Computing Power required to play HD-DVD/BD - Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

post #1 of 22 (permalink) Old 2006-12-10, 07:14 PM Thread Starter
Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Fredericton, NB
Posts: 3,185
I played around with my systems in the house to see what kind of performance requirements are really required of the HD and BD DVD format of 1080p.

I downloaded a pile of 1080p content from the Windows Media HD site and also grabbed a VC-1 encoded file. I have yet to find any AVI or WMV files encoded in H.264.

With the above files, I set out to torture the life out of my systems. So I tortured my systems... Here is what I discovered...

An A64 3500+ with a Radeon 9600XT is actually 95% capable of playing VC-1 and has no trouble with MPEG2 or WMV-HD at either 720p or 1080p. Using the H.264 codec in FFDShow, it was able to play some H.264 MP4 files without any glitches either. The only file to cause the CPU to peg out at 100% was the VC-1 file.

An AXP 2500+ and a X1300 Pro is only capable of MPEG2 and WMV-HD up to 720p. 1080p is just too much and the display glitches out during playback. Things just get worse from there on the other formats.

An AXP 2500+ and a X1600 Pro is almost as capable as the A64 and 9600XT. I only had issues with the VC-1 content. I plan on OCing this system to AXP 3200+ for testing to see if that helps.

From what I can see, the best minimum setup would be a A64 3500+ and a Radeon X1600 Pro.

Once I get some proper H.264 files, I will try again on all systems.
que3jxp is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 22 (permalink) Old 2006-12-10, 08:21 PM
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 5,469
Two other things to consider.

1. Audio. I'm sure there's some extra headroom required for processing the HD audio.

2. DRM. When the WMV-HD test files were first released with DRM they required an extra 10-15% processing power (IIRC) compared to non-DRM'd material. I'm not sure if this will be true of HD-DVD playback or not.
jvincent is offline  
post #3 of 22 (permalink) Old 2006-12-10, 08:22 PM
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 714
This might save you some time: http://download.nvidia.com/downloads...ing_a_HDPC.pdf

You may want to upgrade to at very least an A64 3800+, though the 4200+ is recommended for H.264 titles.
elapsed is offline  
 
post #4 of 22 (permalink) Old 2006-12-10, 09:38 PM
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Ottawa,Ont,Canada
Posts: 941
What was the bit rate of the samples that you tried?

A HD-DVD will usually run around 20mps for VC-1 and 30mps for MPEG-2.

Plus the decoding of such a large bit stream will greatly increase your processing needs.

I seriously doubt that
Quote:
the best minimum setup would be a A64 3500+ and a Radeon X1600 Pro.
will be enough for 1080p smooth playback.

Also, if you plan of using HDMI with TrueHD, this is another high bandwidth decode that must be done.

I hope the new players of PowerDVD, WinDVD, ZoomPlayer and TheatreTek will use multi-threads to process the video/audio streams efficiently.

My Prediction of a min system will be
CPU --- AMD 4000+ or Intel E6400 (both D dual core and not OC'ed)
Memory - 1G min/ 2G with Vista
Video - Nvidia 7950GT or ATI X1950Pro (Reason is enough GPU prower, HDCP compatiablity, and sound integerated HDMI)

That's what i will shoot for next year.
BHoward is offline  
post #5 of 22 (permalink) Old 2006-12-10, 10:23 PM Thread Starter
Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Fredericton, NB
Posts: 3,185
Quote:
Originally Posted by elapsed View Post
Yes...

