backtop


Print 65 comment(s) - last by mraix.. on Jun 2 at 6:12 PM


AMD's Avivo HD slide material specifically details AMD UVD as a subset of the Avivo HD family (Source: TechReport, Scott Wasson)

AMD guide highlighting the lack of UVD from the same presentation as above (Source: Beyond3D, Geo Rule)
Regardless of what you may have heard, ATI's newest Radeon does not have hardware or software HD acceleration

AMD has hit another obstacle with its ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT. After constant delays, weak performance improvements and questionable benchmark tactics, AMD’s Universal Video Decoder is the new source of controversy.

The ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT lacks AMD’s highly touted UVD hardware video processing engine, a feature highlighted in roadmaps. Not only that, AMD continues to tout its entire ATI Radeon HD 2000-series as having UVD, when in fact it is only the 65nm HD 2600 and HD 2400 series that possess the hardware decoding capabilities.

Scott Wasson from TechReport came across the issue while testing the UVD features. "True to my word, I set out yesterday to test HD video decode acceleration on a Radeon HD 2900 XT using an HD DVD drive and a version of PowerDVD supplied by AMD for such purposes," he said. "To my surprise, CPU utilization during playback on our Core 2 Extreme X6800 test system ran between 40 and 50%, well above what one would expect from a solution with full HD video decode acceleration."

Wasson proceeded to contact AMD with his results. AMD confirmed the ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT does indeed lack UVD hardware processing capabilities on the GPU and offers video decoding performance on par with the last generation ATI Radeon X1000-series, according to Dave Bauman, technical marketing manager, ATI.

AMD advertises the ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT features Avivo HD support, despite the lack of UVD. AMD’s Avivo HD page lists UVD as part of the Avivo HD feature set.
Smooth HD Video Playback with UVD
ATI Avivo HD technology is designed for high-end, high definition video playback in home theater systems. Free your CPU to power other applications with new UVD (Unified Video Decoder) hardware processing of HD video formats.

UVD is a dedicated video decode processing unit on ATI Radeon HD 2000 series graphics processors that offloads both CPU and GPU rendering pipelines. UVD technology reduces power use, decreases system noise and increases notebook battery life during HD video playback.

Wasson was not the only journalist fooled by AMD’s presentations and guides, Marco Chiapetta of HotHardware and Ryan Shrout of PC Perspective have become victims as well.

AMD public relations, speaking off the record, tells DailyTech that all trade publications should have known UVD was not present on the 2900 XT.  One representative cites the Radeon 2900 family introduction (PDF), claiming, "ATI Avivo HD is a technology platform that includes a broad set of capabilities offered by certain ATI Radeon HD 2000 GPUs. Not all products have all features and full enablement of some ATI AvivoHD capabilities may require complementary products."

Geo Rule from Beyond3D points out that other AMD guidance did indicate UVD was not present on R600.  More specifically, he adds that the UVD feature slide never explicitly states UVD is present on Radeon HD 2900, while the same slide states UVD is present on Radeon HD 2400 and Radeon HD 2600.

When asked why AMD never contacted any trade publications to correct the misconception that UVD was included in Radeon 2900, our contact declined to comment.  He did add that full HD acceleration is present on the R600 ASIC, and it will eventually be enabled via driver updates.

“Unfortunately, try as we might, we could not get UVD to work with the current drivers provided by AMD and the PowerDVD release that is supposed to enable the hardware acceleration on HD 2000 series parts,” states AnandTech Senior CPU and Graphics Editor Derek Wilson. “We will have to take a second look at hardware decode when AMD and CyberLink or Intervideo get their software in order.”

AMD has not released a driver that takes advantage of the ATI Radeon HD 2000-series multimedia features nor has a software company released a player that takes advantage of the hardware.

Last year ATI made false claims of HDCP compatibility with its Radeon X1900-series graphics cards, despite the lack of HDCP keys.  Eventually ATI was sued over these claims under false advertising pretenses.

