- Email |
- Print |
- Comments (60) |
- Share
We decided to do a simple experiment to see if the amount of system memory allocated to graphics would affect HD video playback performance.
The minimum amount of graphics memory allowed by the BIOS was different between the two platforms. The Radeon 3200 allowed as little as 64 MB to be reserved for graphics memory while the GeForce 8200 allowed a minimum 128 MB. For comparison purposes we tested both platforms with all three codecs using 128 MB and compared those to the baseline 256 MB results:

As you can see, the amount of memory reserved for graphics use appeared to have no appreciable effect on playback performance on the Radeon motherboard. Let’s see if the GeForce motherboard is any different:

It looks like the GeForce tells the same story—allocating 128 MB or 256MB appears to make no performance difference for HD playback.
- System for editing HD in Adobe Premiere [Homebuilt Systems]
- Does Blu-ray use HDCP protection yet [Graphic & Displays]
- Looking to upgrade graphics card on Dell e510 [Graphic & Displays]
- HTPC Configuration - Sanity Check [Motherboards & Memory]
- XBOX 360 VS. PS3 [Games General]
Questions? Ask Tom's community!
- 1 / 3
- Next
-
Sponsored links
Related forums topics
- Anandtech - 780G CPU incompatibilities + 780i/790i data corruption
- $400 budget system. Input appreciated
- Can an experienced builder take a look at my build...
- Home Theater PC....HELP?!!?!?!
- Home Theater PC , Build, Please critique.
- 2 x nVidia 7600GS SLI vs 1 x ATI HD 4670
- 8600 GT\8500 GT lack of HDCP & shattered media PC hopes...
Best offers
|
Radeon HD 5770 Video Card (1GB,... | $179.99 Newegg.com More info |
|
Radeon HD 4890 Video Card (1GB,... | $189.99 Newegg.com More info |
|
Radeon HD 4890 Cyclone OC Video Card... | $209.99 Directron More info |
|
GeForce 9800 GTX Video Card (512MB,... | $200.00 ServerSupply.com More info |
|
GeForce GTX 260 Video Card (896MB,... | $209.99 Best Buy More info |
- hd 3200 benchmark
- radeon 3200 performance
- radeon 3200 vs geforce 8200
- radeon 3200 benchmark
- geforce 8200 graphics
- radeon hd 3200 benchmarks
- integrated graphics benchmarks
- ati radeon hd 3200 vs geforce 8200
- radeon 3200 benchmarks
- geforce 8200 1080p
- 780g vs 8200
- hd 3200 benchmarks
- geforce 8200 and hd 3200
- 780g vs geforce 8200
- radeon hd 3200 geforce 8200 gpu
Partners
The Games selection
violent :
Interactive Buddy
Unwind on your interactive buddy: Do anything you want to him, it will earn you money, and you can buy other stuff to torture him with.
|
crazy :
Xiao Xiao 7
A great fight scene from the animation movies Xiao Xiao.
|







Don't the 780G chips have hybrid technology? It would have been great to see what kind of performance difference it would make to add a discrete card with a 780G chip. Motherboards with integrated graphics cost about the same as those without integrated graphics, and so I would choose an integrated graphics + a discrete graphic card for hybrid performance.
Wao, you should update this article part 5 in tuesday when NDA 9300 lift out. 9300 vs 790GX. Does this NVidia VGA also defect?
Nice job Don !
Interesting seeing the theoretical HQV difference being a realistic nil due to playability (does image enhancement of a skipping image matter?)
I'll be linking to this one again.
Next round HD4K vs GTX vs GF9 integrated, complete with dual view decoding. >B~)
Great article, specially liked the decrypted video benchmarks as I was indeed expecting a much higher difference.

Also was expecting that the single core handled it better as I use a old laptop with pentium M 1500mhz & ATI 9600 as a HTPC and it plays nearly all HD media I trow at it smoothly (Including 1080P) trough ffdshow. Notice the files are usually Matroska or AVI and the codecs vary but usually are H264.
I admit since its an old PC without blueray or HD-DVD I have no idea how the "real deal" would perform, probably as bad or worse as the article says
A refreshingly informative article. Well done.
I have a gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2H m/b (780G)
I just bought a Samsung LE46A656 TV and I have the following problem:
When I connect the TV with standard VGA (D-SUB) cable,
I can use Full HD (1920 X 1080) correctly.
If I use the HDMI or DVI (with DVI-> HDMI adaptor) I can not use 1920 X 1080 correctly.
The screen has black borders on all sides (about 3cm) and the picture is weird, like the monitor was not driven in its native resolution, but the 1920 X 1080 signal was compressed to the resolution that was visible on my TV.
I also tried my old laptop (also ATI, x700) and had the same problem.
I thought that my TV was defective but then I tried an old NVIDIA card I had and everything worked perfect!!!
Full 1920 X 1080 with my HDMI input (with DVI-> HDMI adaptor).
I don't know if this is a ATI driver problem or a general ATI hardware limitation,
but I WILL NEVER BUY ATI AGAIN.
They claim HDMI with full HD support. Well they are lying!
That's funny, bit-tech had some rather different numbers for HQV tests for the 780g board.
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2 [...] chipset/10
What's going on here? I assume bit-tech tweaked player settings to improve results, and you guys left everything at default?
What about the image enhacements in the HQV test posible with a 780G and a Phenom procesor?, would this mix stand up in front of the discrete solution chosen?.
This one could be an interesting part V in the articles series.
I have a gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2H m/b (780G)I just bought a Samsung LE46A656 TV and I have the following problem:When I connect the TV with standard VGA (D-SUB) cable, I can use Full HD (1920 X 1080) correctly.If I use the HDMI or DVI (with DVI-> HDMI adaptor) I can not use 1920 X 1080 correctly. The screen has black borders on all sides (about 3cm) and the picture is weird, like the monitor was not driven in its native resolution, but the 1920 X 1080 signal was compressed to the resolution that was visible on my TV.I also tried my old laptop (also ATI, x700) and had the same problem.I thought that my TV was defective but then I tried an old NVIDIA card I had and everything worked perfect!!!Full 1920 X 1080 with my HDMI input (with DVI-> HDMI adaptor).I don't know if this is a ATI driver problem or a general ATI hardware limitation, but I WILL NEVER BUY ATI AGAIN.They claim HDMI with full HD support. Well they are lying!
LEARN TO DOWNLOAD DRIVERS
Guys...I own this Gigabyte board. HDCP works over DVI because that's what I use at home. Albeit I go from DVI from the motherboard to HDMI on the TV (don't ask why, it's just the cable I had). I don't have ANYDVD so, I know that it works.
As for the guy having issues with HDMI with the ATI 3200 onboard, dude, there were some problems with the initial BIOS. Update them, update your drivers and you won't have a problem. My brother has the same board too and he uses HDMI and it works just fine. Noob...
Yes I own GeForce 8300 IGP... I can confirm it does frame skips in just normal high quality DVD, i hate it... watching some stops... I test using ATI HD2600 external, wow it moves flawlessly and more vibrant, I regret my mobo, I should have bought ATI
Why did not test the 780g and 790gx boards with side port ram?
That's funny, bit-tech had some rather different numbers for HQV tests for the 780g board.http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2 [...]
HQV is, unfortunately, somewhat subjective - but I don't know how they could have gotten these scores. Ati told me directly that their low-end cards won't provide any HD enhancements. That was some time ago, and bit-tech aren't a bunch of incompetents, so it's hard to say exactly what's causing the diffrence here.
What about the image enhacements in the HQV test posible with a 780G and a Phenom procesor?, would this mix stand up in front of the discrete solution chosen?.This one could be an interesting part V in the articles series.
I don't believe the quality will change with faster processors - I tested a Phenom 9500 and didn't see any diffrence. But I'll run a proper test and let you know.
"In this author’s opinion, motherboard manufacturers would much better serve their customers by offering an HDCP enabled DVI output with a DVI-to-HDMI adapter, instead of HDMI outputs."
Wow. You seem to be REALLY missing the point here. The whole point of this is for HTCPs, and the nice thing about HDMI is that it can send both video and audio to your tv over the cable. If they had a DVI port on the motherboard and you had to use an HDMI adapter, you would have no sound. Doing it the other way around though ensures that people who use it for an HTCP like it is intended get their sound, and those who want to use a monitor buy a DVI adapter. You didn't even seem to mention or test the capabilities of sending audio over HDMI!
I don't complain about my laptop not having a DVI out, and when I want to hook it up to my friends 32" HDTV all I have to do is plug in a simple HDMI cable. If I wanted to run and LCD at home I'd buy an adapter.
Great article, specially liked the decrypted video benchmarks as I was indeed expecting a much higher difference.Also was expecting that the single core handled it better as I use a old laptop with pentium M 1500mhz & ATI 9600 as a HTPC and it plays nearly all HD media I trow at it smoothly (Including 1080P)
I have found that even slow CPUs can playback H.264 AVI files; something's going on when playing back a blu-ray, probably the encryption. I was hoping the AnyDVD HD benchmarks would expose this but that's not what we saw. I'll be digging into it further in a future review for sure.
Guys...I own this Gigabyte board. HDCP works over DVI because that's what I use at home. Albeit I go from DVI from the motherboard to HDMI on the TV (don't ask why, it's just the cable I had). I don't have ANYDVD so, I know that it works.
That is really bizarre... are you sure it works? Have you played back protected Blu-ray or HD DVD's over the DVI cable?
During my testing it didn't work at all, and then when I checked around I was led to understand HDCP wasn't supported on the DVI out of that board.
Wow. You seem to be REALLY missing the point here. The whole point of this is for HTCPs, and the nice thing about HDMI is that it can send both video and audio to your tv over the cable. If they had a DVI port on the motherboard and you had to use an HDMI adapter, you would have no sound.
Well, I'll disagree with you that these boards will ONLY be used for HTPCs, as I've stated I believe that these value-priced boards would be attractive to a whole lot of people with decent monitors who would like HD playback.
As for sound, you can certainly play it back over the integrated sound chip instead of HDMI, so I don't think "you would have no sound." is an accurate discription.
Would've been nice to see Intel's X1300HD included.
CnQ on? Why not test 8450e as well? 8200 doesn't work well with Athlon 64 X2, but it seems to work better with Phenom. I don't have blu-ray so I can't confirm how it perform with Phenoms.