Graphics card for Blu-ray playback
list of recommended graphics card for blu-ray movie playback on a PC:
geforce 8400, 8500, 8600, 8800, 9400, 9600, 9800 geforce gtx 260, 280 ati 2400, 2600, 2900, 3300, 3600, 3800,4500, 4600, 4800 i have an on-board ati 3200. it is ok for some blu-rays. but for others, it simply cannot do the job. so, which of those cards really do the job? as a benchmark, the movies that have given me problems are "sin city" and "tremors". it would be good to know if you're using a specific card against those films, or a similar "graphically intensive" film. thanks. |
I don't much favor nVidia cards right now, from the 9000 lines. There are heat issues with some of them. So from that basis alone, I'd opt for an ATI card. Historically, I've liked ATI cards better for the past decade anyway.
For HD playback, it really comes back to "latest and greatest". nVidia has "CUDA" on the GPU. ATI has a simiilar tech, the "Stream OpenCL". Those technologies are for HD video encoding/decoding. Basically pick the highest card number currently out. You're looking at roughly $100 USD in costs. Right now, that's going to be ATI Radeon HD 5xxx and 6xxx series cards from 2010-2011. Some of the cards you listed are rather old, from 2008. Even 2009 cards are not "best" for HD 1080p. |
thanks for that.
i am keeping my eye on some relatively newer cards, like the 4850s and the 5570s. trying to get them 2nd hand for perhaps $60-ish (or less!). does the ram size on the graphic card matter? or is it purely down to processing power? thanks. |
Standard advice applies --
RAM is nice, but ultimately it's the processor that matters most. Graphics cards are no different. |
article on HQV tests. shows the strengths & weaknesses of ati cards & nvidia cards. read it for yourself here.
|
Interesting...
Quote:
Non-responsiveness from nVidia is something that goes back a decade now, when their cards have issues, be it outright problems or deficiencies. At least, that's been my observation, based on both personal experience and forum posts. Not that ATI is necessarily any better (especially post-AMD), but I still think they're somewhat more responsive. I've never been entirely thrilled with uncommunicative hardware companies, and it doesn't sit well with me -- my opinion of them and their product diminishes. Anytime nVidia raises the bar, ATI shortly thereafter jumps over it. Cadence is about smooth playback at varying framerates, which I'd put an emphasis on being important, given your first post concerned about sometimes not getting smooth motion quality. And then it's hard to dislike NR on older and/or lower-quality sources. For somebody that watches a lot of older video material, that has to come in quite handy. I have that on my main HDTV, and absolutely love it. And they picked out the "best" card for you -- the ATI Radeon HD 5750. @Amazon.com = http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.ht...reative=390957 @Amazon.co.uk = http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/redirect....creative=19450 ... or best of luck finding one used and in good condition, on the cheap. :) |
Site design, images and content © 2002-2024 The Digital FAQ, www.digitalFAQ.com
Forum Software by vBulletin · Copyright © 2024 Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.