Image Quality of ATI AIW vs. Matrox G450eTV

[jon well]

I'm building an Athlon 1.5gzh-based system and can't decide on which video card to get: Matrox G450eTV or ATI Radeon All-in-Wonder. I don't care about gaming or dual head. I'm also aware of ATI driver issues and the strong reputation of Matrox 2D image quality. What it really comes down to is image quality of 2D, DVD, TV and capture on a 17" .25 dot pitch display. For those of you who have direct first hand experience with both cards on
like monitors, I have a couple of questions:
- at 1024 x 768 and 85+ refresh rate, is there any difference in 2D quality?
- if not, how high a resolution would you have to go to give Matrox the clear advantage?
- how does image quality of DVD and TV compare?
- how does image quality of DVD/TV capture compare?
- with a 1.5ghz processor, is there any advantage to ATI's hardware compression vs. Matrox's software compression?

Thanks much for your response.

[MatthewW]

While I haven't used the either of the cards (I only have a G400), the price of the ATI cards should soon be dropping as there is a new ALL-IN-WONDER card coming from ATI, based upon the Radeon 8500 chip, so the older models should be sold off cheaper.

[boink]

Dear Jon,

I have an AIW Radeon 32MB and it's pretty good. It runs at 1152x864, 32bpp at 100Hz without any driver or other problems, using a 19" display on the analogue output (it also has a DVI output, which may influence your choice if the Matrox doesn't).

DVD viewing is excellent, though the DVD player that comes with it (can't remember the name) doesn't work as well as PowerDVD, which I use instead.

Although it's not in your priority list, 3D is good, too.

What doesn't work so well is video capture. Maybe I have misunderstood how to set it up , but I can't get it to capture at anything higher than about ~350x252, and fairly jerky, too. The bundled software (ULead Video Studio and a 3D titling thingy) is functional, though fairly basic, and the (software) rendering is slow, even on a fairly fast machine (I have a 1.33MHz Athlon, Win 2K).

You're probably better off getting a dedicated capture card for video editing, if budget your will stretch to it. As a general rule, processing is always better done in hardware than software, but is, of course, more expensive.

I don't have or watch TV so I can't help you with that aspect.

Good luck with whatever you choose.

The Boinkster

[Guru]

You might want to have a look at this review! http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1502

Bringing TV to the PC may seem like a logical solution for many. In areas where space is at a premium, having two large boxes that perform very similar functions (on an electrical level) is both redundant and expensive. Combining your TV and your PC has certainly come a long way in the past few months, where features of TV tuner video cards are offering much more than your standalone TV can do.

It is true that including TV tuner hardware and software on your video card is going to cost you more than a standard video card will cost. In ATI's case, the All-in-Wonder Radeon costs about $20 more than the Radeon DDR and comes with 32MB less memory. Matrox's Marvel G450 eTV card will cost $80 more than the standard G450. In the GeForce3's case, the suggest retail price of the SUMA package we looked at runs about $100 more than the MSRP price of many GeForce3 only packages.

The best choice for a TV tuner video card seems to be the ATI All-in-Wonder Radeon. The software package of the card is simply wonderful, thanks in no small part to the addition of the GuidePlus software. We found that this program made watching TV on your PC extremely easy and enjoyable, as a new level of interactivity was certainly experienced.

Naturally, we must be somewhat concerned about the one crash we did experience while testing the All-in-Wonder Radeon. ATI has since released a more recent version of their Multimedia Center software that may fix the isolated problem we encountered, and we hope this is the case. Even with the crash (which we experienced with Matrox's solution as well), the All-in-Wonder Radeon is our pick for best TV tuner video card.

That is not to say that the other TV tuner video cards we tested were not impressive as well. The Matrox card seemed to have few problems, if any, with the tasks we threw at it and certainly performed as advertised (with exception to the crash we experienced). The Marvel G450 eTV lost points only when compared to ATI's software package.

NVIDIA's solution seems to have quite a bit of potential. The breakout box idea is a good one for allowing easy implementation of TV capabilities on almost every NVIDIA graphics chip. The included remote was great and provides a perfect solution for those really looking to make their computer the entertainment center of their house. If it were not for the problems we encountered while both time shifting and using the Electronic Program Guide, we would feel more confident recommending this solution, but as it stands it seems that there is some maturing that needs to be done.

As the summer begins to come to an end, many students will soon be making their way back to college and the small dorm rooms and apartments that accompanies the experience. A TV tuner video card may just be the way to go if you find yourself in a situation where space is critical, student or not. With certainty, TV tuner video cards should now be considered when building or upgrading a PC, as they have come a long way from their infancy.