Samsung TV and HTPC

[pirlouy]

Hello,

I've done some tests I've never really done since I'm rather a casual "plug & play" user. Maybe you're all aware of what is below, maybe you'll learn something but I do not pretend to have a lot of knowledge, it's just information I share.
I have a Samsung LCD TV from 2009 (xxBxxx) but I think the concept is the same for 2013 TVs.

When using good renderer like madVR, you expect your display to let madVR do all images treatment. But unfortunately, there's a good chance your TV does a lot of post-processing stuff which will interfere with what you would have expected.

Indeed, Post-processing is done on all your HDMI entries. There's one exception and you have to respect these conditions:

1) You have to use HDMI 1 (tagged as "DVI") entry. All others have post-processing forced.
2) You have to go to a special menu in your TV to rename this HDMI 1 entry to "PC" or "PC DVI".
3) You have to use 1920x1080 @ 60Hz only. Don't try to use 24 or 50Hz, or you'll have post-processing enabled. I know some of you use 24Hz by habit/reflex, but you have to be aware of that.

If you respect all these conditions, then the display will act as a monitor and you should notice it in menu with a lot of menus "grayed out". The only difference I've noticed with another monitor, it's a BGR one; I think RGB is most common for monitors.

Some settings you'll have to checked if you use this mode: madVR has to be settled in 0-255 color range. Try to disable the maximum of AMD/nVidia options. In your TV menu, you might have a HDMI black level, you have to use "Normal" and not "Low". Try to use test files to verify no calibration error, or even LCD monitor calibration websites.

--

So, what is the best ? TV as a monitor with madVR doing all stuff, or let Samsung does the post-processing ? Good question, and I think it will depend on people.

In my case, I've tried to compare and it seems image quality is better when in "monitor" mode and madVr does everything, but there are so much post-processing options with Samsung (I've tried to disable all but some are always active like the dynamic contrast APL even if you disable "dynamic contrast" in options).
The only drawback I see is the fact it's 60Hz only. With 24 or 25 fps videos I guess it's not the ideal. I've tried to disable "Smooth Motion Frame Rate Conversion" (FRC), and indeed, the first seconds you really notice the 3:2 pulldown, but it's just an habit, after some seconds, your eyes get used to. With FRC enabled, you don't notice it since the beginning, even with 25fps videos, so to me, it looks like TV settled as monitor is the best choice.

About post-processing, if you want to really notice Samsung post-processing, you can use the famous AVS black clipping test file. This file show some bars blinking at the right of the screen. With Samsung post-processing, even if you disable all the possible options, you will see all the screen blinking: just display the Samsung menu and you will notice this very menu blinks too.
There are also some anti-aliasing post-processing always enabled: just open a text file and you will notice it. Of course you'll say it's not important we do not read small text when watching movie, but I guess it can interfere with madshi upscaling algorithms.

I don't know about other brands, but like they often mimic competitors, I would not be surprised if we have the same behavior. It's too bad there's not a 24 or 50Hz monitor mode, but maybe there's a technical reason...

PS: It's strange to sell a "Game Mode" when there's still post-processing slowing down rendering (not good for Online FPS). But I guess the "Game Mode" is here to enable specific algorithms like anti-aliasing which often is the weakness of video cards / consoles.

Sorry for grammar or spelling (PM if something hurts your eyes).

[huhn]

I don't know about other brands, but like they often mimic competitors, I would not be surprised if we have the same behavior. It's too bad there's not a 24 or 50Hz monitor mode, but maybe there's a technical reason...

just no my "old" Phillips tv build in 2011 week 11 got pc mode for all hdmi inputs and is unlimited rgb 4:4:4. supports 23, 24, 25, 29, 30, 50, 59, 60 hz as input without post processing.

i'm pretty sure nearly all newer tv's can do the same.

have you checked your tv i it is a 4:2:2 or 4:2:2 ? http://madshi.net/madVR/ChromaRes.png

my tv is only 4:4:4 in pc mode.

