Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NVIDIA GeForce GT 520

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

  • #46
    I'll probably get one eventually. It's main (or only) use is a HTPC card but I think I might give up waiting for a $100 GTX 460 card. Comes around once in a while but is picked up so fast...

    At least, the 520 cards are readily available under $100. I'm just not sure whether to buy the cheapest one as it seems it's mostly a choice of Gigabyte's v.s. Asus (I want the fanless version).

    Comment


    • #47
      I'd buy the absolute cheapest card from any vendor I could find, especially when we're talking about a dirt cheap lowest-end card like the gt520.

      There's no advantage spending any more money on a card for an htpc, the only alternative value-wise are the perfectly suitable (bit hotter, hungrier?) older generations.

      I've got a nice little amd fusion box (zotac ad10) that has been infinitely improved by the xbmc developers recently, but I'd still only buy nvidia for quality video acceleration.

      Comment


      • #48
        I would stay away from the 520 and go with the 430 instead. At least in Linux, the performance of the 430 was far better for video playback. I was building another extender and saw a 520 in Microcenter and picked it up since it was a good deal. But when I installed it, it could barely play back HD content, while the 430 had no trouble with it at all. Maybe it's different in Windows, however for Linux use only the most boring HD content could be run without issue.

        Comment


        • #49
          That sounds a bit strange for me. Basically not much changed since geforce 210 in terms of video playback, only that newer cards can decode full hd h264 >= 50 fps better which is also good for 3d content. standard bd content should be a piece of cake for all of em. vc1 was a bit broken in the early days so that vc1 was decoded partly by the cpu but that handled even an atom cpu well with mplayer/xbmc (but no vlc). Also older cards with 8xxx have got no support for hdmi audio at all and should not be used to connect to a tv. The 9xxx cards can be used for hdmi audio but require a spdif cable from board to gfx card. since the 210 also divx decode is accellerated, but for the most commonly used 480/576p res this is a piece of cake to decode - about 25% load on atom, so forget about it. If your system with nv 520 did not decode well, then you used a bad media player (vlc maybe which needs even a wrapper and does not work at all since ffmpeg/libav is multithreaded) or it was not configured to use vdpau - mplayer needs an override if you dont know it.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Kano View Post
            If your system with nv 520 did not decode well, then you used a bad media player (vlc maybe which needs even a wrapper and does not work at all since ffmpeg/libav is multithreaded) or it was not configured to use vdpau - mplayer needs an override if you dont know it.
            This was in XBMC. The only thing that changed was the video card (from 520 to 430). If decoding wasn't working then I would have expected playback to stay the same. This wasn't the case. The stuttering during high action scenes went away immediately once the card was switched. Could it be the way the videos were encoded? Possibly. However, it cost less to go with a better card then to reencode all of that content.

            Comment


            • #51
              According to http://nouveau.freedesktop.org/wiki/VideoDecoding, the NVD9 (= GT 520 and some laptop derivatives) has a different video decoding engine. Perhaps the drivers are just somewhat buggy on this, or the engine is less powerful than the GT 430 (NVC1) one.

              Comment


              • #52
                Do you use an outdated driver?

                Comment


                • #53
                  Well i am currently unsure if current vaapi intel drivers are unstable only together with older ddx / mesa / xserver or in general. Basically when you get a cpu around 3 ghz or more you are not forced to use accelleration - you can enable it when it is fixed. Would be good if at least ivi bridge would be out together with a working driver/vaapi stack in a few months. It should fix a minor 24000/1001 fps issue as well.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Kano View Post
                    Do you use an outdated driver?
                    Don't believe so. Think it was built around Ubuntu 11.10.
                    Last edited by kaczu; 01-11-2012, 06:26 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      That'll be the 280 driver. There's also 290 available in the driver PPA from ubuntu-x-swat, but the changelogs of 285 and 290 (http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...yir_2011&num=1) aren't too exciting. 290 feels laggy on my laptop (8400M GS), in LibreOffice it's even worse. Sometimes it takes seconds before the text I type appears on the screen with 290, while 280 does not have this problem.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        I see no problem with 290.10, with 295.09 i had some issues with hdmi sound. Maybe U is crap

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by kaczu View Post
                          I would stay away from the 520 and go with the 430 instead. At least in Linux, the performance of the 430 was far better for video playback. I was building another extender and saw a 520 in Microcenter and picked it up since it was a good deal. But when I installed it, it could barely play back HD content, while the 430 had no trouble with it at all. Maybe it's different in Windows, however for Linux use only the most boring HD content could be run without issue.
                          Might have been a problem with your system because I was able to watch any HD size video all the way back to a 9600 gso on linux. I always found the opposite true, on windows, less support for higher frame references for avc videos using mpc-hc, the only player I know of that can use unencumbered dxva for video files. Or maybe it depends on the card brand, although I doubt it.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Keep in mind that the 520 is a low-end card. The 9600 GSO isn't low-end, though we might consider its 3D performance lower-end nowadays.

                            About card brands, those manufacturers often program their own clock speeds into the card's BIOS. If the card isn't clocked fast enough for HD video you of course run into problems. However, manufacturers usually overclock, lowering the max. clock speed is not that common.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by AlbertP View Post
                              Keep in mind that the 520 is a low-end card. The 9600 GSO isn't low-end, though we might consider its 3D performance lower-end nowadays.

                              About card brands, those manufacturers often program their own clock speeds into the card's BIOS. If the card isn't clocked fast enough for HD video you of course run into problems. However, manufacturers usually overclock, lowering the max. clock speed is not that common.
                              The 9600 gso wasn't a high end card, either. The core clock was lower, and the 128-bit memory didn't help. I'm seeing similar performance - same settings and resolution - running darkplaces-quake1 on the gt 520. Not an intensive benchmark, but the point is it wasn't high-end. Also, the vdpau benchmarks were much lower on the 9600 gso.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                It is Nvidia or nothing on Linux for me

                                Originally posted by DanL View Post
                                No, just unreasonable and near-sighted. I even said if one wants hardware video acceleration right now, nvidia is preferable. I also said that g3dvl is in its infancy and that AMD has hired more devs for open-source development. So, don't think that things will never change, but don't expect tough work to happen instantly either.

                                ATI is so poor that I consider it a rip off even when I get their trash for free! Time is money and it takes me time to pull that ATI junk out of systems. Nvidia is an honorable company and as such deserves respect from Linux users. AMD does have a lot of tough work ahead of them if they wish to earn anything from me. I'm shopping for a video card now and you can lay your last nickel on the fact that it'll say Nvidia on it.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X