I would build a capture box on Windows XP.

Most classic hardware and software simply will not function well on Windows 7, and there are NO ADVANTAGES of Windows 7 over Windows XP for standard workflows. Most Win7 advances were for new hardware (quad core CPUs, 4+GB RAM, etc) and little was important for working machines. The ATI 600 was one of the few marginal saves, that still worked on Win7. Vista wiped out a lot of older hardware and apps, but not as badly as Win7 did. Even installing simple codecs required for a good workflow (HuffYUV, AC3, XviD, etc) can be a nuisance on Vista and 7.

They perform about the same for HuffYUV compresison. The USB interface can be a worry, as not all USB works the same on all computers. Some drop signal strength more often, for example. Remember that USB is not sustained, it's variable. Although I'd note it's generally still high enough for video throughput. This card is fine on my HP HTPC and two HP laptops, as those have good USB connections.

I've not tested the ATI 600 on my older systems, but I bet I'd run into a few snags, as I know the USB is weak on two of them -- they won't even power portable hard drives.

Thanks LS.

From what you have written I can conclude that with the same S-VHS source being used, an ATI 600 USB device and Radeon AIW 7, 8 or 9000 AGP will capture similar quality using Virtualdub and Huffy compression under XP?

(XP was my preferred choice, just have to find a decent motherboard with AGP and USB. Post processing, bring on the quad core and RAID 0)

I appreciate your time and help with this.

Juan

Yes, correct.

The primary issue is one of throughput, meaning that an AGP or PCI setup is far less likely to drop frames.

A secondary issue comes with capturing PAL video. The 600 can only be used for AVI capturing of PAL material. The older Radeon class cards can capture PAL to AVI or MPEG, and with far less settings tweaks.

A computer in the 2.5Ghz+ range is perfect for those older Radeon cards. It can be pretty much any computer from the latter single-core generation, or the early multi-core (dual core) generation. Even last summer, in 2009, I was seeing good sales of new AGP slot motherboards at Microcenter in Kansas City. Earlier this year, a friend in KC bought a "new" (refurb) IBM cheap with an AGP slot, and he loves it!

I'd suggest against RAID 0. It's abusive to the drives, easy to lose data, and not really a "RAID" anyway (not redundant). Video processing will always bottleneck at the CPU, with write speeds being second to that. Beyond this, 7200rpm drives are plenty fast for writing as fast as the CPU can outbound deliver, even on quad core setups.

You don't need "RAID 0 speeds" until you get into SDI uncompressed video, which you won't be doing. Even I don't have to mess with that level of video.

The benefits are zero, and the risks are greater. You've been warned!

I've seen several RAID 0 arrays die in the past decade. Far more often than single drives. And when the RAID array dies, it's pretty much impossible to recover the data. At least with a failed standard formatted "single" drive, you can always pay for clean-room recovery (about $1K to $2K), which can often get 99% of data back!

Thank you.

I'll see what I can unearth here as far as agp slot motherboards go.

Is it worth considering the use of two drives, one to feed the original file to be processed and the other to receive the processed file? Would a RAID 1 array further sloww down the writing side of this workflow?

Your advise is very much appreciated.

Juan

Yes, do this. :)

It depends entirely on the hardware or software drivers. A good one will increase or maintain speeds. A poor one will slow you down.

ATI 600 capture guide
 

Hey Lord Smurf,

Sorry for ressurecting the thread. Any updates on the ATI USB 600 and CMC/VirtualDub capture guide? This would be an awesome capture guide for newer equipment and operating systems.

Would these be the Matrox codecs you are referring to? Thanks!

See posts #3 and #4 here: http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...lor-space.html
That's it.

It's more or less done now, will be publishing it on the new site soon. :cool:

For those looking at using at least the PCIe version of this card with Windows 7, be advised that there are no ProcAmp settings with this device :(

It's not the hardware that includes the proc amp, but the software.

If using VirtualDub for capture, you have proc amp abilities. If using ATI CMC, you do not. (Catalyst Media Center is really nothing more than a limited and dumbed-down version of ATI MMC.) ATI CMC is fine for capturing NTSC MPEG-2, but for any filter work or lossless/uncompressed capturing you'll want to use VirtualDub.

In all honesty, if you want proc amp controls, use external proc amp hardware, like a SignVideo PA-100 or an Elite Video BVP-4.

Thanks, but I am using VirtualDub and there are no ProcAmp controls for this unit. (PCIe version), at least none the Windows 7 driver exposes.

In VirtualDub capture mode, I can go to Video > Levels and there's options to change brightness, contrast, hue, saturation and sharpness. Using an ATI 600 USB card and VirtualDub 1.9.8. Not sure how to explain why you're unable to get these proc amp controls. It may be something specific to your system, your version of VirtualDub, the drivers in use, or the PCIe card itself. Hard to say. I don't have that exact combination of hardware available to test with.

The key is, are you using Windows 7 with a PCIe card? The 600 PCIe with Windows 7 does not have access to the ProcAmp.

On this specific system, no.
However, this card moves around, and one system is on Windows 7 x64.

When time permits, I'll test there, too. :thumb: