[mythtv-users] 128 mb Fx5200 V 256 Mb XFS 6200
charriglists at bellsouth.net
Tue Mar 20 13:56:30 UTC 2007
David Campbell wrote:
> Calvin Harrigan wrote:
>> David Campbell wrote:
>>> I am looking at getting a new graphics card in a <possibly futile>
>>> attempt to get HD playback watchable on a AMD XP 3000 with a gig of Ram.
>>> Would I be be much better buying a 256Mb XFS6200 card rather than a 128
>>> Mb Fx5200? Will it make a difference for HD?
>>> mythtv-users mailing list
>>> mythtv-users at mythtv.org
>> I would say no, in fact I think it'll make playback worse. The 5200 has
>> more hardware acceleration for video than many of the newer cards.
>> iDtc, motion compensation, chroma keying, etc. I was able to get HD
>> going on an XP 1800 so I'm fairly certain you can on a 3000. What
>> problems are you having? You should provide more detail about you
>> system, distribution, software versions, etc.
> HD playback is very jerky - unwatchable. CPU goes to 0% idle.
> FE/BE on same kit.
> * AMD Athlon(tm) XP 3000+
> * 1Gb Ram
> * GeForce4 MX 4000 AGP
> * Hauppauge WinTV-Nova-T 500
> Kubuntu (edgy) - with custom 2.6.20 Kernel -
> Mythtv Version: 0.20-0.2ubuntu2
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users at mythtv.org
Seems like I misread your initial post, I thought you had the 5200
already looking to upgrade to a 6200. But what I said still holds true.
The 5200 would be a better bet. Though I think the gf4mx4000 is
supposed to support most if not all the features (acceleration) that the
5200 is supposed to.
What version of the nvidia drivers are you using?
What resolution are you outputting? Any de-interlacers?
More information about the mythtv-users