[Qaq]

I suppose all TV matrixes are x60 (or x50) anyway, so you can't do much there. You only can try to find a lesser evil for the whole setup.

[huhn]

but they do a pretty nice job on displaying it right.
you can some times read that tvs use 96 hz for 24 mode so not sure...

but there is no real evil anymore

[pirlouy]

My TV (in monitor mode) is in 4:2:2 according to this image. Is there a setting in madVR to adapt for this case ?
So... It looks like some brands are better when using PC Mode. Do you know some brands who offer a 24Hz through 96Hz ?

[huhn]

My TV (in monitor mode) is in 4:2:2 according to this image. Is there a setting in madVR to adapt for this case ?
no

all i know is that it works fine with my.

a friend of me has an older Phillips (i was about 3-4 times a expansive as my was) i think from 2008 there is no pc mode but 23 hz was no problem.

23 hz in windows is 24000/1001 nearly all bds are 23 hz not 24 with 24 hz you get a frame drop every ~42 sec.

to be totally honest i haven't seen a tv who can't handle 23 hz today. but a lot can't display 4:4:4.
i don't know what my display did. but some times you can read this "24hz (5:5 pulldown)" all philips have a pc mode you can read about this in the Manuel but new display should do this perfectly too i heared sharp got problems with 4:4:4 i was interested in a Sharp Aquos LC-60LE652E but all i read about it was it can't handle 4:4:4 so i gave up on it.

[maco07]

I had set my rig on DVI-PC with full RGB 4:4:4 for desktop and gaming and use Autofrequency to play movies in 24Hz mode (to take advantage of anti blur "Clear" mode and local dimming), just with right click, play with Autofrequency. Then autofrequency calls Potplayer.

[pirlouy]

but all i read about it was it can't handle 4:4:4 so i gave up on it.
Where do you find this kind of information ? It's hard to find useful information in the manual. In general there are only approximations, and no technical details.

For the record, the TV I got is able to display 23,24,25,30,50,59,60 Hz, but not in "monitor" mode and it is what I don't like. But to be honest, I don't see judder with madVR FRC.
For the 4:2:2 thing, I guess it's not really a problem since Blu-Ray are in 4:2:0, but maybe I underestimate this.

[huhn]

For the 4:2:2 thing, I guess it's not really a problem since Blu-Ray are in 4:2:0, but maybe I underestimate this.

it's not the end of the world but the way a pc works and the way madvr works is the "problem"

if you play a bd in madvrit gets yuv 4:2:0 this is upscailed to 4:4:4 and after resizing and so on dithered to rgb24

but your tv gets a rgb 24 pic and changed this to yuv 4:2:2 again and later to 4:4:4 and rgb again... this is not the best way to do this...

the difference in a pc game is very visible!

Where do you find this kind of information ? It's hard to find useful information in the manual. In general there are only approximations, and no technical details.

i just read about this in a forum. from people who got one.
but a tv with pc mode is way more likely to support 4:4:4 then a tv without. the best way to find a tv with 4:4:4 and unlimited support is to look a round in forums or ask in forums user who got one.

For the record, the TV I got is able to display 23,24,25,30,50,59,60 Hz, but not in "monitor" mode and it is what I don't like. But to be honest, I don't see judder with madVR FRC.

yeah madvr does an awesome job with smooth motion! there is a high chance that tvs do the same like madvr.

[pirlouy]

but your tv gets a rgb 24 pic and changed this to yuv 4:2:2 again and later to 4:4:4 and rgb again... this is not the best way to do this...
Are there some TV who handle 4:4:4 RGB without this kind of conversion ? Or you have to have a RGB-> YUV-> RGB (without loss if TV handle 4:4:4) ?

