HD-DVD Playback - On the Xbox 360 & on NVIDIA GPUs
by Derek Wilson & Manveer Wasson on December 15, 2006 9:21 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Final Words
From what we are seeing, there are many more stressful H.264 movies currently available on Blu-ray than HD-DVD. The VC-1 titles are definitely less of a problem for modern hardware, but it wouldn't be a good idea to build a system for playing video without building for the worst case scenario.
While H.264 under The Interpreter did provide a good amount of CPU utilization, there just weren't any huge bitrate scenes to test worst case scenarios. As more action packed and intricate movies are released on HD-DVD with H.264, we would be willing to bet that HD-DVD movies could be as stressful as X-Men III.
Right now the format with the highest potential for pushing hardware beyond its limits is Blu-ray. With 50GB disks possible today, we could see 2+ hour movies with sustained bitrates of 45 Mbps under H.264 which would really push even an X6800 system with an 8800 GTX running the display. Of course, bitrates that high aren't really necessary most of the time, so it won't likely be an issue. But HD-DVD is currently limited to 30GB disks which decreases the potential for high bitrate video (which translates to large file size).
Generally, graphics hardware performed as expected based on our previous testing. It would have been nice to test ATI hardware as well, and we will test it as soon as Cyberlink or Intervideo can get us a player that is up to the task.
As far as the Xbox 360 drive goes, it makes an excellent addition for those interested in HD-DVD playback on a PC. The price is right, it's easy to use and set up, and it won't take up room inside a crowded case. It may be a good idea for most people to wait until the dust settles before throwing their lot in with either HD-DVD or Blu-ray, as the market doesn't seem robust enough to handle two competing formats. On the other hand, those who don't mind potentially purchasing dead-end hardware take a much smaller risk by spending $200 on the XBox 360 HD-DVD drive. Getting a Blu-ray player right now is a much more expensive proposition. typically running over $500 (though with the ability to record as well as play back content).
Those who don't want to take a chance on their PC being able to play HD-DVDs can at least rely on their Xbox 360 for that. The drive combined with the remote provided a very simple and easy to use experience. The Xbox 360 handled playing back HD-DVD movies as well as any consumer electronics device could be expected. Of course at a price of around $200 you can't find standalone HD-DVD players for less money, so if you have a 360 or PC that you'd like to use for HD-DVD playback you can get both for less than a set-top player.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
51 Comments
View All Comments
DerekWilson - Friday, December 15, 2006 - link
We would be using retail players if any were available, but they aren't. Currently the only way to get a copy of a player that supports HD-DVD or Blu-ray is to buy a system or a drive that comes with it. Cyberlink is currently only offering their software through OEM channels.ssiu - Friday, December 15, 2006 - link
Does VC-1 look worse than H.264? (If they are comparable, then why use H.264 when VC-1 takes so much less power to decode?)Are these 720p or 1080i or 1080p videos?
DerekWilson - Friday, December 15, 2006 - link
All of our HD video tests so far have been done using a 1080p tv with 1080p movies.It's hard for us to do a direct image quality comparison right now because HD movie players don't allow any image capture or video clips to be saved. From what we know about H.264, it has a high potential for image quality, especially on Blu-ray where disks are currently up to 50GB in size.
therealnickdanger - Friday, December 15, 2006 - link
Given the current releases on both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, VC-1 has superior sharpness - H.264 tends to soften the image more than VC-1 at any given bitrate (hence the Blu-Ray nickname in some circles "Blur-Ray"). The implemetation of H.264 is more currently more complex and less efficient in many cases. Many argue the VC-1 codec to be superior only because it has the backing of Microsoft, who is working much harder behind the scenes to improve its functionality and efficiency, whereas H.264's support and tools are not as advanced. If and when H.264 receives the same treatment as VC-1 in terms of financial investment and support, then the more advanced features of H.264 can be realized. It's way too early to make a call on which codec will "win" in the end, but I don't think we'll know for a very long time. Lucky for us, Blu-Ray and HD-DVD support both... so the consumers win either way.plonk420 - Saturday, December 16, 2006 - link
where, pray tell, did you hear about this superior sharpness of VC-1? in reviews i've read, H.264 is pretty much identical PQ. the technology pools between VC-1 and H.264 overlap a good percentage, as well as even prosumer solutions having existed for at least year before the first BRD (or even HDDVD) players came out .. well, besides the piss-poor Quicktime.i can't say i can compare VC-1 vs H.264 on a standalone, but i've worked with both, including H.264 encoder betatesting and playing around with VC-1 a little bit as well...
rcabor - Friday, December 15, 2006 - link
I doubt its selling at a loss, since you dont need one for gaming, I cant see where microsoft would make any money with software.Xorp - Friday, December 15, 2006 - link
Good review cept, H.264 will probably more towards being equal with VC-1 in terms of releases. I don't think it's going to replace VC-1 in the long run.nicolasb - Friday, December 15, 2006 - link
Doesn't the fact that the XBox 360 has no digital video output rather limit its safety as a long-term investment for video playback? What happens when the disc publishers decide to switch on the protection flags that prevent output in any analogue format at any resolution beyond 960x540? Something with an HDCP-enabled digital output would surely be safer?ajira99 - Friday, December 15, 2006 - link
I think that by the time any content-protection flags are enabled (if ever), there will be affordable, standalone players that will do a better job than either the Xbox 360 or PS3. I'm pretty satisfied with the HD-DVD addon -- the 360 is an adequate DVD player when I'm away from my computer, and the PC compatibilty of the drive is a definite plus.Of course, Microsoft could just wait and put out an updated 360 console w/CPU die shrink and HDMI in a year or so.
Furen - Friday, December 15, 2006 - link
I believe the HDCP-requirement was scrapped from the spec, which is why MS can get away with having a non-HDMI solution.More importantly, I wonder if MS is in anyway subsidizing the cost of the drive... If so then Microsoft may be getting screwed pretty badly by people who buy the drive to use it on a computer.