Re: Does anybody know if GeForce 8400 GS or Radeon HD 2400PRO is better for MCE 2005?
- From: "Curious" <mailmenot@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 10:58:07 -0800
Here is one 2400 pro card spec:
The 10GB MCE 2005 requirement was for 1080i HD do the bigger buffers required and due to the de-interlacing required.
720p requires less but I don't have a value.
Vista graphics require more GPU power then XP graphics so more then 10GB is probably required for 1080i on Vista.
"dicko" <drwho@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:N8iml.13938$as4.5658@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 12:36:37 -0500, "jolt" <ergoacess@xxxxxxxxx>
The spec for MCE 2005 to properly playback HD content calls for a video card
capable of Memory Bandwidth of 10 GB/sec, a situation that had many
upgrading their video card when MCE 2005 was released. You mentioned a
digital tuner in you earlier post so I assume HD is a consideration.The 8400
GS is rated at 6.4 GB/sec.
Couldn't find the spec for the 2400PRO but on a PCI buss it isn't likely to
fair well enough to best the Intel Graphics Accelerator on your motherboard
rating of 8.5 GB/sec.
<theory4debate@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
Thanks again everybody for helping me. This is my last question, I
Does anybody know if GeForce 8400 GS or Radeon HD 2400PRO is better
for MCE 2005?
Stay away from the 2400PRO. The only way to make it work even halfway
decent is with a bunch of reg hacks. Its totally inadequate for the
job. Its problem is it lacks processors/shaders and does a very poor
job of deinterleaving though I did use it for a year with a 720p TV.
My 8500GS works just great though.
- Prev by Date: Re: MCE 2005 Tuner Unavailable and Outlook Express
- Next by Date: WORD PAD HANGS
- Previous by thread: Re: Does anybody know if GeForce 8400 GS or Radeon HD 2400PRO is better for MCE 2005?
- Next by thread: Re: Does anybody know if GeForce 8400 GS or Radeon HD 2400PRO is better for MCE 2005?