best VHS capture solution - Page 2

Neo Neko · 15th March 2002, 22:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Scuba
I have at least 5 S-VHS VCR's from diferant models and makers.

Any recomendations? Can I borrow one?

kopelen · 15th March 2002, 23:26

Quote:

Originally posted by Ookami
Fact is that the noise reduction filters etc. work much better if you capture at full PAL (or NTSC).

Fact is that all the things that Scuba (in his second posting, I highly disagree with "I have a video capture/Edit card that work in Mjpeg codec. The card run on computers from 350Mhz and up.
It give much better quality then all of the display cards/TV Tuner cards all together") mentioned are a fact too .

Fact is that the picture quality CAN be improved.

Fact is that the Asus cards (Chrontel chip) are way superior to all TV tuner cards out there (and to 99% of the mid range cards like DC10,30 etc.).

Fact is that I'm tired to write the same old stuff every week or so...

Fact is that I preached the same (wrong) stuff "Why should I capture a inferior format like VHS at a high resolution?", for months, before the pro's at Ultimateboard PROVED me wrong.

Fact is that you should use a SVHS VR as the tuner for you capture card (the only TV card that has a similar quality is the Asus TV box).

Fact is that my PC is not working like it should . Scuba, check your PM's .

So, test for yourself and THEN post!

Cheers,

Ookami.

I'm a bit troubled about the Chrontel chips and since Ookami constantly mentions the Asus/Chrontel cards being the best of the best, I want to buy one NOW.

Ookami, your posts leave me with more questions to ask. Hopefully I can get some answers out of you or from someone else.

Searching through Google.com using keyword, 'Chrontel CH7007A', I found only three Asus video cards that are equipped with this particular chip.

*V7700 Deluxe - GF2 TI200
*V7100 Deluxe - GF2 MX Series
*V3800TVR - ??

Unfortunately ( I will further verify this ), the GF3 Deluxe does not have the Chrontel chip - it may be that Asus is now using Brooktree chips.

But the question is, after searching for Chrontel chips in Google.com, I only found Chrontel chips to be used for Video-Out and not Video-In. I'm still in the process of understanding about video capturing and just want to know if the Chrontel chips ARE suppose to be used for Video-Out and does this improve overall video quality of captures? I thought it would be the Video-In chip that affects the quality of the source coming in.

After much investigation, I found out that the V7700 Deluxe has a Conexant chip for Video-In and Chrontel chip for Video-Out.

Please someone clarify what I don't understand, thanks.

Also, if I were to buy the V7700 Deluxe and Asus TV box/SVHS VCR, will I be able to capture NTSC TV @ 748x480 res using huffyuv using Virtual Dub ( the res. is most likely not correct - 7xx X 480)?

Thanks.

-kopelen

takeru · 16th March 2002, 03:48

fyi: the asus 8200 T2/T5 deluxe use phillips encoder chips, SAA7108E.

kopelen · 16th March 2002, 05:56

Quote:

Originally posted by takeru
fyi: the asus 8200 T2/T5 deluxe use phillips encoder chips, SAA7108E.

Thanks for replying with that info. Ookami says the Chrontel chips are the best. But IYHO, do you think the Philips is just as good if not better?

takeru · 16th March 2002, 08:19

i have never seen the quality from a chrontel chip, so i can't really compare them.

Ookami · 16th March 2002, 13:44

Hello Kopelen,

first I have searched for days for interesting threads, sites, reviews etc. when I wanted to buy a capture card (that was one year ago)... The people at Ultimatboard.de (closed :-( ), have always praised the Asus 3800 as the best in town

. So it could be that I've remembered the Chrontel chip, but that the Philips chip is the one who does capture job. If this is so, then I apologize. OK, I will no make a quick google search (real time posting

):

No good.

I will try to find my saved technical html page from Asuscom on my HD
Maybe later this day, I'll find it.

Further, the Asus card has excellent quality but buying a GPU for capturing is ALWAYS risky, because:

-if you have a souncard that is crappy or some driver issues you will have to fight with dropped frames.
-it is always more complicated to do a capture from a GPU than with a dedicated capture card

etc.

So, I recommend you to:

a) buy a decent SVHS VCR as the tuner for you future GPU, with Panasonic (the NV-HSxxx series should be good) you are almost always on the winning side :-) . If you are going to buy the Asus 3800, go for a Philips VR 1xxxx . Features that your SVHS VCR should have is TBC and 4 video and 2 audio heads (don't know if this is the right english word?).

b) I will upload these days a short sample of the Asus 3800 capture result, so if it is nothing special (it could be that Scuba will laugh his a$$ off ;-) ), forget it.

> Also, if I were to buy the V7700 Deluxe and Asus TV box/SVHS VCR, will I be able to capture NTSC TV @ 748x480 res using huffyuv using Virtual Dub ( the res. is most likely not correct - 7xx X 480)?

Off course you can capture full PAL (704x576).
But that is nothing special. The main con of my Asus 3800 is that is has VERY few resolutions to choose from, so for PAL I have only 704x576 and 352x288, sadly no 480x576 etc. This is a BIG con for this card...

As I said, I bought this card because 99% of the Ultimateboard mods have a variation of the Asus 3800 + a Philips VR 1xxxx SVHS (because it had a very good price/quality ratio and has a Philips chip in it, like the GPU).

Some clarification:

Conexant is the same as BT (broktree), so it's a big no,no.

The only half good implementation of BT is the Elsa Erazor III, but this card has so many driver issues that is almost impossible to work normal with it.

If all fails buy a dedicated capture card like the DC30+ or something (Scuba, should be the one who can tell you what is good for you), and forget this crappy GPU captureing stuff.

Hope this helped a bit,

Mijo.

Quote:

Originally posted by kopelen

I'm a bit troubled about the Chrontel chips and since Ookami constantly mentions the Asus/Chrontel cards being the best of the best, I want to buy one NOW.

Ookami, your posts leave me with more questions to ask. Hopefully I can get some answers out of you or from someone else.

Searching through Google.com using keyword, 'Chrontel CH7007A', I found only three Asus video cards that are equipped with this particular chip.

*V7700 Deluxe - GF2 TI200
*V7100 Deluxe - GF2 MX Series
*V3800TVR - ??

Unfortunately ( I will further verify this ), the GF3 Deluxe does not have the Chrontel chip - it may be that Asus is now using Brooktree chips.

But the question is, after searching for Chrontel chips in Google.com, I only found Chrontel chips to be used for Video-Out and not Video-In. I'm still in the process of understanding about video capturing and just want to know if the Chrontel chips ARE suppose to be used for Video-Out and does this improve overall video quality of captures? I thought it would be the Video-In chip that affects the quality of the source coming in.

After much investigation, I found out that the V7700 Deluxe has a Conexant chip for Video-In and Chrontel chip for Video-Out.

Please someone clarify what I don't understand, thanks.

Also, if I were to buy the V7700 Deluxe and Asus TV box/SVHS VCR, will I be able to capture NTSC TV @ 748x480 res using huffyuv using Virtual Dub ( the res. is most likely not correct - 7xx X 480)?

Thanks.

-kopelen

kopelen · 17th March 2002, 04:24

Thanks for the reply, Ookami.

I believe my mind is set on the Asus V8200 TI500 Deluxe. I had an 8500DV card (GPU capture card), but I had too much trouble with the drivers and memory issues. This is why I sold the card off and looking for another, perhaps, better card.

One more question, Ookami.

I will need to purchase a VCR ( the Asus TV box is a bit expensive and limited in availability ). Would the Panasonic NV-HSxxx series work great with the V8200 TI500 Deluxe? You mentioned that the features that the VCR should have are :

*TBC
*4 video
*2 audio heads

What is TBC? Last time I bought a VCR I only looked for stereo output (no mono). What advantages are there with these other features?

Will Scuba be able to answer this?

The reason why I want to capture @ Full NTSC is because I have found that this works best for my TV captures. I don't have the cleanest source - U.S. Adelphia analog cable.
I simply capture at full NTSC using huffyuv and encode using Nandub - resize filter to resize it to 640x480,deinterlace the video, and compress the audio.

So does anyone who owns a Asus GF3 TI500 Deluxe know if you can capture @ Full NTSC? Also are there res limitations for the V8200 as well?

Thanks again.

takeru · 17th March 2002, 07:43

kopelen: read this thread also. the 8200T5 can capture up to 768x576 with no drops. chip limit is 800x600, but dunno any prog that goes that high.

kopelen · 17th March 2002, 10:23

Thanks again takeru, I'll be sure to follow the instructions when I get the V8200 TI500 Deluxe.

Ookami · 17th March 2002, 15:11

>Thanks for the reply, Ookami.

Anytime.

>One more question, Ookami.
I will need to purchase a VCR ( the Asus TV box is a bit expensive and limited in availability ). Would the Panasonic NV-HSxxx series work great with the V8200 TI500 Deluxe? You mentioned that the features that the VCR should have are :
What is TBC? Last time I bought a VCR I only looked for stereo output (no mono). What advantages are there with these other features?

AFAIK, the Asus TV box is MUCH, much better than any other TV card/build in tuner in the graphic cards... But if you use a SVHS VCR as a tuner you will get the same (and even better quality).

As I said, I own a Philips VR 1100 (and the Asus TV box), the Panasonic is the Mercedes of the SVHS VCR's :-) .

TBC = Time based corrector. It "cleans up" the video signal. I have some better and more exact defintions, but not in the english language,I will not try to translate them

.

Video+Audio heads: Kika, explained it to me like this (quick translation): "Most of the S-VHS-VCRs have a badder VHS-playback than modern VHS-VCRs. Take a good look at the technical infos.
Modern VHS-VCR's have a resolution >220 lines, a good S-VHS should make the same. This is only possible if it has 4 video heads. (this is probably not translated correctly) You should not count the heads for deleting. ((Wobei man bei S-VHS fliegende Löschköpfe NICHT dazu zählt.))
There is a max. of 6 heads: 4 Video, 2 Audio, there is a difference between 2 Video+2 heads for deleting and 4 "real" video heads.
2+2 is used for editing, 4 is improving the picture quality (only for VHS)."

> Will Scuba be able to answer this?

Scuba, works with proffesional equipment. Unlike 99,9% of the people here

. He can answer anything =:-D .

> The reason why I want to capture @ Full NTSC is because I have found that this works best for my TV captures. I don't have the cleanest source - U.S. Adelphia analog cable.
I simply capture at full NTSC using huffyuv and encode using Nandub - resize filter to resize it to 640x480,deinterlace the video, and compress the audio.
So does anyone who owns a Asus GF3 TI500 Deluxe know if you can capture @ Full NTSC? Also are there res limitations for the V8200 as well?

Full NTSC? I read some quite different numbers like 640x480 and even 720x486... Quote: "When digitizing video, it's important to digitize the full 720 x 486 pixel matrix of the NTSC signal (a total of 349,920 pixels)."

Dunno, but I'm in a PAL country so I don't care

.

>Thanks again.

I hope I answered the question right. And now I don't need to upload the asus test clip with my crappy dial up. Aaaah, I'm saved ;-) .

All the best,

Mijo.

kopelen · 18th March 2002, 03:09

Quote:

Originally posted by Ookami
the Panasonic is the Mercedes of the SVHS VCR's :-) .

Well, I do want the best of the best. It looks like I'll be getting the Panasonic SVHS VCR. Much appreciated once again, Ookami.

Edit :

It looks like the NV series are no longer in production? I checked the Panasonic website and they only have the PV series.

Here is the link

Can Ookami or anyone tell me which of the ten would be the great, as well as affordable?

Thanks again.

Edit :

Wow, I didn't know SVHS VCRs are so expensive. Are there any VHS VCRs be anywhere as good as the SVHS VCRs?

takeru · 18th March 2002, 07:07

kopelen: check here for better pricing. damn that d-vhs drive looks so good

kopelen · 18th March 2002, 20:53

Thanks for the link, takeru

It looks like the Panasonic PV-VS4821 Super VHS VCR is pretty popular is it's sold out nearly in every online store ( except for the ones that are selling them at an expensive price ).

I guess I'm going to have to wait. :sigh:

\AX · 26th September 2002, 07:00

Ookami...you say that asus use's a philips based chip...which is not a conexant. you said that you don't want to use conexant ("a big no no")because of driver issue's and you mad it seem lower quality or something of that line.

This doesn't add up in my search's. I can't find a asus card that doesnt use the conexant chip at all.

If you read this you will see that the newer asus GeForce3 Ti 200 deluxe uses a conexant chip but manufactured by philips. Even sort of sounds like they always have but that is just how it sounds sort of to me.

http://www.de.tomshardware.com/graph...3tix00-05.html

Im not saying your wrong or anything...i just want to know what card i can buy..that is newer and possible to buy at all, that use's what your talking about.

From what i can tell from this information at tomshardware and alot of other reviews/article's is this: If your using a conexant chip manufuactured by philips it wouldnt matter what board it's on...GPU or a dedicated capture card. It would seem to me that it would yield the same performance since it's using the same chip. So in otherwords a iomagic pc pvr (pinnacle pctv) card for 40usd would do the same thing as this Asus GeForce3 Ti 200 deluxe for ~185usd. Also it might be better if it was not on a GPU. Being on a GPU could only and more complexed overhead for your system i would imagine. 40usd for one card with a philips chip...or...180usd for another card with the same philips chip. the 40usd one also has coaxial in for capture...the asus does not. And i know that the tv tuner is also Philips NTSC_M or for atleast the one i got.

Again i just want to know what you mean exactly by a philips manufactured chip that is not conexant (BT) on a asus GPU. And where can i buy a modern one that is new and purchasable.

I really can't find a single Asus GPU that does not have a conexant chip that is currently available for buy.

^^-+I4004+-^^ · 26th September 2002, 13:57

Quote:

Originally posted by \AX

If you read this you will see that the newer asus GeForce3 Ti 200 deluxe uses a conexant chip but manufactured by philips. Even sort of sounds like they always have but that is just how it sounds sort of to me.

http://www.de.tomshardware.com/graph...3tix00-05.html

Again i just want to know what you mean exactly by a philips manufactured chip that is not conexant (BT) on a asus GPU. And where can i buy a modern one that is new and purchasable.

I really can't find a single Asus GPU that does not have a conexant chip that is currently available for buy.

_you got it ALL wrong!
THG doesn't say that,but just that Philips solutions replaced
Bt/Chrontel ones!
Indeed :Philips chips are on (as far as i know) on ALL Asus combo boards...(doo't know of recent boards,but asus 7700 has Philips chipset)

Mijo (Ookami) sent me some examples of his capturing (huff&mjpeg) on Asus & i was able to BEAT those with my cheap bt8x8 card!
(i sent him examples too so he can affirm,but seems that's stuck in mail somewhere...)

if you can get you hands on newer conexant capture chip (mentioned in "Tested capture cards" thread), try that first...
otherwise of asus combo & bt8x8 solution i would pick bt:they are cheaper & have better picture,also more flexible....(according to my Bt experience &
samples of asus capturing...)

cheers_

Ookami · 26th September 2002, 17:05

\AX, there are many threads in this board about comparing different GPUs and capture cards, I suggest you to read those.

As for "I'm wrong or not", when I read my old posting, I've mixed up many firms and names of the chips. Instead of checking first, I've wrote the names I've remembered, wich is not exact.

For instance:

All Asus/nvidia combos use that I'm aware of use a Philips SAAxxxx chip.

The mentioned Erasor has no BT chip but an Micronas.

It seems that the old Asus 3800 implementation is superior to the newer 6600 etc. combos.

The BT cards have a much better quality with relative new open source drivers.

And so on. So I apologize for my mixing up of names (wich I do to often on this board), but I still have to see something wich convinces me that BT is superior to the Philips combo.

Another note: With GPUs you can have quite some quality difference witgh different drivers, OS and so on. With dedicated capture cards you are mostly spared with those software issues (sadly not with hardware issues, most people build their PC around the capture card!).

"Mijo (Ookami) sent me some examples of his capturing (huff&mjpeg) on Asus & i was able to BEAT those with my cheap bt8x8 card!"

As I've stated in my mails to you, my captures cannot be a example of good quality because of the many reasons I've wrote... (not connected directly to the SVHS in, hardware issues, not same testing circumstances

et al) Doesn't matter, I'm still waiting for your package to arrive (almost two weeks now). If your BT samples are going to be much better than mine (as you've stated), then I'll disegard everything I've read and saw until today.

I suggest you to read this thread http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=32516 and those linked in the FAQ. Also do a forum search (here and in the hardware forum).

I agree with, Owen and Ivo, you should first try the new 10bit Conexant chips, as these could (should?) beat all the older implementations.

And a last note, these internet discussions cannot be objective and are always biased (in one way or another), so the best thing would be to go to a hardware shop and test those cards (or to friends etc.)... I would certainly not believe myself .

Cheers,

Mijo.

thorazine · 26th September 2002, 18:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Ookami
I agree with, Owen and Ivo, you should first try the new 10bit Conexant chips, as these could (should?) beat all the older implementations.

There are a few threads on the AVS Forum with some user feedback about this new chipset (mostly about the MSI TVanywhere and the PixelView XCapture):

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...hreadid=141074
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...hreadid=159248

The quality seems to be better but they (still) have software and driver issues.

For those interested in continuing the Philips vs. Conexant war

this link should be interesting:

http://anipeg.yks.ne.jp/topic.html

It features a side-by-side comparison between the conexant 881 and the new philips saa7134 with sample captures. It's in japanese so no idea how biased could be...

\AX · 26th September 2002, 19:00

Ok so any new geforce3 and newer have a philips conexant chip that is 10bit..im thinking atleast.

anyways...i see that he is sending you a sample of his capture. I was wondering if i could do the same via email or snail mail. Just to let you look it over and think what you will of it. Im having a hard time comparing capture's here...although i have several capture cards they all have the same effect i don't want. Maybe you can shed some light on this if you actually see it.

I would love to send you a sample anyway possible just to see what you say about it comparing it to your own caps with your hardware. If you can agree, and i hope you will, tell me how you want it.

Any help on this for me would be greatly appreciated...for im sort of in the dark on comparison since im the only person i know that capture's video with analogue capture cards here locally. So there is no comparison to do with other hardware that i dont have locally.

my email is hugelefthand@yahoo.com

thanks again for repling.

\AX · 26th September 2002, 19:18

Sorry to repost so quickly but i found that the msi tv@nywhere as you probably know has the 10bit ad converter. This is only 60usd. Now would there be a difference in quality if you bought the same chip on a more expensive board. And what other boards support this. Im currently on the order page to buy it since it's sooooo cheap. I think it's worth buy for the price i just wonder if the chip could bring better performance on a another board.

and most importantly...

WILL VDUB and/or AVI_IO work with it...i need to use atleast avi_io but would preffer vdub..but i don't know since vdub is a vfw and this card is a wdm. Can these chip's work in with these application's is teh biggest ? i can think of regarding this new chip.

^^-+I4004+-^^ · 26th September 2002, 20:05

Quote:

Originally posted by Ookami
[B]

And a last note, these internet discussions cannot be objective and are always biased (in one way or another), so the best thing would be to go to a hardware shop and test those cards (or to friends etc.)... I would certainly not believe myself .

Cheers,

Mijo.

YES!you'we hit the nail on the head!!!
the more hardware you try the more you know!
it's just thte question of friendliness of the salesman...

@AX:10bit cheaper/more expensive cards?
quality is mostly determined by capture chip,not other additions on the card:so NO,more expensive cards won't have better picture
(although they can be bundled with better/more software/drivers)

but you can search the net for best drivers for your card too..
(not so much for combo cards:but for bt8x8 there's veriety of drivers...)

will vdub work?
it should !even with wdm drivers there's wrapper that ttranslates to vfw (that vdub understands...)

ps. contact me and you can send me some samples (vidcaps) & if i can beat them i'll send you some....

i doubt Mijo can get into this (samples) ,his hardware is..... hmmm problematic..hehehe(?)

it would be for the best if someone provided us with some web space for "publishing" samples (vidcaps...)

this (for sure) isn't the place for that anymore.....

cheers

Ivo

17th March 2002, 04:24	#27 \| Link
kopelen Registered User Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 21	Thanks for the reply, Ookami. I believe my mind is set on the Asus V8200 TI500 Deluxe. I had an 8500DV card (GPU capture card), but I had too much trouble with the drivers and memory issues. This is why I sold the card off and looking for another, perhaps, better card. One more question, Ookami. I will need to purchase a VCR ( the Asus TV box is a bit expensive and limited in availability ). Would the Panasonic NV-HSxxx series work great with the V8200 TI500 Deluxe? You mentioned that the features that the VCR should have are : TBC 4 video *2 audio heads What is TBC? Last time I bought a VCR I only looked for stereo output (no mono). What advantages are there with these other features? Will Scuba be able to answer this? The reason why I want to capture @ Full NTSC is because I have found that this works best for my TV captures. I don't have the cleanest source - U.S. Adelphia analog cable. I simply capture at full NTSC using huffyuv and encode using Nandub - resize filter to resize it to 640x480,deinterlace the video, and compress the audio. So does anyone who owns a Asus GF3 TI500 Deluxe know if you can capture @ Full NTSC? Also are there res limitations for the V8200 as well? Thanks again. __________________ powered by AMD.

17th March 2002, 10:23	#29 \| Link
kopelen Registered User Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 21	Thanks again takeru, I'll be sure to follow the instructions when I get the V8200 TI500 Deluxe. __________________ powered by AMD.

17th March 2002, 15:11	#30 \| Link
Ookami Xe-Rotaredom Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Croatia Posts: 1,029	>Thanks for the reply, Ookami. Anytime. >One more question, Ookami. I will need to purchase a VCR ( the Asus TV box is a bit expensive and limited in availability ). Would the Panasonic NV-HSxxx series work great with the V8200 TI500 Deluxe? You mentioned that the features that the VCR should have are : What is TBC? Last time I bought a VCR I only looked for stereo output (no mono). What advantages are there with these other features? AFAIK, the Asus TV box is MUCH, much better than any other TV card/build in tuner in the graphic cards... But if you use a SVHS VCR as a tuner you will get the same (and even better quality). As I said, I own a Philips VR 1100 (and the Asus TV box), the Panasonic is the Mercedes of the SVHS VCR's :-) . TBC = Time based corrector. It "cleans up" the video signal. I have some better and more exact defintions, but not in the english language,I will not try to translate them . Video+Audio heads: Kika, explained it to me like this (quick translation): "Most of the S-VHS-VCRs have a badder VHS-playback than modern VHS-VCRs. Take a good look at the technical infos. Modern VHS-VCR's have a resolution >220 lines, a good S-VHS should make the same. This is only possible if it has 4 video heads. (this is probably not translated correctly) You should not count the heads for deleting. ((Wobei man bei S-VHS fliegende Löschköpfe NICHT dazu zählt.)) There is a max. of 6 heads: 4 Video, 2 Audio, there is a difference between 2 Video+2 heads for deleting and 4 "real" video heads. 2+2 is used for editing, 4 is improving the picture quality (only for VHS)." > Will Scuba be able to answer this? Scuba, works with proffesional equipment. Unlike 99,9% of the people here . He can answer anything =:-D . > The reason why I want to capture @ Full NTSC is because I have found that this works best for my TV captures. I don't have the cleanest source - U.S. Adelphia analog cable. I simply capture at full NTSC using huffyuv and encode using Nandub - resize filter to resize it to 640x480,deinterlace the video, and compress the audio. So does anyone who owns a Asus GF3 TI500 Deluxe know if you can capture @ Full NTSC? Also are there res limitations for the V8200 as well? Full NTSC? I read some quite different numbers like 640x480 and even 720x486... Quote: "When digitizing video, it's important to digitize the full 720 x 486 pixel matrix of the NTSC signal (a total of 349,920 pixels)." Dunno, but I'm in a PAL country so I don't care . >Thanks again. I hope I answered the question right. And now I don't need to upload the asus test clip with my crappy dial up. Aaaah, I'm saved ;-) . All the best, Mijo. __________________ "Only those who attempt the absurd achieve the impossible."

18th March 2002, 20:53	#33 \| Link
kopelen Registered User Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 21	Thanks for the link, takeru It looks like the Panasonic PV-VS4821 Super VHS VCR is pretty popular is it's sold out nearly in every online store ( except for the ones that are selling them at an expensive price ). I guess I'm going to have to wait. :sigh: __________________ powered by AMD.

26th September 2002, 07:00	#34 \| Link
\AX Registered User Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 123	Ookami...you say that asus use's a philips based chip...which is not a conexant. you said that you don't want to use conexant ("a big no no")because of driver issue's and you mad it seem lower quality or something of that line. This doesn't add up in my search's. I can't find a asus card that doesnt use the conexant chip at all. If you read this you will see that the newer asus GeForce3 Ti 200 deluxe uses a conexant chip but manufactured by philips. Even sort of sounds like they always have but that is just how it sounds sort of to me. http://www.de.tomshardware.com/graph...3tix00-05.html Im not saying your wrong or anything...i just want to know what card i can buy..that is newer and possible to buy at all, that use's what your talking about. From what i can tell from this information at tomshardware and alot of other reviews/article's is this: If your using a conexant chip manufuactured by philips it wouldnt matter what board it's on...GPU or a dedicated capture card. It would seem to me that it would yield the same performance since it's using the same chip. So in otherwords a iomagic pc pvr (pinnacle pctv) card for 40usd would do the same thing as this Asus GeForce3 Ti 200 deluxe for ~185usd. Also it might be better if it was not on a GPU. Being on a GPU could only and more complexed overhead for your system i would imagine. 40usd for one card with a philips chip...or...180usd for another card with the same philips chip. the 40usd one also has coaxial in for capture...the asus does not. And i know that the tv tuner is also Philips NTSC_M or for atleast the one i got. Again i just want to know what you mean exactly by a philips manufactured chip that is not conexant (BT) on a asus GPU. And where can i buy a modern one that is new and purchasable. I really can't find a single Asus GPU that does not have a conexant chip that is currently available for buy.
$\AX is offline$

16th March 2002, 03:48	#23 \| Link
takeru Anime XviD'er Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 87	fyi: the asus 8200 T2/T5 deluxe use phillips encoder chips, SAA7108E.

16th March 2002, 08:19	#25 \| Link
takeru Anime XviD'er Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 87	i have never seen the quality from a chrontel chip, so i can't really compare them.

17th March 2002, 07:43	#28 \| Link
takeru Anime XviD'er Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 87	kopelen: read this thread also. the 8200T5 can capture up to 768x576 with no drops. chip limit is 800x600, but dunno any prog that goes that high.

18th March 2002, 07:07	#32 \| Link
takeru Anime XviD'er Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 87	kopelen: check here for better pricing. damn that d-vhs drive looks so good

26th September 2002, 17:05	#36 \| Link
Ookami Xe-Rotaredom Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Croatia Posts: 1,029	\AX, there are many threads in this board about comparing different GPUs and capture cards, I suggest you to read those. As for "I'm wrong or not", when I read my old posting, I've mixed up many firms and names of the chips. Instead of checking first, I've wrote the names I've remembered, wich is not exact. For instance: All Asus/nvidia combos use that I'm aware of use a Philips SAAxxxx chip. The mentioned Erasor has no BT chip but an Micronas. It seems that the old Asus 3800 implementation is superior to the newer 6600 etc. combos. The BT cards have a much better quality with relative new open source drivers. And so on. So I apologize for my mixing up of names (wich I do to often on this board), but I still have to see something wich convinces me that BT is superior to the Philips combo. Another note: With GPUs you can have quite some quality difference witgh different drivers, OS and so on. With dedicated capture cards you are mostly spared with those software issues (sadly not with hardware issues, most people build their PC around the capture card!). "Mijo (Ookami) sent me some examples of his capturing (huff&mjpeg) on Asus & i was able to BEAT those with my cheap bt8x8 card!" As I've stated in my mails to you, my captures cannot be a example of good quality because of the many reasons I've wrote... (not connected directly to the SVHS in, hardware issues, not same testing circumstances et al) Doesn't matter, I'm still waiting for your package to arrive (almost two weeks now). If your BT samples are going to be much better than mine (as you've stated), then I'll disegard everything I've read and saw until today. I suggest you to read this thread http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=32516 and those linked in the FAQ. Also do a forum search (here and in the hardware forum). I agree with, Owen and Ivo, you should first try the new 10bit Conexant chips, as these could (should?) beat all the older implementations. And a last note, these internet discussions cannot be objective and are always biased (in one way or another), so the best thing would be to go to a hardware shop and test those cards (or to friends etc.)... I would certainly not believe myself . Cheers, Mijo. __________________ "Only those who attempt the absurd achieve the impossible."

26th September 2002, 19:00	#38 \| Link
\AX Registered User Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 123	Ok so any new geforce3 and newer have a philips conexant chip that is 10bit..im thinking atleast. anyways...i see that he is sending you a sample of his capture. I was wondering if i could do the same via email or snail mail. Just to let you look it over and think what you will of it. Im having a hard time comparing capture's here...although i have several capture cards they all have the same effect i don't want. Maybe you can shed some light on this if you actually see it. I would love to send you a sample anyway possible just to see what you say about it comparing it to your own caps with your hardware. If you can agree, and i hope you will, tell me how you want it. Any help on this for me would be greatly appreciated...for im sort of in the dark on comparison since im the only person i know that capture's video with analogue capture cards here locally. So there is no comparison to do with other hardware that i dont have locally. my email is hugelefthand@yahoo.com thanks again for repling.
$\AX is offline$

26th September 2002, 19:18	#39 \| Link
\AX Registered User Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 123	Sorry to repost so quickly but i found that the msi tv@nywhere as you probably know has the 10bit ad converter. This is only 60usd. Now would there be a difference in quality if you bought the same chip on a more expensive board. And what other boards support this. Im currently on the order page to buy it since it's sooooo cheap. I think it's worth buy for the price i just wonder if the chip could bring better performance on a another board. and most importantly... WILL VDUB and/or AVI_IO work with it...i need to use atleast avi_io but would preffer vdub..but i don't know since vdub is a vfw and this card is a wdm. Can these chip's work in with these application's is teh biggest ? i can think of regarding this new chip.
$\AX is offline$