(Thank you for all your information)

[Asmodian]

There are some TVs that do not have any conversions, at least as far as anyone can tell. :p

Not that I am willing to name specific brands & models. ;)

[pirlouy]

Please do ! :D
Huhn seems to have a good feeling with Philips TV. It looks to me it is not the same for Samsung (only 1 HDMI able to be used as monitor, and only 60Hz, and maybe 4:2:2 but not confirmed on recent models).

[maco07]

Please do ! :D
Huhn seems to have a good feeling with Philips TV. It looks to me it is not the same for Samsung (only 1 HDMI able to be used as monitor, and only 60Hz, and maybe 4:2:2 but not confirmed on recent models).

Anyone can test it with a pattern like this:

http://i.imgur.com/gTsKnxk.png

Edit: image link

[pirlouy]

Edit: thanks maco07
huhn also gave a test image from madshi: http://madshi.net/madVR/ChromaRes.png

In my case, my Samsung TV is a 4:2:2.

[huhn]

Plus huhn also gave a test image from madshi: http://madshi.net/madVR/ChromaRes.png
thank madshi! by the way it is easy to find:

If you want to test whether your display supports RGB in 4:2:0, 4:2:2 or 4:4:4, you can use this test image. Make sure you display it with 1:1 pixel mapping, otherwise it won't work.

http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=1271414&postcount=1

Huhn seems to have a good feeling with Philips TV.
that's way i got this one. but i'm pretty sure this isn't spezial anymore.

but there is also a problem with these tvs all gpu i have ever tested think this display is limited color range. so i need the madNvLevelsTweaker, reg hacks with intel or i have to change this in the gpu driver from amd. if you don't know this you get milk black and bad white.

[Qaq]

my Samsung TV is a 4:2:2.Did you try to set it to PC mode (HDMI input to "PC", but better read the manual)?

[huhn]

he called that monitor mode so yeah he did that!

[hello_hello]

I've done some tests I've never really done since I'm rather a casual "plug & play" user. Maybe you're all aware of what is below, maybe you'll learn something but I do not pretend to have a lot of knowledge, it's just information I share.
I have a Samsung LCD TV from 2009 (xxBxxx) but I think the concept is the same for 2013 TVs.

Well thanks for sharing as I've learned something.
My TV's a Samsung Plasma, around 2 years old. The manual does little but state the obvious, and I've always wondered why HDMI 1 is the "PC input", given it never seemed any different to the other HDMI inputs.
I'd already set everything up according to the conditions you listed, but I generally run it at 50Hz (I use Reclock to watch everything at 25fps). So I switched to 60Hz and checked the picture menu, and sure enough.... it looks exactly like the menu when using the VGA input. I think the same menu items are greyed out with the exception black level. The "Movie" picture mode is no longer available, just as it's not when using VGA.

For me, displaying a still picture (especially a lot of white) at 60Hz seems to produce a flicker, similar to CRT refresh rate flicker, I guess. Maybe that's a plasma thing or just my brain. I don't see it at 50Hz.
There does seem to be some post-processing happening at 50Hz.
The anti-aliasing can be seen when viewing text.
The AVS black clipping test file (assuming I found the correct one) doesn't cause any blinking in either TV or monitor mode, but when displaying a window with a white background there's an obvious difference between the two. The TV seems to reduce the brightness according to how much white there is on the screen. That process is very stable in PC mode. In TV mode, often after resizing a window the white background will flash a little before it settles down.
The picture is sharper in TV mode (displaying a still image). I only run the sharpness at 20% anyway, but it surprised me I had to reduce it to 0% before it looked about the same as PC mode (50% sharpness by default).

At least now when (very) occasionally I think I see a bit of a jump in brightness during a static scene I'll know I'm not imaging things.

So can someone tell me..... under advanced picture settings there's a Colour Space option and the choices are "Auto" or "Native".
The TV's "tooltip" describes Auto as "setting the colour range depending on the input source" and Native as "setting a colour range wider than the input video source".
Could someone please tell me what that means?

[hello_hello]

http://madshi.net/madVR/ChromaRes.png
In my case, my Samsung TV is a 4:2:2.

According to that image, I guess mine is too (HDMI PC mode).

[pirlouy]

So can someone tell me..... under advanced picture settings there's a Colour Space option and the choices are "Auto" or "Native".
Could someone please tell me what that means?
When I had search the Internet for this, I had not found a lot of information. If I remember well, "Native" is Samsung attempt to have a better display, but often it's not optimum and people recommend "Auto".
If you open Paint, try to display some "known" color (like blue, yellow, red, green) and choose what seems to be the best to your eyes.

When I was using "Native", Yellow was ugly, with "Auto" it was correct to me. But maybe there have been some improvements from Samsung since then.

[mark0077]

hmm always thought my Samsung Series 9 from 2008 (euro equivalent of LN46A950) was 4:4:4 in 60hz PC Mode that I always use. Testing with patterns from this samsung thread official-4-4-4-chroma-subsampling-thread (http://www.avsforum.com/t/1381724/official-4-4-4-chroma-subsampling-thread)(and the thread itself) seems to indicate its 4:4:4 but madshis test pattern here lights up really bright 4:2:2

http://madshi.net/madVR/ChromaRes.png

Is the fact that 4:2:2 lights up but I can also clearly see the 4:4:4 (but darker than 4:2:2) an indication of 4:2:2 or 4:4:4?

Regards,
Mark

[hello_hello]

When I had search the Internet for this, I had not found a lot of information. If I remember well, "Native" is Samsung attempt to have a better display, but often it's not optimum and people recommend "Auto".
If you open Paint, try to display some "known" color (like blue, yellow, red, green) and choose what seems to be the best to your eyes.

When I was using "Native", Yellow was ugly, with "Auto" it was correct to me. But maybe there have been some improvements from Samsung since then.

Ah yes.....

I hadn't thought I could see a difference between them before, but when displaying a large block of colour like that I could. Mainly for red and green, although the difference wasn't huge. For some reason with my TV it seemed to make no difference to yellow.

I went back to displaying a video and had trouble picking a difference between the two settings. In the end I had to pause a cartoon with large blocks of colour to reliably see a change, so I guess for my TV the difference is fairly subtle, but "auto" seemed to be correct.... I think.

Thanks.

[Asmodian]

Is the fact that 4:2:2 lights up but I can also clearly see the 4:4:4 (but darker than 4:2:2) an indication of 4:2:2 or 4:4:4?

It should look similar to the way it does on a PC monitor or smart phone/tablet (view it at 1:1 of course). At 4:4:4 you can see the 4:2:2 but it looks "liney" and is faint. The 4:4:4 is almost invisible on a non-4:4:4 display.

[Dallen]

Whats up with these random questions? Does ANYONE know the answer to them?

My PS64E8005 supports 4:4:4 in PC mode.
One thing I don't understand, should I output 4:4:4 in LAV or any other place to take full advantage of it?

[hello_hello]

Given we're talking about TV modes and refresh rates etc, I have a question someone may know the answer to. It's always bugged me....

Why (I'm running XP) are the lower refresh rates labelled as "interlaced" in Windows Display Properties when it appears they're progressive? Maybe I'm missing something obvious.

http://i39.tinypic.com/2wew6di.gif

[maco07]

Given we're talking about TV modes and refresh rates etc, I have a question someone may know the answer to. It's always bugged me....

Why (I'm running XP) are the lower refresh rates labelled as "interlaced" in Windows Display Properties when it appears they're progressive? Maybe I'm missing something obvious.



I have to manually add those resolutions.

[pirlouy]

One thing I don't understand, should I output 4:4:4 in LAV or any other place to take full advantage of it?
If you use LAV filters default settings, you won't lose anything. But there's a good chance your source is not 4:4:4 so it's not a problem.

The only drawback of not having 4:4:4 when watching videos, it's the fact you won't benefit from madVR chroma upscaling (if I don't say bullshit) but it's really not important I think, compared to the quality of your source file.

It's different for judder which can be noticed more easily. It will always be better to have a display which can use 23,24,25,30 multiple display refresh rate.

[Asmodian]

The only drawback of not having 4:4:4 when watching videos, it's the fact you won't benefit from madVR chroma upscaling (if I don't say bullshit) but it's really not important I think, compared to the quality of your source file.

I do not agree. madVR gives you close to optimal RGB (with user control over the conversion and dithering). If you let the TV do a RGB -> YUV (4:2:2) -> RGB conversion after that you lose much of the benefit of using madVR in the first place, Jinc resize would certainly be a waste. :(

My PS64E8005 supports 4:4:4 in PC mode.
One thing I don't understand, should I output 4:4:4 in LAV or any other place to take full advantage of it?

It is true you do not need to set 4:4:4 in LAV for 4:2:0 or 4:2:2 sources, leave the scaling to madVR. You do need to make sure the video card is sending RGB to the TV and the TV is in a mode which does not have an internal conversion to YUV 4:2:2.

It's different for judder which can be noticed more easily. It will always be better to have a display which can use 23,24,25,30 multiple display refresh rate.

Sorry but I disagree here too. :)
If your video card can do it madVR's smooth motion works very well and allows the use of a 60 Hz RGB mode (PC mode) with better overall quality than the same TV in a YUV 4:2:2 23/24 Hz mode. In my opinion, of course. ;)

[JanWillem32]

I mostly agree with Asmodian. Many make the thinking error of that rendering of 4:2:0 video happens in some 4:2:0 color space/format. It does not. To be able to properly render something at all, you have to get rid of chroma down-sampling and the mess that is Y'CbCr in one of the first steps of a filtering chain. After rendering is all done, reverting to 4:2:0 or 4:2:2 will have the usual downgrade of quality. On top of that, the usual processing in the hardware happens inside the usual 8-bit integer {[16, 235], [16, 240], [16, 240]} intervals, which is extremely poor. Banding is a very common consequence. (Note that the 10-bit format for Y'CbCr isn't that much better either.)
Eliminating artifacts by simply disabling any digital processing done after the renderer should be a lot easier... It unfortunately seems to be different on far too many consumer display devices and graphics adapters. It's also nasty that on many devices that you're so limited in the available refresh rates. Even CRTs from decades ago could just accept a decent range of input refresh rates (often genlocked, but that's okay).
Changing the filter that does chroma up-sampling (in this case from madVR to LAV filters) does not help at all with the matter at hand here. The issue is purely in the steps after the video renderer up to the viewed output.

[pirlouy]

Is there a way (setting) to tell madVR to upscale to 4:2:2 instead of 4:4:4 ?
Is it possible the GPU card is the one responsible of 4:2:2 conversion (instead of display) ?

[Asmodian]

madVR renders in RGB which by definition does not and cannot have subsampled color. RGB is also the native format of nearly all displays, though some are BGR or RGBY.

It is easy to have the video card convert to YUV 4:2:2 when using HDMI out; the drivers should have the option to send YUV 4:2:2, YUV 4:4:4, or RGB. When using madVR RGB is the correct setting.

[pirlouy]

Ahh... I've checked again, and when in monitor mode, I'm in 4:4:4 actually.
I guess I was not in 60Hz when I checked the other day. :/

[hello_hello]

Ahh... I've checked again, and when in monitor mode, I'm in 4:4:4 actually.
I guess I was not in 60Hz when I checked the other day. :/

Ditto for me too. I checked again and I guess I wasn't in 60hz mode when I checked the first time either.

So what's happening when it's not in monitor mode and it's 4:2:2?
I assume that means the TV is internally converting it to YUV 4:2:2, but I don't quite understand why it does that.