It has been my general experience that the bulk of these "recommendations" tend to be a bit to somewhat bloated. I prefer to confirm things for myself before blowing inordinate gobs of money.
que3jxp is offline  
post #6 of 22 (permalink) Old 2006-12-10, 10:36 PM Thread Starter
Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Fredericton, NB
Posts: 3,185
Quote:
Originally Posted by BHoward View Post
What was the bit rate of the samples that you tried?
AVICodec reports the WMV-HD at 9 - 11 Mbps and the VC-1 at 11.5 Mbps. By your next statement, something is definitely amiss with the files I was looking at.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BHoward View Post
A HD-DVD will usually run around 20mps for VC-1 and 30mps for MPEG-2.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BHoward View Post
I hope the new players of PowerDVD, WinDVD, ZoomPlayer and TheatreTek will use multi-threads to process the video/audio streams efficiently.
Agreed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BHoward View Post
Video - Nvidia 7950GT or ATI X1950Pro (Reason is enough GPU prower, HDCP compatiablity, and sound integerated HDMI)
Don't like the idea of blowing several 100 $$$ for a vid card but I generally agree with this as well.
que3jxp is offline  
post #7 of 22 (permalink) Old 2006-12-10, 10:40 PM Thread Starter
Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Fredericton, NB
Posts: 3,185
Quote:
Originally Posted by jvincent View Post
1. Audio. I'm sure there's some extra headroom required for processing the HD audio.
The "fastest" system has onboard puke. My main HT system has NVidia Soundstorm and is feeding the bitstream via Toslink to my HT amp. The "weakest" system has onboard puke as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BHoward View Post
2. DRM. When the WMV-HD test files were first released with DRM they required an extra 10-15% processing power (IIRC) compared to non-DRM'd material. I'm not sure if this will be true of HD-DVD playback or not.
Never heard about this so can't comment intelligently.
que3jxp is offline  
post #8 of 22 (permalink) Old 2006-12-11, 08:38 AM
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Ottawa,Ont,Canada
Posts: 941
The idea system would be able to process and decode TrueHD 7.1. This will probable require a receiver connected via HDMI 1.3 from the Video card. The video card's API must now include sound.

I guess what i am saying is that we are at a new generation of equipment...

New Video Card with TrueHD
New Software with TrueHD
New Received with TrueHD

I will buy a new receiver that has 4 HDMI 1.3 inputs.

Will video cards ever have HMDI 1.3?

Quote:
A HD-DVD will usually run around 20mps for VC-1 and 30mps for MPEG-2.
I read this over at AVSForums. I have no way of proving ths....
PS - MPEG-2 is for BluRay only
BHoward is offline  
post #9 of 22 (permalink) Old 2006-12-11, 08:43 AM
Digital Sage
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Burlington
Posts: 24,794
The odd HD DVD has MPEG2.
james99 is offline  
post #10 of 22 (permalink) Old 2006-12-11, 09:00 AM
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Ottawa,Ont,Canada
Posts: 941
Thanks ... was not aware of that ....
BHoward is offline  
post #11 of 22 (permalink) Old 2006-12-11, 09:05 AM
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 5,469
Nor was I. Is there by any chance a list somewhere?
jvincent is offline  
post #12 of 22 (permalink) Old 2006-12-11, 07:00 PM
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,201
Quote:
Originally Posted by james99 View Post
The odd HD DVD has MPEG2.
Did you mean AVC - some of those were released in Japan.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BHoward View Post
...A HD-DVD will usually run around 20mps for VC-1 and 30mps for MPEG-2...
I hink this comes from the specs of the first laptops - from Toshiba and Sony - that were able to play back HD and BD disks, respectively: they claim to do this as long as the AVC/VC-1 streams don't exceed 20Mbps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by que3jxp View Post
...I downloaded a pile of 1080p content from the Windows Media HD site and also grabbed a VC-1 encoded file.
...The only file to cause the CPU to peg out at 100% was the VC-1 file.
VC-1 decoding acceleration isn't supported in the codecs fully - according to Zambelli on doom9 and Amir on AVSForum. This will come in few more iterations of the codecs (e.g. PureVideoHD in beta now).

Diogen.
diogen is offline  
post #13 of 22 (permalink) Old 2006-12-12, 12:28 AM
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,201
From today's AnandTech here:
"As for recommendations, based on our testing, we would not suggest anything less than an Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 for use in a system designed to play HD content. The E6400 may work well enough, but not even the 8800 GTX can guarantee zero dropped frames on the E6300. ATI owners will want to lean more towards an E6700 processor, but can get away with the E6600 in a pinch. But keep in mind that X-Men: The Last Stand is only one of the first H.264 movies to come out. We may see content that is more difficult to decode in the future, and faster processors are definitely a good place to pad your performance to ensure a quality HD experience on the PC."

Diogen.
diogen is offline  
post #14 of 22 (permalink) Old 2006-12-12, 01:20 AM
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,296
Quote:
1. Audio. I'm sure there's some extra headroom required for processing the HD audio.
In sound card pass through mode, using software decoding and passing it directly to the A/V receiver for decoding can work better than decoding DD 5.1 to PCM.
I_Want_My_HDTV is offline  
post #15 of 22 (permalink) Old 2006-12-12, 09:36 AM
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Ottawa,Ont,Canada
Posts: 941
an E6300/E6400 can be OC'ed to 2.8/3.2 gHz with ease. These should be enough to run any HD material .... especially at 3.2gHz. This is faster than the X6800 from Intel and much cheaper!
BHoward is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome