INTERACT FORUM
More => Old Versions => Media Center 17 => Topic started by: NickF on December 31, 2011, 03:19:04 am
-
Red October is generally viewed as a significant step forward for MC in handling video. It is clear, though, that many users, myself included, are still struggling to get the best out of it.
One of the problems I am struggling with is what is the minimum CPU and GPU requirement to get good results for Red October standard and HQ. The JRiver wiki says that we need an i5 or better processor. The problem here is that there is a range of i5 CPUs with significant variation in capability - number of cores, hyper threading, clock speed etc, and the wiki says nothing about GPU. Does the OS make a difference and does it need to be 64 bit? I have an i5 K655 running at 3.2 GHz and an NVIDIA 8600 graphics card. I am running Windows 7 Ultimate 32 bit. I can run Red October standard but get frequent tearing across the screen and regular jumping of the picture, even with frame rates set correctly and ReClock running. With Red October HQ, the jumping is very bad.
So how are we to know what is required to get the best result? I feel that we need better guidance than we have at present. Is the Windows Experience Index which Windows produces any help here. If you right click on Computer and choose properties, the rating is shown and is broken down if you click on Windows Experience Index. My overall rating is 6.5. The breakdown is:
Processor calculations per second: 6.9
Memory operations per second: 7.0
Graphics desktop performance: 6.5
Gaming graphics: 6.5
Disk transfer rate: 7.1
Can these numbers be used to set criteria for successful use of the Red October options? If not, what is the alternative?
Nick.
-
I think it has more to do with the GPU than the CPU. I couldn't run HQ on my i3-2100 or my i5-2500 without occasional stuttering/frames-dropped. Then I added the nVidia GTS450 and GT440 and now both machines have no issues running HQ.
-
I agree. I just finished installing an AsRock Vision 3D with an i3 processor and it is running as smooth as can be with Win 7 64bit.
TLS
-
I agree. I just finished installing an AsRock Vision 3D with an i3 processor and it is running as smooth as can be with Win 7 64bit.
TLS
Same here. Even 1080p movies play flawlessly Red October HQ mode on my Asrock 3D Vision, with an i5 2520M processor, and a GT540 mobile graphics card.
-
What I would like to know is, does it scale beyond the two settings? (STD and HQ)
The OP talks about "achieving best results" - surely it either works or it doesn't. Does the features of each scale according to the system or is it a one-size-fits-all solution?
-
So, for those of you who are getting a good result, can you publish your Windows Experience Index numbers. Say whether you are using RO Standard or HQ. Also, are you Windows 32 or 64 bit. I really believe we need some quantification here.
Nick.
-
The most cut and dry answer would probably be GDDR5 memory.
-
So, for those of you who are getting a good result, can you publish your Windows Experience Index numbers. Say whether you are using RO Standard or HQ. Also, are you Windows 32 or 64 bit. I really believe we need some quantification here.
Nick.
My overall rating is 5.9. The breakdown is:
Processor calculations per second: 7.1
Memory operations per second: 7.4
Graphics desktop performance: 6.7
Gaming graphics: 6.7
Disk transfer rate: 5.9
Running Windows Pro 64 on 8GB RAM on ASROCK 3D Vision 252B
No problems with Red October HQ
-
Here is my data.
Overall: 5.9
Memory: 5.9
Graphics: 6.5
Gaming graphics: 6.5
Disk: 5.9
JRiver Benchmark
JRMark (version 17.0.38): 2063
AsRock Vision 3D 156b with i5 processor running Windows 7 Home Premium, 4Gb ram.
Also remember that performance depend on the material you try to play. My movies are all ripped Blu-Ray and DVD. No interlaced material.
TLS
-
JRiver Benchmark
JRMark (version 17.0.38)
Where do I find JRMark? Is it within MC or is it a separate tool?
Update: OK, found it - Help, Benchmark.
Mine is:
JRMark (version 17.0.59): 1851
Nick.
-
This indicates that Bryanhoop is right. You graphic card is using GDDR3 memory, so apprently that has a lot of influence on the performance. Your processor should be more than enough powerful.
TLS
-
Sorry. I just realised that the above was the number for my desktop machine, not my HTPC. The HTPC score is:
=== Running Benchmarks (please do not interrupt) ===
Running 'Math' benchmark...
Single-threaded integer math... 3.937 seconds
Single-threaded floating point math... 2.227 seconds
Multi-threaded integer math... 2.093 seconds
Multi-threaded mixed math... 1.559 seconds
Score: 1936
Running 'Image' benchmark...
Image creation / destruction... 1.151 seconds
Flood filling... 0.968 seconds
Direct copying... 1.607 seconds
Small renders... 2.464 seconds
Bilinear rendering... 2.078 seconds
Bicubic rendering... 1.923 seconds
Score: 2159
Running 'Database' benchmark...
Create database... 0.569 seconds
Populate database... 2.450 seconds
Save database... 0.599 seconds
Reload database... 0.088 seconds
Search database... 1.466 seconds
Sort database... 1.263 seconds
Group database... 0.758 seconds
Score: 2989
JRMark (version 17.0.59): 2361
Nick.
-
This indicates that Bryanhoop is right. You graphic card is using GDDR3 memory, so apprently that has a lot of influence on the performance. Your processor should be more than enough powerful.
TLS
Thanks, TLS. I have had this NVIDIA card for some time and I am pretty sure it needs to be updated. The GDDR5 requirement restricts choice somewhat as I want a silent card again. Should I be going for ATI or NVIDIA. There are more silent ATI cards with GDDR5 than NVIDIA. Does the Catalyst Control Center support setting up custom resolutions and frame rates? I have never used it.
Nick.
-
It does, at least on my desktop PC, but I have mostly had experience with Nvidia cards in the past. I have seen a lot of posts on this forum with people describing their Nvidia cards, so it most be possible to find a silent card from Nvidia as well.
TLS
-
Thanks, TLS. I have had this NVIDIA card for some time and I am pretty sure it needs to be updated. The GDDR5 requirement restricts choice somewhat as I want a silent card again. Should I be going for ATI or NVIDIA. There are more silent ATI cards with GDDR5 than NVIDIA. Does the Catalyst Control Center support setting up custom resolutions and frame rates? I have never used it.
Nick.
ATI cards donīt need custom resolutions as NVIDIA... NVIDIA has CUVID-accelerated playback and some ATI haters claim that NVIDIA is better for gaming and they do not have "bad drivers" (but I donīt know if this is true...). If I were you, I will buy 7xxx AMD card cause it has more than enough power and it will be "up-to-date" a long time. But I donīt know much about new NVIDIA cards, they will definently take a big step too...
-
Here's my new laptop:
Processor: 7.5
Memory: 7.6
Graphics: 6.6
Gaming: 6.6
Hard Disk: 5.9
My native screen res is 1920X1080. I get perfect ROHQ playing SD AVIs up to ~1600X900 (video only),or somewhat more. After that I will see tearing in the uppermost quintile.
FWIW I have never seen a nicer-looking video renderer than ROHQ.
-
I take that back. 1920X1080 plays perfectly (from an SD source) in 17.0.61, and I haven't noticed any issues in several versions. Could be the software improving, could be my computer, which went back to the factory for a GFX issue.