ATI board partners potentially face the same false advertising claims.  Today, no less than four AIB partners claim UVD support on their Radeon HD 2900 XT boxart.  Surprisingly absent from that list: Built-by-ATI boards.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

That Hurts
By chrispyski on 5/25/2007 5:32:06 PM , Rating: 3
The same decoding capabilities as the X1000 series? Absolutely absurd especially when their touting it's multimedia capabilities with its sound pass through and HDMI dongle. I'm sorry but this sounds like false advertising to me.

They'd better get on that update and quick or their gonna be facing some litigation.




RE: That Hurts
By jak3676 on 5/25/2007 5:37:22 PM , Rating: 3
So it's there in the hardware, but not enabled by current drivers?


RE: That Hurts
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 5/25/2007 5:39:59 PM , Rating: 5
There is no UVD chip on the 2900. The R600 ASIC can supposedly handle HD acceleration, but that has not been enabled yet either apparently.


RE: That Hurts
By chrispyski on 5/25/2007 5:46:51 PM , Rating: 2
Wow, I stand corrected. Thanks Kris.

There may very well be some sort of litigation coming, update or not...


RE: That Hurts
By Samus on 5/25/2007 7:22:16 PM , Rating: 2
Right, only their 65nm parts even have the technology even embedded. Everything else doesn't even have it on-die.

That's a big oversight. nVidia is going to grind this into their products now because AMD lacks them.


RE: That Hurts
By wingless on 5/26/2007 12:41:14 AM , Rating: 2
Nvidia basically pulled the same bulls**t with the 8xxx series. The 8800GTX/GTS cards don't have full PureVideo 2. Only the midrange/lowend POS's have all the on-board decoding capabilities.

Honestly though, if you buy one of these video cards in the first place then its safe to say you probably have a fast ass processor that can easily handle UVD or whatever you throw at it. I for one hope that atleast Nvidia will have full PureVideo 2 in their 8900 refresh this summer. We really shouldnt knock ATI too bad for this since a little bit of the problem is their beta drivers.

ATI's only crime is releasing a card 6 months late with BETA drivers which killed it's launch. They should have made us wait another month and come out with decent working software as not to lose any more face.


RE: That Hurts
By defter on 5/26/2007 3:57:35 AM , Rating: 2
You are missing the point here. NVidia never claimed that 8800 series has purevideo 2. AMD/ATI is still saying on their 2900 pages that: "ATI Avivo™ HD Video and Display Platform" is supported: http://ati.amd.com/products/radeonhd2900/specs.htm...

On other page they clearly state that Avivo HD contains UVD: "Smooth HD Video Playback with UVD
ATI Avivo HD technology is designed for high-end, high definition video playback in home theater systems. Free your CPU to power other applications with new UVD (Unified Video Decoder) hardware processing of HD video formats.":
http://ati.amd.com/technology/avivo/features.html
Thus, they still continue lying about UVD in HD 2900XT.

Let's look at NVidia site: "NVIDIA® GeForce® 8600 and 8500 series GPUs feature NVIDIA® PureVideo™ HD under Windows Vista™ with a revolutionary new video processing engine."
http://www.nvidia.com/page/purevideo_hd.html
There is no confusion, since NVidia doesn't claim that 8800 series has the same capabilities.


RE: That Hurts
By Aikouka on 5/29/2007 8:48:34 AM , Rating: 1
Maybe nVidia and the vendors should get in touch then?

eVGA e-GeForce 8800GTX
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...
"The NVIDIA PureVideo HD Technology offers high-definition video decoding and delivers videos with unprecedented clarity to convert your PC into a high-end home-theater system."


RE: That Hurts
By Deekity on 5/29/2007 12:31:49 PM , Rating: 2
Why? It doesn't claim Purevideo 2 ....it's claims are in accordance with the featureset of the board


RE: That Hurts
By Aikouka on 5/29/2007 2:20:08 PM , Rating: 5
The 8600's feature page doesn't list PureVideo 2 either, what's your point? Oh wait, if you look, nVidia's link for the 8600's features and benefits redirects you to the 8800's features and benefits page.

Then they so conveniently say that hardware acceleration delivering lower CPU use is "model dependent." So since both the 8800 and 8600 reference the same page, both count under models referred to by the statement. Since the 8600 has it and the 8800 does not, this becomes valid, but annoyingly sneaky.

Personally, I own an 8800GTX and it does peeve me a bit that a cheaper card in a lower designation has features that nVidia was too cheap to put on my card. But now they're being sued for setting prices... ?


RE: That Hurts
By carage on 5/30/2007 9:50:51 AM , Rating: 2
It's not the first time nVidia pulled off something like this.
I was also pretty peeved when I learned that my 6800 GT lacks features available on the lower end models.


RE: That Hurts
By MDE on 5/26/2007 9:34:17 PM , Rating: 2
No, it's more like the BS Nvidia pulled with the whole NV40 PVP fiasco.


RE: That Hurts
By leexgx on 5/27/2007 5:09:07 PM , Rating: 2
look up


RE: That Hurts
By iVTec on 5/25/2007 6:15:32 PM , Rating: 1
So if i got that right, there can be hardware decoding via the shaders but not by using an on-board UVD chip,right?It seems ATI'll face quite a few lawsuits soon unfortunately...


RE: That Hurts
By drebo on 5/25/2007 6:45:59 PM , Rating: 3
Uhm, didn't we already know this? I distinctly remember seeing an HD DVD benchmark that had the 2600 outperforming the 2900 and pointing to this as the cause.

Strike one for the sensationalists.


RE: That Hurts
By drebo on 5/25/2007 6:49:22 PM , Rating: 2
I stand corrected. The article I was thinking of was for the 8600 series.

Still, though. Why is this a bad thing when it's AMD leaving it out of the high end card, when none of the 8800-series GeForce cards have full hardware decode accelleration?


RE: That Hurts
By gramboh on 5/25/2007 6:52:31 PM , Rating: 2
I know it isn't in my 8800GTS and I think that is stupid, the technology was there and for the price of a higher end card they should include hardware decoding, even if most machines using the card are powerful enough to do it CPU.


RE: That Hurts
By Christopher1 on 5/26/2007 9:43:23 AM , Rating: 2
I have to agree. What about the people who are running a MM system with more than one monitor, and want to do something else while their kids are watching a movie, or something similar?


RE: That Hurts
By OMGBS LIES on 5/27/2007 11:24:26 PM , Rating: 4
who in their right mind would want this thing in a HTPC ???

this is something built for gaming not for sitting in a crap low profile setup for viewing content. it makes sense to me anyway to use a low/mainstream card eg: HD2400 which will provide full vc-1 / avc HD content with no need for fans etc..

i dont understand the logic here, and didnt nvidia do EXACTLY the same thing with there high end cards, no h264 speedup on their top cards...

anyways its all bollox...


RE: That Hurts
By deeznuts on 5/28/2007 11:36:18 PM , Rating: 2
You do know some people game on their HTPC right? There is no one cookie cutter mold for an HTPC which makes the HTPC so appealing, it's very versatile.

You don't understand the logic here, maybe you have no logic? Nvidia never claimed their high-end cards have the "h264" speedup on their top cards. AMD/ATI is.


RE: That Hurts
By carage on 5/30/2007 9:58:04 AM , Rating: 2
Apparently you don't know there are people who also watch movies on their game PC that just happens to be their primary rig.
Get a 30" LCD or 42" Plasma plus some decent speakers...voila...your game PC is also a decent movie player/TV.
As of the noise, well...when your speakers are doing their job, I don't think noise from the fans are much of a problem. I doubt many people are capable of distinguishing the hiss of the fan motor when there are buildings exploding.
Power consumption? If someone could afford a rig like this, chances are electric bills is a non-issue.


RE: That Hurts
By chrispyski on 5/25/2007 5:40:47 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
He did add that full HD acceleration is present on the R600 ASIC, and it will eventually be enabled via driver updates.


