<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0" ><tr><td valign="top" style="font: inherit;">--- On <b>Mon, 6/11/12, lists.md301 <i><lists.md301@gmail.com></i></b> wrote:<br><blockquote style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(16, 16, 255); margin-left: 5px; padding-left: 5px;"><br>From: lists.md301 <lists.md301@gmail.com><br>Subject: Re: [mythtv-users] 8400GS -> GT 430 -> ?? (60Hz, VDPAU High Quality)<br>To: "Discussion about MythTV" <mythtv-users@mythtv.org><br>Date: Monday, June 11, 2012, 1:41 PM<br><br><div id="yiv1736389423"><br><br><div class="yiv1736389423gmail_quote">On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Gary Buhrmaster <span dir="ltr"><<a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:gary.buhrmaster@gmail.com" target="_blank" href="/mc/compose?to=gary.buhrmaster@gmail.com">gary.buhrmaster@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="yiv1736389423gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
The issue with the 430 is only for interlaced content (where the<br>
GPU is running code), all the VDPAU cards have dedicated<br>
decoding hardware for mpeg1/2, h.264 (various capabilities in the<br>
various cards). The specs when running the 430 indicate that the<br>
card simply has little to no headroom for 60hz interlaced content,<br>
so that if the particular activity is either interrupted to do something<br>
else (the card does have to deal with other things), or the process<br>
is slightly more complex for some scene or another, there may<br>
be "glitches" in the output. <br></blockquote></div><br>This is the second time you've said this, and nobody else has contradicted you, but are you sure you mean the 430, not the 520 series.<br><br><a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/users/480941">http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/users/480941</a><br>
<br>Note that one of your fellow developers (wagnerrp) provided the performance stats back then.<font color="black" face="Verdana,Arial,Helvetica"><b> </b></font>The conclusion of that thread seemed to be that the 430 was sufficient, but has the real world proven otherwise since? I understand what you're saying about card overhead, but I don't remember seeing anything on the mailing list since then to contradict, until now. The attraction of the 430 being it handles HDMI audio and can be found fanless.<br>
<br>I have a fanless GT430 myself (the above email and the capabilities helped make my decision), and for the most part used Advanced 2x with no problems (gentoo 0.24.1, nvidia-drivers-275.09.07, Samsung LCD-LED 55")...except: this has been my first baseball season with this configuration, and I've been noticing weird motion artifact during the pitcher's wind-up and the batters swing. I'm unsure if it's deinterlacing, or something else. (Never noticed any issues during football or hockey seasons.) Nothing obvious shows up in the verbose playback frontend logging. Just today I've upgraded to a more recent nvidia 295.49 driver, which I have yet to test (view playback). For what it's worth, I've also had audio sync issues with certain DVD rips with the Advanced 2x (Batman Begins, The Dark Knight), which were not present if I switched to Temporal 2x. I'll see tonight if the newer driver makes any difference.<br>
</div><br>-----Inline Attachment Follows-----<br><br><div class="plainMail">_______________________________________________<br>mythtv-users mailing list<br><a ymailto="mailto:mythtv-users@mythtv.org" href="/mc/compose?to=mythtv-users@mythtv.org">mythtv-users@mythtv.org</a><br><a href="http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users" target="_blank">http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users</a><br><br>maybe I'm just lucky or something but my 520 performs perfectly on everything, including 60hz interlaced content.<br></div></blockquote></td></tr></table>