[JanWillem32]

So what's happening when it's not in monitor mode and it's 4:2:2?
I assume that means the TV is internally converting it to YUV 4:2:2, but I don't quite understand why it does that.Most video processing hardware is really poor quality. Down-grading the input to Y'CbCr 4:2:2 and such to be able to do processing is a common thing.

[Asmodian]

I believe it is a memory bandwidth limitation, 4:2:2 needs 2/3 the bandwidth and buffer sizes of 4:4:4 for the sharpening etc. chip. :p

[JanWillem32]

It depends, 8-bit 4:2:2 uses 16 bits per pixel, 8-bit 4:4:4 takes 24 bits per pixel, 12-bit 4:2:2 uses 24 bits per pixel, 12-bit 4:4:4 takes 36. The highest (but still reasonable) consumption of memory would be single precision floating-point, taking 96 or 128 bits per pixel (depending on alpha/extra channel) for 4:4:4.
Note that 4:4:4 forms can differ, too. There's not just Y'CbCr, R'G'B', RGB and such. There are even more complicated color formats available to get a better color model of world-to-human vision.

[leeperry]

And +90% of those TV's are used to exclusively watch 4:2:0 DVB-T/DVD/BD, so why would they care about 4:4:4 processing in the first place? Would people be willing to pay extra for this in your opinion? ;)

[Dallen]

Thanks guys.

I read somewhere that setting my TV in PC mode also disables all post processing, this is a good thing right?
Does this mean it doesn't do an "internal conversion to YUV 4:2:2."?

When PC mode is enabled, text on my desktop gets alot easier to read.
The only downside (?) is that some options are disabled on my TV, calibration stuff like tint and some built in thing called "Film mode".

And for Nvidia users, adding a custom resolution of 61Hz for eg. makes your graphics card output 0-255.
I can even add a custom resolution of 75Hz on my TV, but that disables sound over HDMI when playing a movie :(

I also feel that FRC does a pretty good job, so that's why I mentioned custom resolutions! I think I read that FRC works better the higher refresh rate you have.

[Asmodian]

And +90% of those TV's are used to exclusively watch 4:2:0 DVB-T/DVD/BD, so why would they care about 4:4:4 processing in the first place? Would people be willing to pay extra for this in your opinion? ;)

It is most significant for console or computer gaming. As of now I imagine a simple 8-bit RGB post processing chip cannot cost that much more than a 8-bit YUV 4:2:2 one. Console gaming is a pretty big market, especially with new ones out. :)

I read somewhere that setting my TV in PC mode also disables all post processing, this is a good thing right?
Does this mean it doesn't do an "internal conversion to YUV 4:2:2."?

When PC mode is enabled, text on my desktop gets alot easier to read.

Yes, this is the mode we are talking about. :)

The only downside (?) is that some options are disabled on my TV, calibration stuff like tint and some built in thing called "Film mode".

Right, those are done by the processor that can only handle 4:2:2.

I also feel that FRC does a pretty good job, so that's why I mentioned custom resolutions! I think I read that FRC works better the higher refresh rate you have.

Yes it does, 25Hz content looks very smooth and sharp on a 120Hz display with madVR's smooth motion on. The blended frames are only displayed for 8.33 ms.

[leeperry]

I imagine a simple 8-bit RGB post processing chip cannot cost that much more than a 8-bit YUV 4:2:2 one. Console gaming is a pretty big market
The only thing gamers care about is input lag, not gonna happen IMO.

[nevcairiel]

Yeah the PC or Game mode is specifically for gamers, not only to allow 4:4:4, but also to reduce display latency.
Games also don't really need the film processing, since its already 4:4:4 and hopefully free of artifacts.

