Quiet AGP card to do 1080p H264 decoding?

[pnag]

I'm back again, and again hopefully not in the wrong forum so apologies if I am!

I'm looking to smack an AGP card into either an AMD 64 3000+ or an AMD XP 2700+ to do hardware H264 decoding up to 1080p that will ease the CPU.

The 3000+ even with CoreAVC is struggling to play 1080i files! The mobo will also only take AGP, so no PCI express for me :(

Any and all advice welcome!

Cheers,
PnaG.

[dumbas..]

I think you will find that the limit is your processor not the video card.
I have a A64 3200+ and with either a ati 9600 or 9800 and 1Gb ram, I can not decode 1080 h.264
without problems (stutters/sync in audio) and cpu up at 100%. Even if the CPU is below that,
you still need a good overhead to cope with peak decoding.

There aren't many agp cards that will give you what you want.

I tend to down convet to 1280*720p x264 to get the best out of my setup.

Looks like your in a similar position... Looking into your wallet and hoping for a miracle:D
Others may disagree!

[Pookie]

Which version of CoreAVC are you running? The old Alpha version from Jan 2006 is not as fast as the commercial version. For $10, invest in that first. Also, link to a file that you can't play.

And, when was the last time you upgraded your DirectX and Video Drivers ?

I can play 1080i on my POS 2.4GHZ P4 533FSB

[Turtleggjp]

I wouldn't get too optimistic about any video card helping you out with that yet. I tried a couple of the lower end ones (X1300 & 7600GT, both PCI Express) that could supposedly help, but with no luck. I'm not ready to shell out several hundred bucks for a higher end card that might do better, but maybe someone else with one can comment.

My Athlon64 X2 4600+ (2.4 GHz) can play a 1080p clip I encoded with X264 pretty well with CoreAVC, but I was hoping for a lesser CPU coupled with a good video card that could handle it. That's why I'm sticking with XviD for another season...

I've read some of the system requirements for upcoming Blu Ray and HD DVD playback on your computer, and despite all the acceleration these cards are supposed to be doing, they still recommend high end CPUs (Athlon64 FX or X2) :eek:

[pnag]

Okay... so I've got a few to tackle!

dumbas.. - you say your card is a "ati 9600 or 9800", but neither of these cards claim to be able to do H.264 decoding, so of course it's all offloaded onto the CPU; the card isn't built to do it!

Pookie - thanks for the suggestion - I'm always bang up to date as regards directX and drivers though. I've tried the alternative Omega drivers for my ATI, but no luck... As regards the commercial version of CoreAVC - I'll be sure to try that!

Turtleggjp - fair enough, but neither the X1300 nor the 7600GT claim to be able to decode 1080i/p in hardware, so again the point's moot.

I'm just wondering if there *are* any cards that can do it - apparently there's an ATI all-in-wonder that can, and is AGP? (That's H264 decode, and up to 1080p). I know I found it in an online ATI brochure or something, but I've not been able to find it since...

Anyone got any ideas?

Cheers, and thanks for the feedback!

PnaG.

[Dark Eiri]

About 1080p, I can play it with my A64 3200+ Venice, socket 754, no overclock, 1 GB RAM. GeForce 6200 (total crap, but I don't play games on PC, so it's fine), CoreAVC.

Maybe the best money I ever used on my PC.

[pnag]

Okey dokey! I know CoreAVC has some hardware options though - are you using them?

And is it H264 1080p?

Cheers!
PnaG.

[DrNein]

Short answer: Gigabyte 7600GS and Cyberlink H.264 decoder for the AMD 64 3000.

The XP seems doomed due to lacking the minimum SSE2. But the 64 can take advantage of Avivo or PureVideo hardware in combination with a suitable decoder. You did not mention the importance of budget, 3D performance or output (single or dual DVI) but there are a number of options from the X16xx and 7600 series (plus the forthcoming X1950). Another possibility are the later model 6800 (only the native PCIe with HSI bridge otherwise the PVP component is defective) but they run hotter and consume more power then the 7 series.

AFAIK, only the Gigabyte 7600GS comes with passive cooling so anything else would require modifying to be silent. But the Leadtek version with fan is at least quiet and also available in the higher-end GT.

An advantage to the ATI route is they generally utilize less CPU resources for decoding than NVIDIA (certainly with MPEG-2 and in the absence of specific HWA such as with software MPEG-4) but from the tests I have seen H.264 HWA is equivalent. Also, for ATI a Cyberlink H.264 player/decoder is available for $15 versus significantly higher for a suitable version of PowerDVD or addition of the required H.264 pack.

As for CoreAVC, it may be relatively fast for software (no DXVA yet) but if you also want to be able to use the PC for other tasks at the same time then hardware is the only way to go. Benchmarks showing a frame rate beyond that which is required for the video (24-60 FPS) are irrelevant compared to CPU utilization.

Hope that helps :)

-
If the commercial version of CoreAVC is supposed to be better, is there not a demo/trial to avoid the risk of wasting $10-20? Can't reach their site right now.

[pnag]

If I could show you this?

http://www.komplett.ie/k/ki.asp?sku=324393

That do you think? The Gigabyte one's don't seem to be on sale anywhere...

And it probably will be future proofed for HD-DVD/Bluray playback (with the appropriate drive, of course)?

More I look at it, a dedicated media PC might be the way to go?

[bond]

http://www.nvidia.com/page/purevideo_support.html

[Turtleggjp]

Right, so according to that list, the 7600GT I have (PCI Express, but while silent is also quite big) should be able to handle HD H.264 content. However, I have yet to see it actually work that way. It could be that my test clip is one I made using X264. Could it be that I used too many advanced AVC features that are not supported by the card or the decoder?

[Pookie]

http://www.behardware.com/news/8117/coreavc-stronger-than-avivo-purevideo.html

And, you can do a performance comparison with this:

http://haali.cs.msu.ru/mkv/timeCodec.exe

[dumbas..]

dumbas.. - you say your card is a "ati 9600 or 9800", but neither of these cards claim to be able to do H.264 decoding, so of course it's all offloaded onto the CPU; the card isn't built to do it!

PnaG.

Yep, well aware of that...

My point was that it DOES take a large amount of processor usage to do as you ask.. My Pc having a higher 'spec' processor than the ones you quoted.

One last suggestion. I have found KM Player with Core AVC Dec., will work quite well on 1080p just don't expect it to work without stutter on VRM9. Try the other render option in the advanced menu and see what happens.

Give the player a try?

[Blue_MiSfit]

Your athlon64, what socket is it on? If it's 754 then disregard this, but if it's 939, then just get a dual core :) CoreAVC should be happy then!

~misfit

[DrNein]

pnag, the cooler on that Club3D doesn't look too bad but if you want HD-DVD/Blue-ray playback then HDCP compliance is required (for both the card and display). That is not yet a standard feature, particularly on these lower to mid-range cards. There's a list of potential candidates at hardforum (http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1071342).

I wouldn't put to much credence in behardware's results as they are now seven months old and obviously the drivers and DXVA decoders have matured since then.

Turtleggjp, what CPU and decoder are you using? I would suggest testing with QT HD clips from Apple as it is then easy to compare results with other users.

I just tested the Perfume trailer (http://www.apple.com/trailers/dreamworks/perfume/hd/) (the 1080p one is actually 1920x1080p while other so labelled trailers are not necessarily but may be 1920x816p, for instance). Average CPU usage was about 35% with P4 @ 3.52, 7600GT & Cyberlink. So, plenty of resources left for other tasks.

Lowered frequency to 3000 (should be equivalent to AMD "3000+", no?) and average system CPU usage was about 40-45%. This is going by a large history graph on the Task Manger Performance tab.

[Turtleggjp]

Turtleggjp, what CPU and decoder are you using? I would suggest testing with QT HD clips from Apple as it is then easy to compare results with other users.

When I was doing my tests, I was using a Sempron 2800+ (AM2, 1.6 GHz) and either a Radeon X1300 or a GeForce 7600GT. I tried Cyberlink, Nero, and CoreAVC. I know (now) this is not an ideal setup, but I was hoping to build as slow and cool of a system as I could for this purpose (HTPC). I had hoped that just like MPEG2 acceleration, I could get a simple CPU and GPU and play things just fine. The conclusion I have come to is that I will have to wait a while for this to happen, as AVC acceleration is still pretty new.

I did not use any of the Apple clips for my tests for a couple reasons. First, my goal of using this system to playback AVC was not for short trailers made by Apple, but to playback my TV episodes that I capture and convert to 1080p using X264. Since this is not yet feasible without high end hardware, I'm sticking with XviD this season. Secondly, I think I went to Apple's site a few times, but was unable to download any of the clips (I probably could have tried harder, but didn't). I think that if I had streamed them, it would have used the Quick Time player which not only did I not have installed at the time, but I've also heard it sucks. Again, not what I'm trying to use this system for, so not a good test for me. If you are interested in how well my hardware does with these Apple clips, I can try again.

That review of the AVC codecs was quite interesting. It's too bad they only used high end graphics cards from both brands. I'd be interested to see how the lower end ones did too, since that's what I have. I think in my tests, CoreAVC came out on top as well. I think that even the little 1.6 GHz Sempron was able to play the clip with minimal skipping. I also tried playing it on my more powerful computer (Athlon64 X2 4600+ 2.4 GHz) and it played great with CoreAVC.

[Blue_MiSfit]

It's been said, but CABAC makes a HUGE impact on decoding speed when you are doing 1080p.

Disabling it is often worth it. My system can not play 1080p with CABAC using CoreAVC. It's silky smooth with CAVLC!

~MiSfit

[oddball]

You will only get H.264 acceleration on Nvidia Purevideo if you have an SSE2 capable CPU. Anything like a AMD 3200 XP and the Nvidia drivers will not accelerate it. Blame Nvidia for this limitation. I do!

[ntropy]

You will only get H.264 acceleration on Nvidia Purevideo if you have an SSE2 capable CPU. Anything like a AMD 3200 XP and the Nvidia drivers will not accelerate it. Blame Nvidia for this limitation. I do!

What about the Sapphire ATI X1950 PRO AGP -- does ATI impose the same limitation on systems without SSE2 capable CPUs? I'd like to decode 1080p h264 on a Socket A system and wondered if this card could do it.

[Pookie]

Socket A = 1080 NO = 720 YES

Upgrade your Mobo and Proc to an Intel 4300 Duo Core. You'll still be able to use your DDR-1 RAM and AGP video card with it. Around $230 for the chip and a motherboard. 2+ times faster than an AthlonXP 3200.

[legoman666]

you do realise this thread is >5 months old.

[ntropy]

you do realise this thread is >5 months old.

I had hoped that between the release of Catalyst 6.9 (when this thread started) and Catalyst 7.4 (now), that ATI might have come up with a driver update miracle that would unlock hidden 1080p playback capabilities in AGP socket A systems, similar to how the MyHD PCI card opens up 1080i MPEG2 playback capabilities to Pentium III systems. But I can start a new thread (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=125263) if you want.

[ronnylov]

If you are lucky perhaps Nvidia 8600 cards will be released in AGP format.

http://www.theinquirer.org/default.aspx?article=37790

The 8600 is really good at offloading the CPU at h.264 playback:
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2977

[ntropy]

If you are lucky perhaps Nvidia 8600 cards will be released in AGP format.

http://www.theinquirer.org/default.aspx?article=37790

The 8600 is really good at offloading the CPU at h.264 playback:
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2977

That's interesting that they only accelerate h.264 and not VC-1. I wonder if ATI's Universal Video Decoder will do both?