HD-DVD/Blu-Ray acceleration in GFX cards

***Veridian3*** · Jul 30, 2007, 04:14 AM

With the current generation of graphics cards from ATI and Nvidia the 2400/2600/8400/8600 series feature full acceleration of high definition content, taking the load from the CPU and leaving it free for other tasks. (E.G. Blu-Ray/HD-DVD playback)

The higher specification parts ( 8800/2900 series )do not feature this same level of video acceleration and more of the playback is dependant on the CPU.

For the next generation of graphics cards would you prefer to see the high end cards feature full acceleration or not?

***temeteus82*** · Jul 30, 2007, 04:34 AM

I would like to see it in cards in all price ranges. I think there are people like me who likes to use PC as to play HD-content.

***Veridian3*** · Jul 30, 2007, 05:03 AM

I'm pretty much of that view myself... the more i can do on my main PC's the better and having full video acceleration on all cards enables me to choose the best all round card for every system.

Brutality · Jul 30, 2007, 05:33 AM

Yup. I'm a gamer but I also watch DVDs. I don't really care as long as my CPU can handle that load, because it doesn't matter which processing unit decodes my movies for me. But as long as my cards cost 700$, I want everything possible for that. Damn, for that money a piece of hardware should be capable of doing backmassage and serve you cold beer.

niceguyrichy · Jul 30, 2007, 05:55 AM

frankly if I'm spending as much on a single component as some spend on an entire system I expect it to do everything, not just make games look pretty.
makes it a bit easier to put system together as well if they all support it by default.

bug77 · Jul 30, 2007, 06:48 AM

Of course it shoulg have everything and the kitchen sink for that kind of money.

Otherwise, it will turn into another marketing gimmick. They'll tout the uselessness of full video acceleration on high end cards, only to offer it in a generation or two at a premium.

Hell, video cards are way overpriced already and people are already paying for features that are not supported in the drivers for 6 months after launch. This is crazy.

Edit: And don't even have a single HD movie. And I don't pay 300USD for a video card. But if I did...

IvanV · Jul 30, 2007, 06:49 AM

It makes no sense to leave out video acceleration on high-end cards, considering their price and the fact that high definition video is quite a strain even for higher end CPUs - paying $700 for a video card and then not being able to watch a film?!

Falstaff · Jul 30, 2007, 12:42 PM

not so far in the future these dual specifications will be attainable, I will wait.

INSTG8R · Jul 30, 2007, 01:03 PM

Having just built a new rig with a 2900XT the HD part of it was not even a thought in my purchase. I have a HD TV, HD Cable Box and a home theatre setup to watch movies on. I mean sure its a nice feature to be included but not neccasary in the least for me.

dipstick · Jul 30, 2007, 04:44 PM

You know its funny but when I pay three times more for a high end card I expect all that is included in the cheaper ones and then some. It's the most retarded thing ever to pay more for less(in a way course).
I've always thought that the video playback features where not included because they rush the high end cards out first but how many times can one do that before people notice a shitty trend? Either that or they think that whoever buys a $600 video card is also going to buy a $600 cpu anyways..

***Veridian3*** · Jul 30, 2007, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dipstick

Either that or they think that whoever buys a $600 video card is also going to buy a $600 cpu anyways..

Thats an interesting point, my own view on that (being someone with an expensive CPU) is that quite often i want to put a movie on in the background (casual viewing i guess you could call it) whilst i work on other things, maybe encoding some music or something more demanding. With the 2900/8800 a large chunk of my CPU time is taken up with video decoding already which impacts my other tasks and how long they take.

However if i had chosen to buy a 8600/2600 i would complete the work faster and thats just crazy given the price difference! (of course then my games wouldnt be as good)... so as a high end CPU user i would rely on my card to be a great gaming card, and a great video card ideally... that would allow me to have a real multi purpose system which i expect for the money they are asking.

BWX · Jul 30, 2007, 11:04 PM

[COLOR="Red"]I want it all for my £400/$700! Great gaming performance AND full video acceleration [/COLOR]

Hell yes...

Lowfat · Jul 31, 2007, 12:12 AM

meh, my old Geforce 6200 turbocache can play 1080P with a good CPU, why do you need acceleration for video.

bug77 · Jul 31, 2007, 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lowfat

meh, my old Geforce 6200 turbocache can play 1080P with a good CPU, why do you need acceleration for video.

That was my first thought, too. But apparently, there's a lot of people that do many other things while watching a movie (background tasks maybe)? And again, for the kind of money they're asking for, you should get everything. And then some.

**Vikingod** · Jul 31, 2007, 09:33 AM

I don't really watch video on my computer, but for the price they are asking for high-end cards, the damn thing better do your laundry.

Judas · Jul 31, 2007, 12:05 PM

My PC has fully replaced everything, it's my TV, HD DVD player, DVD/CD player, Gameing rig, Hell i'll even plug my console into it. (TV card anyone?)..

IMO, Even on the high end cards, i think specific Accelerations should be avaialble, while ATI's current 2900's lack of "acceleration" in the form we are familare with is no there, and used the gpu itself as an option, i don't think it's a wise way around it.

OmegaRED · Aug 5, 2007, 01:17 PM

Believe me, when you're so used to watching trailers in 1080p you'll miss the video acceleration as soon as you're on a PC without it and the trailers play like slideshows.

Judas · Aug 7, 2007, 11:56 AM

i got to toy with a HD2900xt quick, and playing a 1080p trailer @ 2560x1600 played smoothly for me..... but the suckers fan starts spinning up though.

Salty85 · Aug 7, 2007, 01:32 PM

I do not understand what the big deal is with video accelleration, I had a 9700 AIW Pro when DivX started the Acceleration scheme, and it sure did lower my CPU usage, from 20% to 5% on my 2.4 Ghz P IV, but the quality suffered because of it (seemed like a manditory snow filter effect). I dunno, CPU's are so fast, that we don't need GPU for video decoding, keep it to the CPU I think is best, because that way we don't have to worry about needing specific hardware to do it, and leave it in the CPU and Operating system based codecs which for the most part are uniform between brands

Judas · Aug 7, 2007, 03:27 PM

Salty, some if not most of the current video accelerators not only accelerate, but also improve video quality, imo Avivo is pretty damn slick.

Salty85 · Aug 7, 2007, 03:32 PM

But isn't AVIO something that ATI created. I am an ATI fan, don't get me wrong, but I want my video to be universally compatible, with the same quality. I don't doubt that the cards may increase the quality, but I have not seen any non-proprietary video schemes that benifit from a card over the CPU doing the decoding, that is all I am saying. I gave that example because the 9700 was touted as the same thing and it was worse quality when I did screenshot comparisons years ago.

Judas · Aug 7, 2007, 04:54 PM

the was first generation accerlation.... fairly old tech today now..

as far as i can tell, no specific video codec is specific to brand of video card, there is a standard in place, however each company can and does allow for getting a few extra benfits.... i mean in cyberlinks powerDVD 7.3, i can easily uncheck avivo so that i get the generic cpu accelerated version with no enhancements.

OmegaRED · Aug 7, 2007, 04:56 PM

You can't compare Avivo or Purevideo with the old 9700 video quality