Newbie Hardware Setup

[zjennings]

Hey,
I am new to SageTV, and am about to build my HTPC PVR. I would appreciate any input anyone has on my setup.

Hardware:
Radeon 8500LE w/ Component connector (Still need to buy)
Hauppauge PVR-250 (SageTV bundle with Remote) (Still need to buy)
Seagate 160GB 8MB Hard Drive w/ SIG UATA 133 PCI card
900Mhz Athlon w/ 512MB of PC133 Ram and onboard Audio
PCI 10/100 NIC
Toshiba 6x DVD

Software:
Windows XP Pro
Ciberlink Power DVD
SageTV Server (Still need to buy)


I can get the Radeon 8500LE for around $50 + about $20 for the component converter. Is this a bad solution? Should I just go with a basic TV-out card instead? I thought the component output would be nicer for my Dell 2100MP projector.

Any help would be much appreciated!

Thanks a ton,
Z

[mlbdude]

Component output will be better if you can output in 480p, 720p, or 1080i. Do some research to see if that card can do it. I don't see a difference in my setup when I use component or svideo but I can only input 480i into my TV.

Make sure you format the Sage partition with 64k blocks.

[mikejaner]

This is just an idea, so don't take it as gold.
At some point, SageTV might support output with overlay on the Xcard, made by Sigma Designs. This card outputs component video and does hardware decoding. Jeff (Narflex) said the Xcard was compatible with what his architecture had in it, so it is only a matter of time before it is supported.

Your second best solution for good output is the PVR 350, which does hardware decoding with overlay (in Sage2.0) but only outputs standard definition. I know you have a projector, so you are talking about the capability of it, but the signal your recording can't be improved. I would imagine your projector has svideo input?

As a third option, I would consider the setup you are talking about, just because software decoding is inferior to hardware decoding.

mikejaner

[mlbdude]

I completely disagree that the signal can't be improved. You can use your HTPC as a line doubler and video post processor. You can buy those too but they are very expensive. You need to do a progressive output though (component or DVI) to get the full benefits. The 350 will go the way of the Dodo pretty soon since it only works with old TV's. The XCard is the best bet since it will work with just about anything but since you can only get video out of it for now.

Software decoding is far superior to hardware decoding with an HTPC. Deinterlacing a signal that will be sent to a device that wants interlaced video is where a device like a 350 can come into play because it outputs in the exact resolution 540x480? and sync that an old TV wants so no deinterlacing is required.

A good place to research this stuff is the AVS forums. There is a wealth of information available to help you out.

[zjennings]

yah, i've been an AVS Forum member for a long time now.

~
z

[stanger89]

zjennings,

That PJ should have a VGA input on it (the 2200MP does, I just looked) also the 2200MP is 800x600 so it wouldn't be 1:1 pixel mapping with component. From everything I've heard/read, 1:1 pixel mapping is the only way to go with a digital PJ.

One more suggestion, a Radeon 9500/9600 would probably give you better PQ, and maybe better hardware accelleration/deinterlacing.

[mikejaner]

I feel software decoding to be far inferiour IMHO, because of two things.

1:Motion is smoother when outputing through a hardware decoder, and I have never seen dropped frames.

2:Software decoders, and I have tried them all, do not decode with the same level of detail as the hardware ones. I am very picky about video, and I have yet to see the level of decoding match the encoding on anything but the 350, and Xcard.

Also, line doublers in my opinion once again, do not improve the picture. You cannot enhance the original signal. You cannot add information to what is already there. Line doublers make it possible to better match the resolution of a projector for example, but do not enhance the picture in any way. Think of taking a 640x480 picture and stretching it to fit on your 1600X1200 desktop. It does not look any better than the original, yet it is being rendered at ~4 times it's original resolution.
I do agree that he should look for component output, which is why the Xcard may be his best choice of card. It does progressive and component, which is the best you do right now for a standard signal. All of this IMHO

mikejaner

[zjennings]

I think I'm going to stick with my origional setup. I am pretty sure I can still do 1:1 through the component inputs. The reason why I'm not using the VGA connector to connect to my projector, is because I would need a KVM to go with it since my projector uses the VGA port as the component in port.

So, I should have no problem doing 480p at the 1:1 input. Granted it will be a little smaller than the screen is, but that's ok. Actually, the 2100MP has a preety good scaler on it. I've got my xbox going through component input on it, and DOA3 is beautiful. I also tried some HD videos using my wife's laptop, and even though my resolution is only 800x600, it looked like a photograph!

I'll have to look a little more, maybe a KVM is cheaper than the $20 VGA to HD connector that ATI sells, but probably not. Also, that's just one more thing that my wife would have to remember to switch. WAF (Wife Acceptance Factor)

Thanks for all the advice. But buying a seperate Hardware Decoding card is just a little too much extra I can't spend.

~Zach

[SHS]

mikejaner as for this (At some point, SageTV might support output with overlay on the Xcard) the Xcard only support this if you using the 26 Pin VIP Connector don't you mean OSD?.

[stanger89]

mikejaner,

I think I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one. First I'll agree that scaling doesn't add any any information to the picture but there's more to consider than just that. First a deinterlaced picture looks much better than an interlaced one, and especially in the case of film content, where all 480 lines are actually stored on the disk, deinterlacing the picture actually gets you closer to the original film source than interlaced. Second the deinterlacing is being done completely in the digital domain where it's easier to you can deinterlace without loss.

Here's my justification for this. My set is a 36" 4:3 HD ready set. With an interlaced source, the TV displays an interlaced picture, the scanlines on a set that size are incredibly annoying. I've also got a Pioneer Elite DVD player that I've used for quite a while. Watching TV through SageTV, deinterlaced by the Sonic filters I'm using and scaled to 1280x1024i by my Radeon 9500 looks far superior to the signal strait through the TV. It's smoother, more saturated colors, all together more DVD-like. Not DVD quality, but much closer than the interlaced picture I see on my TV. Now DVDs, they always looked nice through my Elite but with Sonic filters on my HTPC DVDs look spectacular, far more detailed, better colors, etc. Also I've never seen dropped frames while watching a DVD.

The one possible exception to this might be a Xcard over PDI to a Holo3D or Holo3D II. But even this isn't perfect since the Xcard has the dreaded chroma bug (although the Faroudja chip masks that).

Now this is all contingent on having a display that will accept a 480p+ signal, but that's my experience after playing with this stuff for a while.

As always, YMMV.