6600GT and 1920 resolution

deimos wrote:

IMHO it's not worth considering price-wice anyways. A single
GF6800GT or Ultra is cheaper and faster than a SLI 6600GT setup...

Benjamin



I was reading an SLI test on Beyond3D yesterday in which the 6600GT
SLI setup repeatedly outperformed the generic 6800 SLI setup for some
reason.

Sure, since a single 6600GT outperforms a 6800 (non-GT/non-Ultra) in almost
all situations already...

Benjamin

pixel wrote:

in this thread i've heard 2 people say completely opposite things
about DVD performance with a 6600GT at 1920,

Strange, as both people (I assume You are talking about Arthurs and Dr Teeth
postings) are talking about the 6800 and not the 6600GT. The funny thing is
that the 6600GT has much better video acceleration hardware which also
supports HDTV, and the 6600GT doesn't...

Besides that, it depends on what exactly You want to do. DVD watching is
different from i.e. watching DivX movies or WMV movies (especially WMV-HD),
and it also depends on the DVD player software You use...

Besides that, it's IMHO totally stupid to rely on watching DVDs at
1920x1200, simply because DVD Video has a max resolution of only 720 x 576
pixels. So even if You set Your gfx card to 1920x1200 the DVD Video has to
be interpolated, and the resulting picture isn't better than with Your gfx
cards at i.e. 1440x1152 and having the display interpolating the image...

and watching full-screen
movies on the LCD would be the 2nd most important task.... so not
sure what to believe on that yet...

If I were You I'd concentrate on things that are much more essential than
DVD playback which hardly is a problem for any somewhat modern gfx card...

Benjamin

Benjamin Gawert wrote:

Strange, as both people (I assume You are talking about Arthurs and
Dr Teeth postings) are talking about the 6800 and not the 6600GT. The
funny thing is that the 6600GT has much better video acceleration
hardware which also supports HDTV, and the 6600GT doesn't...
^^^^^^
Replace this "6600GT" with "6800". Sorry.

Benjamin

Benjamin Gawert wrote:
Besides that, it's IMHO totally stupid to rely on watching DVDs at
1920x1200, simply because DVD Video has a max resolution of only 720 x 576
pixels. So even if You set Your gfx card to 1920x1200 the DVD Video has to
be interpolated, and the resulting picture isn't better than with Your gfx
cards at i.e. 1440x1152 and having the display interpolating the image...


it has to be 1920 for several reasons, no-one can really be bothered
changing the res of a monitor just to watch a movie, and interpolated
DVDs i've seen still look great. it has to be no less than 1920 because
as i understand it changing the native res of an LCD would look bad,
worse than interpolating the DVD movie itself.

pixel wrote:

it has to be 1920 for several reasons, no-one can really be bothered
changing the res of a monitor just to watch a movie, and interpolated
DVDs i've seen still look great. it has to be no less than 1920
because as i understand it changing the native res of an LCD would
look bad, worse than interpolating the DVD movie itself.

No matter what You do, DVD will always be interpolated. If the gfx card does
the interpolation or the display does makes no difference. Using a high
resultion brings You nothing. That's btw one of the reasons why most LCD TVs
use XGA or SXGA displays. Higher resolutions simply don't offer a better
picture.

Besides that, having the display interpolationg lower resolutions isn't
always as bad as it sounds. Of course it usually looks really bad if You use
1024x768 on a 1280x1024 (SXGA) display or if You go down to 800x600 on a
1024x768 (XGA) TFT. But the image quality on i.e. a HP L2335 23"-Display
(native 1920x1200; we have dozens of them at work) on lower resolutions like
1600x1024 or even down to 1024x768 is very good and sharp. That's because
such high-res monitors have lots of pixels on which even lower resolutions
look good, while usual 15" XGA and 17" SXGA TFTs have a much smaller number
of pixels which results in a unsharp image on non-native resolutions.

But of course if You insist You can watch DVD in 1920x1200 with a 6600GT
without problems...

Benjamin

No matter what You do, DVD will always be interpolated. If the gfx
card does the interpolation or the display does makes no difference.
Using a high resultion brings You nothing. That's btw one of the
reasons why most LCD TVs use XGA or SXGA displays. Higher resolutions
simply don't offer a better picture.

Actually there has been a lot of success in upscaling DVDs to HD
resolutions. There was an article a year or so ago about it on one of the
hardware sites that showed screenshots of Star Wars Episode 2 from standard
DVD video and the upscaled version and there was quite an improvement.

tq96 wrote:

Actually there has been a lot of success in upscaling DVDs to HD
resolutions. There was an article a year or so ago about it on one
of the hardware sites that showed screenshots of Star Wars Episode 2
from standard DVD video and the upscaled version and there was quite
an improvement.

I know, but there are quite contrary opinions around about upscaling. I've
seen it myself several times, but I don't think it's really that good. Most
people simply forget that the visual information (detail resolution) in
720x576 isn't sufficient for higher resolutions. There are some tricks to
make some(!) (not all) scenes look better, but that's it. It's not even
close the quality of a high resolution video stream, and in most scenes that
aren't taking place in the dark the picture also can get worse...

Of course HDTV video (like wmv-hd) is a different story, but for that the
6600GT also is one of the best cards available...

Benjamin

Benjamin Gawert wrote:
tq96 wrote:

Actually there has been a lot of success in upscaling DVDs to HD
resolutions. There was an article a year or so ago about it on one
of the hardware sites that showed screenshots of Star Wars Episode 2
from standard DVD video and the upscaled version and there was quite
an improvement.

I know, but there are quite contrary opinions around about upscaling.
I've seen it myself several times, but I don't think it's really that
good. Most people simply forget that the visual information (detail
resolution) in 720x576 isn't sufficient for higher resolutions. There
are some tricks to make some(!) (not all) scenes look better, but
that's it. It's not even close the quality of a high resolution video
stream, and in most scenes that aren't taking place in the dark the
picture also can get worse...

I beg to differ. My 6800GT card displays video in 640x480 overlay, and it
looks absolutely horrible compared to when I use my Parhelia, which scales
the overlay to the chosen destination resolution, using 10 bits per colour
while interpolating. Gone are the horisontal stripes that you easily see in
640x480, and aliasing effects are severely reduced.

The video quality of the 6800GT is so bad that I'm about to yank it out and
put the Parhelia back in, despite not being able to play $300 worth of games
plus having spent $400 on a card I won't use.

Of course HDTV video (like wmv-hd) is a different story, but for that
the 6600GT also is one of the best cards available...

Provided you use Windows XP. If you use Windows 2000 (which has some
advantages over XP, where XP has been crippled), all the extra video
features are disabled. This is not an OS problem, as other video card
producers have no problems doing HW accelleration in W2k, but likely a
conscious decision from nVidia not to support W2k more than they have to,
due to the smaller user base.

--
*Art

Arthur Hagen wrote:

I beg to differ. My 6800GT card displays video in 640x480 overlay,
and it looks absolutely horrible compared to when I use my Parhelia,
which scales the overlay to the chosen destination resolution, using
10 bits per colour while interpolating. Gone are the horisontal
stripes that you easily see in 640x480, and aliasing effects are
severely reduced.

What software are You using? I have no problem watching DVDs at 1680x1050
with my PNY Verto GF6600GT PCIe...

The video quality of the 6800GT is so bad that I'm about to yank it
out and put the Parhelia back in, despite not being able to play $300
worth of games plus having spent $400 on a card I won't use.

Maybe You should just choose a different card, or check Your
setup/configuration...

Of course HDTV video (like wmv-hd) is a different story, but for that
the 6600GT also is one of the best cards available...

Provided you use Windows XP. If you use Windows 2000 (which has some
advantages over XP, where XP has been crippled)

And what advantages should that be?

, all the extra video
features are disabled. This is not an OS problem, as other video card
producers have no problems doing HW accelleration in W2k, but likely a
conscious decision from nVidia not to support W2k more than they have
to, due to the smaller user base.

That's BS. The GF6600GT works as well with video in W2k as it does in
WinXP...

I really suggest You check Your setup...

Benjamin

Benjamin Gawert wrote:
Arthur Hagen wrote:

I beg to differ. My 6800GT card displays video in 640x480 overlay,
and it looks absolutely horrible compared to when I use my Parhelia,
which scales the overlay to the chosen destination resolution, using
10 bits per colour while interpolating. Gone are the horisontal
stripes that you easily see in 640x480, and aliasing effects are
severely reduced.

What software are You using? I have no problem watching DVDs at
1680x1050 with my PNY Verto GF6600GT PCIe...

Video overlays should be independent of the software used.
If the software does it for you, bypassing the drivers, that's cheating.
:-)
So the answer is really "any program without special nVidia support".
This includes Pinnacle Studio 8 and PCTV Vision, BeyondTV 3, Intervideo
WinDVD Recorder, Bink/Smacker player, and a bunch of games (where
cut-screens don't appear on the second monitor at all, even when an overlay
is used).

The video quality of the 6800GT is so bad that I'm about to yank it
out and put the Parhelia back in, despite not being able to play $300
worth of games plus having spent $400 on a card I won't use.

Maybe You should just choose a different card, or check Your
setup/configuration...

I tried an ATI X800 pro first. That was much worse -- it can't do overlays
to a second monitor at all unless you use clone mode.

As for configuration, I'm uncertain what to check for. It's not like
there's a lot of options in the nVidia drivers for overlays when running
W2k. There are some things I am sure are just plain wrong with the driver
setup, though, like:

- Having no less than *eight* monitors show up in the device manager when I
really have two. If I remove any of them, they reappear if doing a hardware
scan. I have four "Default Monitor (winseset)", two Envision monitors and
two Mitsubishi Diamond Pro monitors listed, when in reality I have one
Envision and one Diamond Pro. No matter what I try, the extra non-existing
monitors reappear in the device manager as long as the GT6800 card is
installed.
- Whenever I select the "GeForce 6800 GT" tab in the display properties
advanced settings, the primary monitor degausses and goes black, and I have
to turn the monitor off and on again to get the display back. Same when I
OK out of the display properties.
- DDC/CI doesn't work. I refuse to believe that a $400 card doesn't
support this, and think it might be related to the above mentioned confusion
with number of monitors.

Of course HDTV video (like wmv-hd) is a different story, but for
that the 6600GT also is one of the best cards available...

Provided you use Windows XP. If you use Windows 2000 (which has some
advantages over XP, where XP has been crippled)

And what advantages should that be?

There's at least a few places where XP has been deliberately crippled:

- Multiple colour profiles per monitor.
- For networking, having more than 10 half-open connections (which has been
crippled even for XP Pro with SP2).
- Being able to "Remove Hardware", so you can revert to a previous version
of a driver if the latest one gives you problems, even when there's no
specific uninstaller.

, all the extra video
features are disabled. This is not an OS problem, as other video
card producers have no problems doing HW accelleration in W2k, but
likely a conscious decision from nVidia not to support W2k more than
they have to, due to the smaller user base.

That's BS. The GF6600GT works as well with video in W2k as it does in
WinXP...

Nope. Look at nVidia's site:
http://www.nvidia.co.uk/object/dvd_decoder_sysreqs.html
Or this review from Anand:
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2305

In short, thne nVidia hardware decoder isn't available for W2k (and neither
is WMP 10 which you need to take full advantage of all the options).

I really suggest You check Your setup...

I'd love to, but I don't know what to check or how to fix what's wrong,
beyond what I've already tried. Do you have any specific suggestions?

--
*Art