The New Theater 650 TV Tuner Solution from ATI
by Josh Venning on June 14, 2006 4:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Smartphones
- Mobile
TV Tuner Comparisons
In this section, we'll look at how the ATI Theater 650 compares with the NVIDIA DualTV MCE and the ATI Theater 550 Pro. As in the past, we will be looking at power consumption for these cards as well as image quality, but for this review we will be adding a section on CPU utilization to see what kind of overhead is associated with using these cards.
Power
For power, we tested each of the three cards at four different states: while the system was idle, while watching live TV, while recording live TV, and while watching TV while simultaneously recording the broadcast. Here are the results.
For reference, the power draw of the system without a TV tuner card installed was 145 Watts. We can see from the table that the Theater 650 and 550 drew less power than the DualTV overall, which makes sense given the DualTV's dual tuners as opposed to the other cards' one. We can also see that there isn't a very big difference at all between the power consumption of the Theater 650 and 550, and interestingly, there wasn't a difference between the power load of the system while watching and watching/recording with the Theater 650.
Channel Switch Speed
We again wanted to see if there was any difference between the channel switching speed of the different tuners, as the different hardware can sometimes affect this aspect of the tuner. Here are the results.
As the data shows, there is again not much difference between the Theater 650 and 550, and each of these cards took around two seconds to switch channels (the 650 being very slightly faster). The DualTV took about a half a second longer than the other two making it the slowest of the three. As we mentioned in the last review, two seconds may not seem like much time, but when trying to flip rapidly through channels, the delay can be very annoying. Unfortunately, it appears that the new "mini-can" tuner of the 650 doesn't substantially improve the tuning speed relative to the 550.
In this section, we'll look at how the ATI Theater 650 compares with the NVIDIA DualTV MCE and the ATI Theater 550 Pro. As in the past, we will be looking at power consumption for these cards as well as image quality, but for this review we will be adding a section on CPU utilization to see what kind of overhead is associated with using these cards.
Power
For power, we tested each of the three cards at four different states: while the system was idle, while watching live TV, while recording live TV, and while watching TV while simultaneously recording the broadcast. Here are the results.
| System Power Draw (Watts) | ||||
| Idle | Watching Live TV |
Recording | Watching + Recording |
|
| NVIDIA DualTV MCE | 170 | 197 | 176 | 203 |
| ATI MSI Theater 550 Pro | 167 | 186 | 171 | 187 |
| ATI MSI Theater 650 Pro | 169 | 187 | 174 | 187 |
For reference, the power draw of the system without a TV tuner card installed was 145 Watts. We can see from the table that the Theater 650 and 550 drew less power than the DualTV overall, which makes sense given the DualTV's dual tuners as opposed to the other cards' one. We can also see that there isn't a very big difference at all between the power consumption of the Theater 650 and 550, and interestingly, there wasn't a difference between the power load of the system while watching and watching/recording with the Theater 650.
Channel Switch Speed
We again wanted to see if there was any difference between the channel switching speed of the different tuners, as the different hardware can sometimes affect this aspect of the tuner. Here are the results.
| Channel Tune Speed | |
| Time in Seconds | |
| NVIDIA DualTV MCE | 2 1/2 |
| ATI MSI Theater 550 Pro | 2 |
| ATI MSI Theater 650 Pro | 2 |
As the data shows, there is again not much difference between the Theater 650 and 550, and each of these cards took around two seconds to switch channels (the 650 being very slightly faster). The DualTV took about a half a second longer than the other two making it the slowest of the three. As we mentioned in the last review, two seconds may not seem like much time, but when trying to flip rapidly through channels, the delay can be very annoying. Unfortunately, it appears that the new "mini-can" tuner of the 650 doesn't substantially improve the tuning speed relative to the 550.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
78 Comments
View All Comments
rqle - Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - link
Currently own a Theater 550 chipset and i like it much better then my roommate nvidia dualTV one. My question is, can i buy another Theater550 so i can dualTV, would the system go crazy on me? Would like to have dual screen running different sport program at once and would be cheaper for me as well.DerekWilson - Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - link
that would work fineWoodchuck2000 - Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - link
When is Anandtech going to publish a decent article on TV tuners? In no particular order:Why use ATI promotional material that is designed to prove that the 650 is better than the 550? Use your own material if you want a fair test. More to the point, why transcode it? Im sorry, but file size considerations are not a good justification for degrading the image quality <IN AN IMAGE QUALITY TEST>.
How do you justify adding throwaway comments about equivalence with Hauppage products in the conclusions if you havn't addressed the cards at any point in the review?
Why have you taken the instantaneous CPU utilisation from task manager and tabulated it? You need to take an average over a reasonable period of time if it is to have any relevance.
Seriously, there's not enough depth in any area to make the review really worthwhile - you may as well post a single page saying "Look everyone, ATI have sent us this nice new card they want us to plug!" and it would have the same amount of relevance to 99% of your audience.
Cardio - Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - link
Why is there no mention of how this card preforms on DTV, that is its major difference and only really new feature? Am I missing something here? You didn't test the Hauppauge because you have looked at it before. You've looked at the ATI 550 before also. In the earlier test you campare a dual tuner card to a single tuner card rather to the other available dual tuner card. Will ATI only give you stuff to test if you don't compare it to the competition? As you said, Nvidia's card is only available directly from them and at twice the price. The Hauppauge MCE 500 is available anywhere and is cheap. Oh, you have looked at those cards before.I can tell you for sure that I am a lot more interested in Picture Quality and functionality than in power consumption or cpu usage.
Not worthy of AT and its getting to be a habit.
DerekWilson - Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - link
We transcoded it for your benefit (smaller file to download) -- in our image quality analysis, we used the unmodified output of the cards. Sorry if this was unclear.As for using ATI's material, you can't argue with a zone plate. Better is better and worse is worse. Same for the other tests we ran which were designed by SMPTE (http://www.smpte.org/)">http://www.smpte.org/) ... ATI was gracious enough to provide us with these tests we would have otherwise had to purchase ourselves.
testing the Hauppage card is a reasonable request, but it doesn't change the fact that it was similar in quality and performance to the Theater 550 in previous evaluations. That is perfectly reasonable information to use in drawing conclusions.
SHSPVR - Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - link
One thing I really hate more then anything is the fact that min reviewer are so lazy in the cheating game by using the PrtScn Button and do not do ture original video RAW decode MPEG screenshot in the rigth application software like Womble MPEG-VCR and always seem to be using MCE DVR-MS proprietary video and audio format carp what matter are they just to lazy in using other PVR software or GraphEdit to get real MPEG files but as we all know that the NVIDIA DualTV is not option with GraphEdit which has no exposes advanced features properties.2nd problem as today no body turely using low bitrate under 4MBit/sec which is more reasonable testing to see how well it really dose encoding without artifacts.
So you wondering why I said cheating well each encoder dose there video difference from each other and there for the decoder filter display difference in case depend on the clean up filter like Deinterlace, difference Enhanced Video Processing Technologies which get apply on top the MPEG Video.
Now as for comparison.
Hauppauge, ATI and NVIDIA
Hands down Hauppauge PVR cards wins becuase of some major reason it has support for more OS then any one eles Windows, Linux, Mac (Apple) and yes even OS/2 Warp or eComStation and has more 3rdparty application support.
As for a real encoding comparison all test they should done with the fellowing device
VCR, Stardard Antenna TV, CableTV Analogue/Digital and Satellite with fellowing output source S-Video/Composite and Tuner
CPU Utilization is really useless becuase all of today Video card are still mostly base on 3rdparty SW-Decoder which mean you still need fast CPU unlike a ture HW-Decoder which provides a real decoding performance unlike today video card which only do part HW-accelerated decoding not full HW-decoding.
Let say for Example you have Intel P3 800MHz runing 2000Pro or XP with 512MB and you can chosse from GeForce"4" MX4000 or GeForce"7" 7800 becuase you want upgarde your old doggie ATI 3D RAGE PRO 4MB what do you think you see in CPU Utilization from the two card newer card.
andrep74 - Tuesday, June 20, 2006 - link
One thing I really hate more [than] anything is the fact that I have to try to read cr*p like your comments, which try to pass off the sh*t in your head for English.SHSPVR - Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - link
Oh I also for add You need do Cartoon as well as reg video show