Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NVIDIA GeForce GT 520

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by timmydog View Post
    I'm looking at this card (or maybe a 530 when it eventually gets released as a non-OEM card) for the same usage but there has been some questions raised about its ability to do advanced de-interlacing in MythTV.
    I do not have interlaced movies so I don't know how that works on my setup. I also do not use MythTV, my software is XBMC, SmPlayer, Firefox+Flash.

    Comment


    • #17
      whats worse?, the 520 GT or these Flash Captcha's

      So, I stick in my brand new pny 520 GT 1 Gig ddr3 card thinking, atleast this will be a nice replacement for my "aging" Silent/Fanless Asus Nvidia 8600GT card (with 512 Meg). ?
      well, the 520 GT was such a piece of slow crap, that I put my 8600GT back in and immediately found out just how powerful that old 8600GT was ?! -One of my best investments was that old card.
      Ok, i'm thinkin wtf !?
      Wait a minute, I bought my fanless 8600GT way back in 2008?, or maybe it was 2009. I honestly don't remeber.
      But the brand new 520GT (which still comes with a FAN) couldn't even come close to matching my so-called "old" Fanless 8600GT.

      Well, now i finally know how ATI user's used to feel way back in the nvidia 8800GT days when ATI didn't have an answer for it.
      WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY this 520 GT piece of caca really is.

      Well, for the bang-fer-your-buck, the tables have completely turned. AMD/ATI today, have all the answers, whereas nvidia, still seems to be dickin' around with their not-so-vaunted Fermi stuff ....?
      ya, whatever.
      If it wasn't for the simple fact that Nvidia's "LINUX/BSD" Drivers are still so much better than ATI"s, I would just stick with ATI for sure. But for Windows, and even MacOSX, AMD/ATI rules. Simple as that.
      wow, what a complete joke and let down this nvidia 520 is.
      The ATI 56**, 57**, 6*** are just so much more bang for your buck these days, that in essence, other than nvidia's 460, and 580, nvidia really doesn't have much of anything anymore. ?
      geez nvidia -how the mighty have fallen.
      I think nvidia would have a great market if they would just bring back those 8600's, 8800's, 9800's,... and make them all Fanless kick-butt little powerhouses. between $50 <-> $100 they would regain that market.
      LMAO, seriously, I'm crying over this now.
      Last edited by scjet; 09-17-2011, 08:35 AM.

      Comment


      • #18
        First of all budget cards have got usally only a 64 bit memory bus, your card has 128 bit. It would be really easy to google for benchmarks first before you buy it. As upgrade only 460/560+ chips are usefull as they are really faster than older ones.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by scjet View Post
          But the brand new 520GT (which still comes with a FAN) couldn't even come close to matching my so-called "old" Fanless 8600GT.
          Apples and oranges..
          The 520GT comes in fanless variants and is okay for an inexpensive VDPAU-capable card if you need one right now (since the g3d vdpau tracker isn't ready yet). If you're looking to use it for any kind of demanding game, then look elsewhere.

          Comment


          • #20
            still not impressed with it.

            Like I said, If it wasn't for the fact that the 520 GT works better(due to nvidia drivers) in Linux. I wouldn't bother.
            It's ok for a nice Linux desktop install.
            It's just that I remeber paying $89.00 for my old 8600GT back in 08, btw this is not the gts which was much more expensive version of that 8600 series.
            I paid $69 for this 520 GT last week here (prices in Canada are generally higher than States side). now, as I found out, a couple Comp stores up here will not even carry the 520 GT, for the same reason that ATI's are better in that same price range.

            Anyway, this was all my fault becaue I didn't "read" this review, and others, before I bought it.
            http://forums.cnet.com/7726-7591_102-5130882.html

            Most other things in in the PC world get smaller, faster and cheap, except for this piece o' junk from nvidia.
            I expected a bit more, and got a lot less -my fault.

            So ya, go ahead, stick in your HTPC and have fun with it. Lol

            Comment


            • #21
              Suits me just fine.

              Originally posted by DanL View Post
              The 520GT comes in fanless variants and is okay for an inexpensive VDPAU-capable card if you need one right now (since the g3d vdpau tracker isn't ready yet).
              Exactly. I've recently bought an Zotac 520 zone fanless card and am very happy with it. The MythTV site listed the Asus 520 card as being capable of hardware decoding of all the media that I own and advanced interlace so I knew it would do what I wanted.

              My MythTV based media centre now plays video without dropping any frames which used to spoil my viewing pleasure.

              I don't really do much gaming anymore, so I have a faster PC upstairs and a Wii...

              Next upgrade: more than 1TB storage and a DVB-T2 decoder...

              Tim

              Comment


              • #22
                -the 520GT scrap is great for a cheap MythTV/Linux HTPC and/or desktop.
                But For Windows ? -pffft, get a RadeonHD 567*,..., oe almost any comparable AMD/ATI, they are basically the same price, but with twice as much preformance in every field.

                case CLOSED !

                Comment


                • #23
                  The GT 520 just shows Nvidia is unwilling and incapable to top AMD in the low end. That 64 bit memory bus is joke, a bad one if you ask.

                  If you're exclusively looking for a low profile card, the Radeon HD 6570 performs way better overall, but it may lack video acceleration capabilities. In that aspect, the GT 430 is not quite old and has a good performance and a respectable video acceleration that is characteristic in Nvidia cards. The Radeon HD 5570 seems good for an HTPC environment, too.
                  Last edited by Richard Wolf VI; 09-20-2011, 01:25 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Richard Wolf VI View Post
                    The GT 520 just shows Nvidia is unwilling and incapable to top AMD in the low end. That 64 bit memory bus is joke, a bad one if you ask.
                    Again, apples and oranges for the price and class of cards you're talking about..
                    The competitor for the GT520 is the RadeonHD 6450 (also with a 64-bit bus). Considering that no AMD cards do full VDPAU in Linux (yet), there's no competition at all if that's what the card is intended for.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by DanL View Post
                      Again, apples and oranges for the price and class of cards you're talking about..
                      The competitor for the GT520 is the RadeonHD 6450 (also with a 64-bit bus). Considering that no AMD cards do full VDPAU in Linux (yet), there's no competition at all if that's what the card is intended for.
                      The three cards mentioned are around the same price as the GT 520 and are available as half height cards, am I missing something? The HD 6450 is cheaper than the GT 520 yet it has a superior performance. I said the bus on the GT 520 was a joke because cards in the same price are better in practically every aspect. If you dislike AMD, there's the GT 430, which may not be a very powerful card yet it is a better investment than this poor excuse of a budget card.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by DanL View Post
                        Again, apples and oranges for the price and class of cards you're talking about..
                        The competitor for the GT520 is the RadeonHD 6450 (also with a 64-bit bus). Considering that no AMD cards do full VDPAU in Linux (yet), there's no competition at all if that's what the card is intended for.
                        ati was the first to have full hardware for mpeg2 , it was before geforce was born . with hd6k it has the DIVX in hardware .
                        for the 2d and 3d , ati is largely better than nv .
                        if "nouveau" drivers are not good enough to use full potential , that does not mean card is badly made .

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          you can decode mpeg4 simple profile (aka divx) via vdpau since g210 on linux. it does did not always work perfectly but it was implemented long ago. do you really think ati invented this? it is not possible to do that with linux via the xvba-video wrapper. so the cheapest card for htpc is definitely g210 with full vdpau support. only for full hd h264 with > 50 fps progressive a newer modell with gt4xx would be better, but no gt405 as this like g210 just rebranded. bd content is never in that range - when there is 50/60 fps content it is always interlaced, but there are cameras out there that could use those maximum settings.
                          Last edited by Kano; 09-21-2011, 06:19 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Richard Wolf VI View Post
                            am I missing something? The HD 6450 is cheaper than the GT 520 yet it has a superior performance.
                            You keep missing the part where I agree with that with the exception of doing VDPAU in Linux...

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by DanL View Post
                              You keep missing the part where I agree with that with the exception of doing VDPAU in Linux...
                              If VDPAU is a big issue, I don't see why a GT 520 is still a good buy when the GT 430 exists in the same factor and price.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Kano View Post
                                you can decode mpeg4 simple profile (aka divx) via vdpau since g210 on linux. it does did not always work perfectly but it was implemented long ago. do you really think ati invented this? it is not possible to do that with linux via the xvba-video wrapper. so the cheapest card for htpc is definitely g210 with full vdpau support. only for full hd h264 with > 50 fps progressive a newer modell with gt4xx would be better, but no gt405 as this like g210 just rebranded. bd content is never in that range - when there is 50/60 fps content it is always interlaced, but there are cameras out there that could use those maximum settings.
                                nv or older than hd6k have some hardware for mpeg2 that is used by xvid/divx codecs for the rendering , like " motion compensation " with ati rage pro was with dvd at the time of w98 - half-life .
                                but hd6k is able to render the divx without any help from cpus
                                nv made the hit with its 3d support while ati always do the best in 2d . now ati does some good 3d for a cheaper price than nv . by the way gpu market is 50-50 .
                                i do not have a hd6k but that should be cool to know if ati-drivers are installing codec for divx with linux or windows

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X