|
|
| PureVideo Introduction | ||||||
We've been hearing details about NVIDIA's on-chip programmable video processor ever since the NV40 originally launched about eight months ago. Back then NVIDIA had stated that the NV40's on-chip video processor incorporated a high-quality adaptive de-interlacing engine, along with better filtering and scaling techniques, video de-blocking logic and an integrated TV-encoder. The NV40's on-chip video processor was also to be a complete HDTV solution as well, with the ability to output HDTV streams in all of the popular formats (720P, 1080i, 480P, CGMS). It also had integrated PVR (Personal Video Recorder) functionality, with hardware audio / video synchronization, hardware MPEG 1 / 2 / 4 encoding and decoding, and WMV9 decode acceleration. It has since become known that the original NV40 chip used on AGP GeForce 6800 class cards didn't accelerate WMV9 content at quite the level NVIDIA would have liked, but newer derivatives of the chip with an updated video engine are much better performers in this respect. The GeForce 6600 GT, for example, is equipped with the updated on-chip programmable video processor, which gets a new name today. At 9:00AM EST NVIDIA's PureVideo technology, not to be confused with Matrox's brand of the same name, was officially unveiled. The combination of a GeForce 6 Series graphics card, with new decoder software that should be available on NVIDIA's site shortly, finally make PureVideo a reality. And video on the PC now comes a step closer, and perhaps even surpasses, the quality available from most Consumer Electronics devices. The key features of NVIDIA's PureVideo technology include:
To give you some examples of how PureVideo affects video playback on the PC, we installed a GeForce 6600 GT into one of our test systems and compared its video playback quality to an ATI Radeon X700. ATI has long been regarded as having the best video engine available on the PC. Their popular All-In-Wonder line of cards is a testament to this fact. But NVIDIA isn't the type of company to just sit back and let a competitor dominate a particular market segment unchallenged. Which is where PureVideo comes in...
HOW WE CONFIGURED THE TEST SYSTEM: We tested the ATi Radeon X800 XL on a DFI LANPARTY 925X-T2 Intel i925X chipset-based motherboard, powered by an Intel
|
| PureVideo Features (Cont.) | |||||
Bad Edit Detection (3:2 Correction)
This pair of images also show a clear difference in each card's output. If you look closely at the truck's grill, between the '2' and the headlight, and along the edge of the windshield wipers, jaggies and feathering are visible in the frame captured with the Radeon that simply aren't there when using the GeForce 6600 GT with PureVideo. In conversations with representatives from ATI, however, they stated a software update would be able to address this issue. Windows Media Video 9 Acceleration
To document CPU utilization when playing back WMV HD content, we used the performance monitor built-into Windows XP. Using performance monitor, we created a log file that sampled the percent of CPU utilization every second, while playing back the 1080p version of the "Step Into Liquid" video available on Microsoft's WMVHD site. That data was then imported into Excel to create the graph above. The graph shows the CPU utilization for each card in an un-patched environment, as your system at home would be configured right now, and patched using a pair of DLLs supplied by NVIDIA. The updated files will be available in a patch to Windows Media Player 10, that should be released shortly. With an un-patched system, CPU utilization was much higher during WMV HD playback. The Radeon had the overall advantage in the initial tests, but the GeForce 6600 was close behind. With the system patched, however, CPU utilization dropped significantly. This time around, the NVIDIA powered card had the slight advantage overall. Looking at the statistics below the graph, you can also see that each card performed similarly. In one instance, the 6600 dropped a single frame, but other than that there isn't much to point out. (Note: There is only one ATI statistics image, because the stats were identical in the patched and un-patched environments.) |
| Summary & Conclusion |
Summary: In the examples we have shown here today, the NVIDIA GeForce 6600 GT with PureVideo Technology had better image quality than the Radeon X700. The NVIDIA powered card also had lower CPU utilization when playing back WMV HD content when hardware acceleration was enabled using a pair of beta DLL files. However, the ATI powered card had a slight advantage in CPU utilization in the default configuration.
NVIDIA's PureVideo Technology is a definite step in the right direction. The video quality produced on the GeForce 6 Series of graphics cards with PureVideo technology was excellent, and rivaled that of most consumer electronics devices. When compared to ATI, NVIDIA also seems to have gained ground, or even surpassed ATI in some respects. We won't dwell on this point though, because ATI also has some updates in the works that will likely render the comparisons made here somewhat out-dated in a few short weeks. We'll have to revisit the topic of image quality during video playback at a later date, using real world content to make any final conclusions. Regardless, NVIDIA's PureVideo Technology and new decoder software dramatically improve video playback on the PC, and further blurs the lines between the PC and a Home Entertainment Center. More information on NVIDIA's PureVideo Technology is available on their website in this press release, and in this comparison chart that illustrates the specific features available in the GeForce 6 Series of cards. |