Missing Something . . .
By vanka on 5/25/2007 8:34:27 PM , Rating: 2
I guess I must be missing something; at first the article seems to say that the UVD is completely missing from the 2900XT, then it goes on to imply that they just couldn't get it working in this driver version. At risk of appearing ignorant: which one is it?

Here's the quote that creates the confusion:
quote:
When asked why AMD never contacted any trade publications to correct the misconception that UVD was included in Radeon 2900, our contact declined to comment. He did add that full HD acceleration is present on the R600 ASIC, and it will eventually be enabled via driver updates.

“Unfortunately, try as we might, we could not get UVD to work with the current drivers provided by AMD and the PowerDVD release that is supposed to enable the hardware acceleration on HD 2000 series parts,” states AnandTech Senior CPU and Graphics Editor Derek Wilson said. “We will have to take a second look at hardware decode when AMD and CyberLink or Intervideo get their software in order.”

AMD has not released a driver that takes advantage of the ATI Radeon HD 2000-series multimedia features nor has a software company released a player that takes advantage of the hardware.




RE: Missing Something . . .
By Anh Huynh on 5/25/2007 9:57:28 PM , Rating: 3
UVD is lacking from the HD 2900 XT, which is the video decoding engine that decodes most of the Blu-ray and HD DVD formats in hardware.

As it stands, the HD 2900 XT can decode the formats and accelerate the decoding, however, it is doing so no differently than the last generation Radeon X1950-series.


RE: Missing Something . . .
By smitty3268 on 5/25/2007 10:39:07 PM , Rating: 6
There are basically 2 approaches - the way ATI did it in the last generation where they use their existing shader hardware to do the acceleration, and the NVIDIA way which is to add a seperate chip on the card which exclusively handles it.

The former way is cheaper in terms of silicon but requires a lot of shader power, especially for HD content. AMD is saying that the 2900XT has enough horsepower to do it that way, but the drivers haven't been finished yet. On the other hand, they had to add another chip (UVD) to the lower end parts because they wouldn't have been able to do it. This is what everyone seemed to assume the 2900 had as well, and is really the better solution because it would use less power due to the specially designed hardware being more efficient for the task and would also almost certainly use less CPU as well due to the drivers having to do less work.


RE: Missing Something . . .
By raven3x7 on 5/26/2007 11:40:37 AM , Rating: 2
Actually Nvidia didnt do it on their high end GPUs either. The 8800 series does not have full HD acceleration.


RE: Missing Something . . .
By bob661 on 5/27/07, Rating: 0
RE: Missing Something . . .
By Aikouka on 5/29/2007 2:26:25 PM , Rating: 3
http://www.nvidia.com/page/8800_features.html
quote:
Discrete, Programmable Video Processor:
NVIDIA PureVideo is a discrete programmable processing core in NVIDIA GPUs that provides superb picture quality and ultra-smooth movies with low CPU utilization and power.


This page is also referenced by the 8600 (i.e. if you click on Features and Benefits after clicking on the 8600 link, you will also be directed to this same exact page. Replacing 8800 with 8600 in the URL only leads to a 404 error).

To me, it looks like nVidia is hiding about not having video decoding available with their one footnote:

quote:
2 - Feature requires supported video software. Features may vary by product.


I'm a bit disappointed as I paid good money for my 8800GTX only to find that someone that has a lower-end 8600 and a lower-end processor (single core?) can get just as good video decoding as I can with a dual core and an 8800GTX. Do I feel cheated? Quite a bit as nVidia loved to tote their high-def decoding on their card at release. Oh well, at least games run fast =(.


Media center cards Vs. Gaming cards
By SoneeOO7 on 5/26/2007 1:34:22 AM , Rating: 3
You have to take into consideration that most people will buy a mid/lower end card for their media center pc so those having the better HD capabilities in those cards and not in the "higher" end cards isnt really a big deal. If you're gonna game you get a card that'll push higher frames IN GAMES not movies. If you want to watch movies you get a lower end card, and oh, wouldn't you know it they run HD better. So in essense you get what you paid for or bought the card for.




RE: Media center cards Vs. Gaming cards
By GlassHouse69 on 5/26/2007 7:22:36 PM , Rating: 1
this makes no sense. people that buy high end stuff use their computers for MUCH more applications. I for one buy 1000 dollar + monitors whenever I buy one that enables me to never need a tv. all in wonder?

your argument is one of someone that doesnt buy all-in-wonder versions or use their computer for more than just bs'ing and gaming.


RE: Media center cards Vs. Gaming cards
By XesBOX on 5/28/2007 10:12:17 AM , Rating: 4
It makes perfect sense. How many people spend more than 1000+ on monitors so they never need a TV?

Population: You.

This is a general sense, there will be special applications, and user preferences, but, generally speaking, people who own a TV, HD or otherwise, don't have any intention on GAMING on their TV. If I was spending a grand on monitors, I could probably afford a high end gaming card and a separate video card that was feature rich in video playback.

On another note, can someone explain to me.. uh.. why it f'cking matters? ATI and nVidia have been in a tug of war that rivals even Intel and AMD's history. They've both made mistakes, they've both made -really- bad PR moves, and in the end, if you're getting 100% CPU utilization on your f'cking HMPC what does it matter? Who tries to render 3072x2304 image in Photoshop while watching their favorite episode of 24 on the same box?

Where the hell did 'practical' go?


By carage on 5/30/2007 10:06:48 AM , Rating: 3
Population: umm...people who have spacing issues?
I know quite a few people who are restricted by their small apartments/dorm rooms(college or company)that have this issue.
I know quite a few folks in Japan have this issue, because real estate price over there is ridiculous.
If someone doesn't have a lot of space, getting a 24" or larger monitor that also serves as a TV makes a lot of sense.


By inthell on 5/29/2007 7:26:04 PM , Rating: 2
well i watch movies/TV shows and game on my PC which is hooked up to a 20" LCD widescreen. although i dont have a HD drive i might buy one if they get a lot cheaper.


AMD getting desperate
By therealnickdanger on 5/25/07, Rating: 0
RE: AMD getting desperate
By Pirks on 5/25/07, Rating: -1
RE: AMD getting desperate
By DTAllTheBest on 5/25/07, Rating: -1
RE: AMD getting desperate
By tacorly on 5/25/2007 6:15:43 PM , Rating: 5
maybeeeeeee you should get a life


RE: AMD getting desperate
By mars777 on 5/26/2007 3:04:58 AM , Rating: 2
1 maybe too much


RE: AMD getting desperate
By Makaveli on 5/25/2007 6:21:45 PM , Rating: 2
From the sound of your post u are not a day over 14. Why don't focus on your school work, and not trolling the forums fighting fanatics, which makes u look like a fanatic!


RE: AMD getting desperate
By Pirks on 5/25/07, Rating: -1
RE: AMD getting desperate
By DingieM on 5/29/2007 4:27:01 AM , Rating: 2
ATI lovers aren't the only one rating you down.
I surely know every decent/normal individual will rate you down and do that happily.
Maybe you should pay a visit to the hospital because you sound very ill to me, I just don't hope its already too late for you.

Take care


RE: AMD getting desperate
By AstroCreep on 5/26/2007 12:02:25 AM , Rating: 1
Eh, I'm not so sure that this was totally an 'AMD' problem (in name only, perhaps), as this is very reminiscent of a few years ago when ATI claimed their cards supported HDCP (on paper), but they didn't in reality...which was followed by a class-action lawsuit.

So if anything, it's just history repeating itself with ATI opening their mouths a tad too quickly.


This Review (and others) Seem to Say Different.
By Goty on 5/25/2007 5:54:42 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews/r600reviewz/vi...

If you look around the common review sites, you'll see that this simply isn't true.




By Amiga500 on 5/25/2007 6:17:55 PM , Rating: 4
I recommend you actually read the linked page.

