Best offers
|
GeForce GTX 295 Video Card (1.75GB,... | $549.99 Dell Home More info |
|
GeForce GTX 260 Video Card (896MB,... | $214.99 Newegg.com More info |
|
GeForce 9800 GTX Video Card (512MB,... | $219.85 PC Connection More info |
|
Radeon HD 5770 Video Card (1GB,... | $179.99 Newegg.com More info |
|
Radeon HD 4890 Cyclone OC Video Card... | $216.70 PC Connection More info |
- hd 3200 benchmark
- radeon 3200 performance
- h.264 codec for vista
- radeon vs geforce
- radeon 3200 vs geforce 8200
- radeon 3200 benchmark
- geforce 8200 graphics
- radeon hd 3200 benchmarks
- windows h.264 codec
- ati radeon hd 3200 vs geforce 8200
- radeon 3200 benchmarks
- geforce 8200 1080p
- 780g vs 8200
- radeon vs geforce chart
- is a radeon hd 3200 good
Partners
The Games selection
adventure :
Scoobydoo: Episode 2
The sequel of Scooby and Sammy's adventures. Same principle as in the previous episode (available on this website). Click on "Instructions" to see...
|
crazy :
Xiao Xiao 7
A great fight scene from the animation movies Xiao Xiao.
|
Sponsored links
- Email |
- Print |
- Comments (60) |
- Share
Now that we’ve examined the image quality, let’s have a close look at raw playback performance. Are these integrated solutions fast enough at the 1920x1080 progressive resolution with a dual-core 4800+ CPU?
We’ll test these motherboards with three different Blu-ray disks, each one created with a different video codec: “The Fifth Element: Remastered” is our H.264 title, “300” is our VC-1 title, and “Tomb Raider” is our MPEG2 title.
First, we’ll examine the toughest codec to play back, which is the one that requires the most processing resources and is therefore the most difficult on the hardware: H.264.
At first look, it seems the GeForce 8200 is breathing a little easier than the Radeon 3200, but first looks can be deceiving. See how the Radeon delivers more consistent performance and the GeForce fluctuates wildly? What this reflects—and what you can’t see from this chart—is that even though CPU usage is below 100%, the GeForce 8200 has trouble playing at this resolution and is dropping frames.
This frame dropping is obvious during playback on the 8200, but playback on the Radeon 3200 appears totally smooth. The frame dropping on the GeForce 8200 appears linked to the resolution — it does a much smoother job at 1280x720 progressive resolution (more on that later). But let’s finish looking at the CPU benchmarks using the other, easier codecs before digging deeper into this issue.
The old MPEG2 codec is clearly taking a much smaller toll on our graphics processors. Both solutions are playing back smoothly in this title. While the GeForce has a slight CPU usage advantage, it’s hardly worth mentioning. Finally, the VC-1 codec:
The VC-1 codec shows us similar results to MPEG-2, with the GeForce and Radeon providing nearly identical CPU utilization performance.
Frankly, while the CPU utilization numbers are showing a close race, we’re still concerned with the GeForce 8200’s frame skipping behavior we saw using the demanding H.264 codec. Let’s dig a little deeper into that specific issue by concentrating on the H.264 codec and seeing what happens at different resolutions.
- 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...
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.