal folks looking to save money these days, so they'll move some 220's. So fans will appreciate the cards.

apache_lives 10/12/2009 9:30 AM
Hide
-20+

hmmm i can see amd stomping this thing shortly with a DX11 part - kalliman is right, this is way too late in the market

as for the gt300 - also bad news if the info i have heard is correct - 6 months away is not good for nvidia

lashabane 10/12/2009 9:35 AM
Hide
-20+

And to answer your question - No, it cannot play Crysis.

Anonymous 10/12/2009 10:03 AM
Show
IzzyCraft 10/12/2009 10:09 AM
Hide
-1+

apache_lives :
hmmm i can see amd stomping this thing shortly with a DX11 part - kalliman is right, this is way too late in the marketas for the gt300 - also bad news if the info i have heard is correct - 6 months away is not good for nvidia


The 210 220 i'm pretty sure are OEM parts this is more like a proof/test of what nvidia can do, then a market move. They are nothing more then media cards meant for random dell's/gateway random desktops for people who don't really know what's in their computers.

apache_lives 10/12/2009 10:10 AM
Hide
-20+

idk :
why do i feel like mac?



because they cant play crysis either?

apache_lives 10/12/2009 10:16 AM
Hide
-2+

IzzyCraft :
The 210 220 i'm pretty sure are OEM parts this is more like a proof/test of what nvidia can do, then a market move. They are nothing more then media cards meant for random dell's/gateway random desktops for people who don't really know what's in their computers.



like nvidia 8300's and 9300's - never heard of them till i worked on a few HP's

scrumworks 10/12/2009 10:17 AM
Hide
-14+

This is the first time Tom's has run HAWX with DX10.1 support enabled. Those countless reviews with HD4xxx this support was not used. Does this imply something obvious?

Cleeve 10/12/2009 10:20 AM
Hide
-0+

IzzyCraft :
The 210 220 i'm pretty sure are OEM parts this is more like a proof/test of what nvidia can do, then a market move.



They're retail now.

Check Newegg, they can be purchased already. Today is the official launch of the retail cards, although they've been available for a few days now.

scrumworks 10/12/2009 10:21 AM
Hide
--3+

I forgot to add that article writer seems not to have any idea what DX10.1 is all about when running HAWX without AA. Let me clarify: DX10.1 is about improving AA performance.

americanbrian 10/12/2009 11:10 AM
Hide
-8+

Well scrumworks,

Seeing as these cards cannot perform well on basic settings at low resolutions it would seem that enabling AA for these cards is a moot point.

joeman42 10/12/2009 11:16 AM
Hide
--1+

Why do you keep making the same damn error? The 9600GSO/8800GS variant (96SP/192b) described is no longer being made. Only the 48SP/256b and 96SP/128b are available. Both are inferior to the original. At least make mention of this.

joeman42 10/12/2009 11:16 AM
Show
StumpyStumped 10/12/2009 11:49 AM
Hide
-0+

I don't see the point of these cards, 9500GT have similar power and performance and costs less. 9600GT green version would have similar power output but twice the performance of GT220 so again it's getting pwned.

shubham1401 10/12/2009 11:53 AM
Hide
-8+

Fail!

JohnnyMash 10/12/2009 12:48 PM
Hide
-0+

"..the GT200 family's naming convention. Let's have a closer look at what they actually contain."

Oh touchè! ;-)

liemfukliang 10/12/2009 1:36 PM
Hide
--1+

If only Nvidia have something to make consumen confuse like:
Pure Video HD 4
DX 11

If not than I thing I will buy 9600 GT. Thank you....


Sponsored links

Related articles

  • In the ’CPU against graphics card’ test, it’s clear that the GeForce 9600 GT is well-served by a 2.4 GHz to 3.2 GHz processor. In the following evaluations it has been allowed access to a 3.47 GHz overclocked model, which it is able to utilize in a...

  • The number of driver versions between the last test and the current beta drivers is greater for the GeForce 9600 GT. However, the 175.16, 175.19 (GeForce 9), 177.39 and 177.41 (GeForce GTX) came out in quick succession. Many of the changes affected...

  • The following table lists the system power requirements when using several popular graphics cards. These results were obtained with a different motherboard than the one listed in our test setup, but the difference is clearly in the single-digit range...