[JanWillem32]

And +90% of those TV's are used to exclusively watch 4:2:0 DVB-T/DVD/BD, so why would they care about 4:4:4 processing in the first place? Would people be willing to pay extra for this in your opinion? ;)input != output
Raw Y'CbCr isn't pretty: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YCbCr (and even those pictures are modified). You need some processing to get Y'CbCr on screen as R'G'B'. If that processing isn't decent (the usual case) the output quality will be bad.
No analog nor digital video cable format even supports the transport of Y'CbCr 4:2:0 at all to begin with. You either need to up-sample to a half-baked Y'CbCr 4:2:2 signal, or to one of the more decent formats. I don't know why on earth people ever allowed Y'CbCr formats on the digital video cable formats to begin with. The currently available ones (DVI, HDMI, DP, SDI) are required to support common R'G'B'(-like) signals anyway. (DL-SDI, DP and HDMI are also used to transport the XYZ signals in DC systems.)
I've said this before, but the 80's TV set I was allowed to play with back when I was still a young tech enthusiast had pretty much ideal control when you plugged in a VGA connector. It looked like what you expect from a CRT TV from the 80's, but it hardly was fussy at all about refresh rates and didn't have any silly digital hardware to do obnoxious filtering with forced chroma down-sampling.
In yet another era, I had to deal with PC's that could only process 15- or 16-bit color palettes. (Of course I'm old enough to have met 8-bit grayscale and color palettes, but I never really used them much.) Programming and designing for these was nasty. You're always pushing pixels and then take a look if it's looking decent on screen... In all my years of developing I never had to deal with 'hidden' filters after the processing chains I wrote, except for some analog 'knobs' on the display device.
It has only been the last few years that the digital era for video and imaging became common. Everything on a true professional-grade level, from various studio software, to the digital hardware used for cinemas for example, worked out very well. On the other hand, consumer devices seem to be forever stuck in the digital dark ages.I read somewhere that setting my TV in PC mode also disables all post processing, this is a good thing right?Test it yourself. I know what 'enhancement' filters the video chips on consumer devices can do these days, and I'm much underwhelmed.Does this mean it doesn't do an "internal conversion to YUV 4:2:2."?To disable post-processing; force full-range R'G'B' input from the PC/other device of choice, prevent backwards transforms to some sort of Y'CbCr format and back to R'G'B' for the display panel again, and only use the analog controls of the display device. Two chroma testing images were posted already to see if you're in some sort of Y'CbCr 4:2:2 mode or are passing '4:4:4' through normally. I personally used the Nokia monitor test a lot in the past. That one's nice for various test screens as well.When PC mode is enabled, text on my desktop gets alot easier to read.
The only downside (?) is that some options are disabled on my TV, calibration stuff like tint and some built in thing called "Film mode".By all means, leave video/film effects to your video renderer of choice. It doesn't seem that the usual text on your desktop benefits from such artificial enhancements anyway. (I'm really not surprised...)And for Nvidia users, adding a custom resolution of 61Hz for eg. makes your graphics card output 0-255.
I can even add a custom resolution of 75Hz on my TV, but that disables sound over HDMI when playing a movie :(If the video output stays working, by all means send a problem report to Nvidia to fix the audio when using such custom refresh rate settings.I also feel that FRC does a pretty good job, so that's why I mentioned custom resolutions! I think I read that FRC works better the higher refresh rate you have.Correct, the less amount of time movement artifacts can stay on screen (caused by a higher output frame rate), the better. It makes them less visible. Human vision only has a 23 to 24 Hz refresh rate, but a somewhat higher sensitivity to 'raw' motion.As of now I imagine a simple 8-bit RGB post processing chip cannot cost that much more than a 8-bit YUV 4:2:2 one. Console gaming is a pretty big market, especially with new ones out. :)8-bit video processing is really crappy. Even if it's 8-bit R'G'B'. Please don't bring any funny ideas to the hardware manufacturers :D.

*Again, I agree on most points with Asmodian.

[Asmodian]

8-bit video processing is really crappy. Even if it's 8-bit R'G'B'. Please don't bring any funny ideas to the hardware manufacturers :D.

Are these 4:2:2 video processing chips really using >8 bit? If so, I agree; going to 8 bit RGB would probably be a bad idea. Let me say RGB at the same bit depth then. :)

[huhn]

Given we're talking about TV modes and refresh rates etc, I have a question someone may know the answer to. It's always bugged me....

Why (I'm running XP) are the lower refresh rates labelled as "interlaced" in Windows Display Properties when it appears they're progressive? Maybe I'm missing something obvious.

http://i39.tinypic.com/2wew6di.gif

xp doesn't support 23 hz so... maybe xp got in general problems with refresh rates below 50hz

Correct, the less amount of time movement artifacts can stay on screen (caused by a higher output frame rate), the better. It makes them less visible. Human vision only has a 23 to 24 Hz refresh rate, but a somewhat higher sensitivity to 'raw' motion.

but why does 120 hz gaming feel and look better than 60 hz if the human eye is limited to 23-24 ?

[JanWillem32]

Are these 4:2:2 video processing chips really using >8 bit? If so, I agree; going to 8 bit RGB would probably be a bad idea. Let me say RGB at the same bit depth then. :)Good quantization (meaning bits per sub-pixel) from source to view, a good color space for each applied filter and good methods for each filter is the key to get good video processing. All three of these points are a problem with consumer devices at the moment.xp doesn't support 23 hz so... maybe xp got in general problems with refresh rates below 50hzIt's not exactly because of Windows XP. You probably need to add a manual resolution & refresh rate mode if you want to use a custom one. Windows XP and its driver model are not the best at detecting these things.but why does 120 hz gaming feel and look better than 60 hz if the human eye is limited to 23-24 ?It's just like I noted. You can see some fast motion, but you can't get a full 'image' of these in your mind if it's only there for a short time. Think about a whip in action. You can see the motion, but not the exact location and form of the object.

[pirlouy]

I think this webpage (http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm) can bring answers too.

[leeperry]

input != output
Raw Y'CbCr isn't pretty: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YCbCr (and even those pictures are modified). You need some processing to get Y'CbCr on screen as R'G'B'. If that processing isn't decent (the usual case) the output quality will be bad.
No analog nor digital video cable format even supports the transport of Y'CbCr 4:2:0 at all to begin with. You either need to up-sample to a half-baked Y'CbCr 4:2:2 signal, or to one of the more decent formats.
They actually broadcast low bitrate 1080i around here and it would appear to be 4:2:0 : http://www.hdtv.biz/hdtv_information.shtml
HD broadcasts use 4:2:0 and 8-bit quantization to save bandwidth

so it takes a lot of work to turn it into 4:4:4 RGB 1080p indeed, and yes I get your point that sloppy deinterlacing then chroma upsample all done in 8bit won't look all that great in the end....but movies suffer from the PALspeedup chipmunkiness around here, so this is not the worst offender by far and I couldn't care less about chroma upsampling when I watch the news(well except if it makes huge red blocks :D)

Human vision only has a 23 to 24 Hz refresh rate.
FWIR it takes roughly 72fps to completely fool the human brain(fairly easy to achieve with sped up 59.94fps using Reclock) and some fighter pilots can see up to 100fps.

[JanWillem32]

8-bit 4:2:0 1080i broadcasts are indeed possible. Those are encoded formats. The raw video formats that can be carried by digital video cable formats available for consumers (DVI, HDMI, DP, SDI) are R'G'B'/X'Y'Z', and in some cases Y'CbCr signals in 4:2:2 and 4:4:4. There are none that can carry 4:2:0. (*Available bitdepths for these formats also vary per type of connection.)

[nevcairiel]

There are none that can carry 4:2:0.

HDMI 2.0 adds support for 4:2:0

[hello_hello]

xp doesn't support 23 hz so... maybe xp got in general problems with refresh rates below 50hz

The 24, 25 and 30Hz refresh rates definitely work. The TV displays the appropriate refresh rate when selecting one, but I don't understand why Display Properties labels them as interlaced.
Not that it really matters.... it's just bugged me not knowing why.