For an "AMD owned site" its pretty harsh on the 2900XT:

What also became apparent in the time we used the 2900 XT for video playback is that it is completely unsuitable due to the noise the cooler makes.

and it also says:

As mentioned earlier in the article the 2900 XT does not feature the same video capabilities as the 2400/2600 and so relies on raw shader power to assist with video tasks, let’s see how much of a difference it can make.

While describing an Intel QX6700 as one of the best processors money can buy - not the soundbite of an AMD PR machine is it?


off the record?
By flashbacck on 5/26/2007 10:43:11 PM , Rating: 5
"AMD public relations, speaking off the record, tells DailyTech that all trade publications should have known UVD was not present on the 2900 XT"

I'm no journalist, but if they were speaking off the record, why are you mentioning it? Isn't that a bit dishonest, Dailytech?




RE: off the record?
By James Holden on 5/27/2007 5:42:40 PM , Rating: 2
Off the record means you keep the identity confidential, not the info.


foot-in-mouth syndrome
By Gul Westfale on 5/25/07, Rating: 0
RE: foot-in-mouth syndrome
By iVTec on 5/25/2007 8:01:15 PM , Rating: 2
Basically...yes.

But this happens only in the 2900XT which is supposed to have "AVIVO" HD but as we see it can't hardware accelerate decoding...However PureVideo HD delivers what it's name promises.But in 8600/8500 the results are much better than in 8800 GTS/GTX/Ultra,something nVidia surely could have avoided...On the other side,so could ATI,coincidence? :P


RE: foot-in-mouth syndrome
By defter on 5/26/07, Rating: 0
RE: foot-in-mouth syndrome
By iVTec on 5/26/2007 4:24:47 AM , Rating: 2
That's correct,still i believe they could have "finalized" PureVideo HD in time for the 8800GTX launch...It's a shame the graphics card offering the best value for money right now doesn't have this feature.Seems like VP1 was just a quick-built solution in order to release GTX sooner,but that's not something we expect from a 450+ EURO product.Makes me think of all the games today that require an enormous patch few months after their release to fix all the bugs and problems,because the developers were in a hurry to get them done.


RE: foot-in-mouth syndrome
By defter on 5/26/2007 5:23:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
.Seems like VP1 was just a quick-built solution in order to release GTX sooner


Uhm, VP1 was already present in at least some G7x GPUs...

Thus, it's simple really:
NVidia's new chips released in 2006 have VP1.
NVidia's new chips released in 2007 have VP2.


Does the HD 2900XT need high end CPU to run HD/BR
By EastCoast on 5/26/2007 1:45:08 AM , Rating: 2
Looking at the review from Hardspell with a AMD 2800+ it appears there is No, 0, nada, zilch, hardware decoding of any kind. Therefore, I need someone to explain to me how do you turn it on with a driver update? IMHO, I don't see how that makes sense. I am not saying it's impossible but I still wonder how this is going to be pulled off. For example:
-will the HD 2900XT need to be in 3d mode to play HD/BR?
-will the HD 2900XT ASIC really fix the problem or is there something else involved?
If you look here you will know what I am talking about:
TESTBED
http://tinyurl.com/2va6xh

Results of Behind Enemy Line using AMD 2800 + 1.6 WinXP
http://tinyurl.com/355abx

Results of Open Season Line using AMD 2800 + 1.6 WinX
http://tinyurl.com/345g33

Results of X-men Last Stand Line using AMD 2800 + 1.6 WinX
http://tinyurl.com/2o43kd

As you can see, CPU utilization is at 100% (these are just a few H.264 movies...I didn't link them all). Now if there was something on the HD 2900XT that processes HD/BR content shouldn't it read something other then 100% CPU utilization?
Inwhich better driver optimization could decrease CPU utilization further with better drivers? Now as you review this please note that this was completed using a low end CPU. From what I read around forums CPU utilization of 50% or more causes skipping and stuttering (from what I read). If this is true Cat 7.5 would need to deliver a driver that would reduce CPU utilization of more then 50% from 100% that it's currently at (again if you use that CPU). Other CPUs will vary and I could guess that any C2D would be less then 100% but wow, amazing!!!!




By EastCoast on 5/26/2007 1:02:57 PM , Rating: 2
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1012047&p...
can anyone define that statement? (last sentence in that post)


By EastCoast on 5/27/2007 3:08:34 PM , Rating: 2
Is this actually news?
By PrinceGaz on 5/26/2007 7:47:16 AM , Rating: 4
I knew about this on the day the card was launched because it was stated quite clearly in the review on HardOCP which I read then.

quote:
Continuing their video acceleration support ATI has built a Unified Video Decoder engine into the Radeon HD 2600 and HD 2400. The Radeon HD 2900 series does not have UVD; instead it uses the streaming processors to carry out the same functions.


It's a shame they haven't got the drivers finished to run the UVD functions on the HD 2900's shaders especially given how late the card is, but I thought it was common knowledge that the 2900 lacked the UVD hardware.




No Reason to Get HD 2900 XT
By AggressorPrime on 5/26/2007 11:15:00 AM , Rating: 2
I only supported this card because I thought it had UVD. Now that it doesn't, it is no longer the fastest video card with an HD content accelerator. The best you can get now would be the GeForce 8600 GTS (GT for notebooks) until the HD 2600s come around. This makes me very disappointed in AMD. First they lose their CPU crown, now they mess up the R600 launch.




By GlassHouse69 on 5/26/2007 7:20:36 PM , Rating: 2
yeah, that's utter ass.

I am waiting for the 65nm revision only to learn that it will be using the entire gfx card to view hd and not some ultra efficient chip add in.

It might work better but it will be unecessary. it might be a method though to remove an added cost on the high end, more expensive cards to keep them competitive.

the 8800 cannot do it all and there will be nothing enabling anything for it. this is rediculous :) However, I will be using a quad core Agena by the time this is a factor, which probably would neutralize any concerns.

still, dedicated chips are the way to go for miniscule wattage usage. sux.

all-in-wonder.... where are you I wonder? if that has it, im there (plus 65nm hopefully!)


It should be renamed then...
By shabby on 5/25/2007 10:32:11 PM , Rating: 3
To SD 2900XT, its only fair right?




I can see the concerns but...
By Trisped on 5/29/2007 2:22:03 PM , Rating: 3
ATI (Now AMD) has never tried to directly compete with NVidia. Yes, they put out high end gamer cards, but they seem to put a larger value on the multi-media market then NVidia does. It then makes sense that their media focus card, the 2600, has the smaller die and HD decode abilities.

While AMD does need to be more carful about stating what is supported and what is implemented, reviewers need to also read carefully to make sure they are not creating rummers and misconceptions.

Of course the duality of the words like "supported" and "implemented" means that a company can use one to say that their boards can be configured to use UVD or HDCP, or that they ship with the hardware on the board using the exact same sentences. Personally I think of support as meaing it is possible, while implemented means it is actually there. I think the DailyTech guys look at it the other way around though...




By mraix on 6/2/2007 6:12:16 PM , Rating: 2
I am amazed that anyone expected the HD decoder to be onboard the 2900 card.

that capability is clearly missing from it's specs, as opposed to the other two cards. No need to read the small print in the bottom, the main text already tells you so.

(?)




Alright, that's it! :X
By Rike on 5/25/07, Rating: -1
RE: Alright, that's it! :X
By BucDan on 5/25/2007 6:21:10 PM , Rating: 2
im saying the same with you...but isnt the 8600 series and the 8500 series compared to the hd2600/2400 have the UVD(err something like that)in common with eachother?


RE: Alright, that's it! :X
By iVTec on 5/25/2007 6:46:43 PM , Rating: 2
Purevideo HD, it's called...And it does a hell of a job in decoding H.264 if you have 8600/8500 (VP2 engine)...


"I'm an Internet expert too. It's all right to wire the industrial zone only, but there are many problems if other regions of the North are wired." -- North Korean Supreme Commander Kim Jong-il

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki