1080i material not deinterlacing under 1.0.1.0 (1 Viewer)

[globaldonkey]

This is getting a little off topic, but I'd be interested to hear what people think is a good IGP board for playback of 1080i / h.264. The problem I find is that all the mobo and video card manufacturers talk about 1080p playback, and I'm not sure there is a really solid IGP platform out there that can handle everything video playback could throw at it. Maybe a 780G chipset with a Phenom, but is their anything better nowadays? There is a big difference in performance requirements from 1080p to 1080i, and the other little nasty is if you are not using native screen resolution and are using your PC to do scaling. Now there's the benchmark - if your system can do 1080i h.264 with scaling, then you've got a rig that can handle anything.....

Yes I think the format of the different TV channels is the reason for the differing performance. In Australia, all our digital TV is MPEG-2 (both SD and HD, no h.264 for HD - we like to bathe in the radiation spectrum like the sun), but the resolutions vary between channels (eg between HD channels, with some running 720 and others 1080), and when there are performance problems, the higher resolution channels get hit with drop / jitter problems first and hardest

The best way (I know) to check what the stream is to record it (as .ts, not .mpg) and use mediainfo to check the format of the video. This should be the video stream as it comes off the air, no re-encoding.

For example, here are two HD channels in AUS. The first is 1080i and the second is 720p. On a marginal system, the first is going to stutter and carry on much worse than the later, particularly with the de-interlacing overhead, which is what this thread was originally all about


General
ID : 4
Complete name : \\Mediapc2\media2\Disk3\TV Recordings\A Current Affair - Nine High Definition - 2009-06-05.ts
Format : MPEG-TS
File size : 5.14 GiB
Duration : 44mn 44s
Overall bit rate : 16.5 Mbps

Video
ID : 48 (0x30)
Menu ID : 137 (0x89)
Format : MPEG Video
Format version : Version 2
Format profile : Main@High
Format settings, Matrix : Default
Duration : 44mn 44s
Bit rate mode : Variable
Bit rate : 14.9 Mbps
Nominal bit rate : 90.0 Mbps
Width : 1 920 pixels
Height : 1 080 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 16/9
Frame rate : 25.000 fps
Colorimetry : 4:2:0
Scan type : Interlaced
Scan order : Top Field First
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.288
Stream size : 4.67 GiB (91%)

Audio
ID : 64 (0x40)
Menu ID : 137 (0x89)
Format : AC-3
Format/Info : Audio Coding 3
Duration : 44mn 45s
Bit rate mode : Constant
Bit rate : 384 Kbps
Channel(s) : 2 channels
Channel positions : L R
Sampling rate : 48.0 KHz
Video delay : -1s 43ms
Stream size : 123 MiB (2%)
Language : English

Text
ID : 129 (0x81)
Menu ID : 137 (0x89)
Format : Teletext
Language : English

...and here's ABC HD (720p)

General
ID : 4
Complete name : \\Mediapc2\media2\Disk3\TV Recordings\The Chaser's War on Everything - ABC HDTV - 2009-05-27.ts
Format : MPEG-TS
File size : 3.70 GiB
Duration : 50mn 0s
Overall bit rate : 10.6 Mbps

Video
ID : 48 (0x30)
Menu ID : 137 (0x89)
Format : MPEG Video
Format version : Version 2
Format profile : Main@High
Format settings, Matrix : Default
Duration : 50mn 0s
Bit rate mode : Variable
Bit rate : 9 408 Kbps
Nominal bit rate : 9 600 Kbps
Width : 1 280 pixels
Height : 720 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 16/9
Frame rate : 50.000 fps
Standard : Component
Colorimetry : 4:2:0
Scan type : Progressive
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.204
Stream size : 3.29 GiB (89%)

Audio
ID : 64 (0x40)
Menu ID : 137 (0x89)
Format : AC-3
Format/Info : Audio Coding 3
Duration : 50mn 0s
Bit rate mode : Constant
Bit rate : 448 Kbps
Channel(s) : 2 channels
Channel positions : L R
Sampling rate : 48.0 KHz
Video delay : -387ms
Stream size : 160 MiB (4%)
Language : English

Text
ID : 102 (0x66)
Menu ID : 137 (0x89)
Format : Teletext
Language : English

 

[kiwijunglist]

it also depends on what version of MP you are using
I think 780G + nonphenom + 1080i + MP1.0 Final is fine, while 1.0.2 is not
If your gonna spend more money on a phenom why not just spend it on a dedicated video card?

 

[globaldonkey]

it also depends on what version of MP you are using
I think 780G + nonphenom + 1080i + MP1.0 Final is fine, while 1.0.2 is not
If your gonna spend more money on a phenom why not just spend it on a dedicated video card?

Right I was talking about MP 1.0.2 with the proper textures implementation as the baseline. That was the conclusion I think I was coming to. Steer clear of integrated graphics in the first place, and get either a ATI 4550/4670 or Nvidia 9500 as the minimum spec to do this properly

Still interested to hear if anybody feels there is a good IGP rig out there that can do the business end of video playback.

As I said, I think there's a lot of hype around 1080p playback, and that seems to be about the only statement mobo and video card manufacturers make about video playback performance. Nobody really stresses these chipsets with 1080i, until folks like those from this community (and similar) go and throw some "real life" video at it.

 

[Owlsroost]

There's a few comments from rtv about IGP's here - https://forum.team-mediaportal.com/1-0-1-svn-builds-313/1080i-material-not-deinterlacing-under-1-0-1-0-a-58486/index9.html#post470166

Also take a look at Guide to Building a HD HTPC - Page 85 - AVS Forum

Tony

 

[Andrew H]

Have you not read this link on Missing Remote another poster presented? It indicates the 8300-based board (with a caviot about a Phenon) is 'better' than the N9500, although the 4550 seems to be their winner. IF one were building a new PC AVSForum (page 85 from above) rated highly the ASUS M3N78-EM, along with a $79 Phenom 8650 Toliman 2.3GHz (or a $120 Phenon II x3) would be well suited... and you could always add-on a $40 video card if it doesn't. Personally I don't see many mobos of decent HTPC specs (SPDIF, HDMI, GB-LAN) that don't have iGPU.

 

[globaldonkey]

That was me who posted it AndrewH and again.... the big problem with the 8200, 8300, 9300, 9400, just like the 780G is that you need a Phenom, and they are really too weak for de-interlacing, as rtv said in his post earlier. I also had some first hand experience with an 8200 recently.

.... and when you look at the AVS specs renethx has put together (which I had, thanks Tony) there is this defacto caveat - no mention of 1080i

So are my recommendations really enough for HD contents?

One of the most frequently asked questions is if these systems can play 1080p contents (including various mkv files as well as BD movies) fine. The answer is yes as you can see in the above chart. Here are screenshots taken in one of the recommended systems (the low-end Intel/NVIDIA system) when a 1080p mkv file is played back. Whether hardware acceleration of the GPU is on or off, the file can be played back fine.

I think the mini-itx and the low end micro-atx configs (which typically specify IGP's) would struggle with 1080i h.264. I think the mid range micro-atx systems would do it, but doesn't look like any are using IGP, and most are 4670 based.

In other words if you aimed for the low end system configs presented, I think you'd be disappointed with 1080i performance and my observation was that all the mid - high end configs were using dGPU.

Not trying to force an opinion here - just musing out loud and trying to make sense of it all. I'm actually in the market for a client only system and would really like to use Mini-itx IGP, but having been burnt a couple of times (G35, 8200), I'm just not sure, and if I lock myself into a small case that can't take a PCIx card, then I'm screwed.

Again, I think the real reason for the doubt and confusion is because of the lack of information about 1080i performance, which is what caught everybody with this texture change in MP.

 

[kkozma]

4550 doesn't have enough oomph behind it. Mine still deinterlaces to 30 fps. The mpc mpeg2 decoder just makes things smoother than the pdvd decoder.

 

[globaldonkey]

Yes I had read on the AVS forums that the 4550 was considered borderline by some.

 

[kkozma]

Yep, it also doesn't help that the 4550 is only 64 bit. I'm going to probably pick up a 4670 and give that one a go... It won't bust the wallet either at $70 from Newegg and Sapphire sells a fanless variant.

4550:
Core Clock: 600MHz
Stream Processors: 80 Stream Processing Units
Memory Clock: 800MHz

4670:
Core Clock: 750MHz
Stream Processors: 320 Stream Processing Units
Memory Clock: 2000MHz

Interestingly enough, it looks as if the Radeon 2600 XT I replaced for this 4550 might be a better card. The only two reasons I changed it was I couldn't take the fan noise anymore and the 4550 can do 8 channel LPCM.

 

[globaldonkey]

Yes, it does look like (on paper at least) that the 2600XT would be better than the 4550. Looks like it sits somewhere between the 4550 and 4670.

I've been pretty happy with the 4670, but I did run into some problems with scaling recently. In the end I couldn't get it to do scaling nicely at all and resorted to getting the display to do it. Think it might be a driver / config problem coz it should be able to handle it

Might have to look at that passively cooled model. Looks interesting.