ASRock's High-End Vision 3D HTPC Reviewed
by Ganesh T S on October 3, 2010 10:20 AM EST
We have been using our media streamer test suite for the last few reviews in the HTPC / media streamer space. In v1.0.1 of the test suite used in the WDTV Live Plus review, we added DVD and Blu-Ray folder structures to the mix. In v1.0.2, we have added three Xvid clips (one with Q-Pel, and two others with GMC (Global Motion Compensation) using 2 and 3 warp points respectively) and a MKV stream with forced subtitles. For the Vision 3D, we used v1.0.2 of the media streamer test suite. Weights have been assigned to each of the test stream based on how frequently one might encounter each type of file in a home theater setting.
We now have 50 streams in our test suite and a maximum possible score of 350. Presenting a table listing every stream would make this section messy. Instead, moving forward, we will only indicate streams which have playback issues. In addition to that, for HTPCs, we will also indicate all the different softwares / codecs used to enable playback of all the test streams.
The Vision 3D is the first pre-built HTPC we have reviewed to score a perfect 100% in our media streamer test suite. However, this was not quite straightforward, as it was quite difficult to find the correct splitter / filter / renderer combinations for some of the test streams. The following softwares were used to process our media streamer test suite:
- Cyberlink PowerDVD 10.0.2025.52 OEM 3D
- MPC-HC x64 1.4.2499 with ffdshow Audio Decoder (x64 SVN 3572)
- VLC 1.1.4
- Monogram GraphStudio with MPC-HC Matroska Splitter (for 024-1080p24.x264.DTS-MA.7Ch.mkv, which had minor stutters with the default MPC-HC combination used to playback other streams)
- Monogram GraphStudio with Sage Mpeg Demux Splitter (for 042-1080p24.VC1.TrueHD.AC3, which the latest MPC-HC M2TS splitter couldn't split properly. VLC could play this back without bitstreaming, but GraphStudio, with the Sage splitter was able to properly deliver the TrueHD soundtrack to ffdshow for bitstreaming).
3D Playback
Vision 3D's claim to fame is the enabling of 3D Blu-Ray playback with HDMI 1.4a output. However, 3D technology equipment is pretty high-end even for us reviewers. However, that would be no excuse to not test it out, right?! Thankfully, Tom Vaughan from Cyberlink invited me over to Cyberlink's office in Fremont, CA to make use of their demo equipment (3D TV / AV receiver). With the Vision 3D in hand, I landed up over there at 8 AM one morning, and proceeded to test out 3D Blu-Ray playback with the Vision 3D using the OEM PowerDVD version supplied by ASRock. I was also quite surprised that PowerDVD was able to correctly identify stereoscopic WMV files and play them back appropriately on the 3D TV.
Tom also gave us some useful insights on 3D technology and how Cyberlink is gearing up to handle the upcoming challenges in the HTPC area, but those are details for another day and another article. We are grateful to Tom and Cyberlink for providing us with the opportunity to make use of their facilities.
Refresh Rate Handling
Many HTPC purists are concerned about the lack of support for proper display refresh rates. This was one of the main drawbacks of the Core 100 reviewed earlier. The Vision 3D, with nV's 260.66 drivers, has no such issues. This can be observed from the following screenshots. MPC-HC's statistics OSD indicates that the display correctly refreshes at 23.976 Hz with the 23 Hz setting for Vision 3D, while Core 100 indicates a refresh rate of 23.999 Hz for the 23 Hz setting.
23 Hz Setting on Core 100 / Vision 3D (Click to enlarge)
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
51 Comments
View All Comments
ProDigit - Sunday, October 3, 2010 - link
Looks interesting at first, but I don't much like nvidia graphics cards, and the WD drive.WD drives are known to break right after their warranty expires when using them a lot.
The only good about the nvidia card is that it could be set up to work with CUDA (CPU + GPU in parrallel); although cuda now also supports most ATI/AMD cards.
The price of this setup is quite on the high end. If it wasn't for 3D vision, I'd say this computer would go for no more than $699. With 3D, I'd say $799 max.
I personally don't care if it supports 3D or not, since I have no monitors that support this resolution. So for me it's only worth $599.
ProDigit - Sunday, October 3, 2010 - link
They should have gone with a Toshiba drive instead. Yes, WD has faster continuous write and read speeds, but Toshiba is much better in IO performance.An OS like Windows 7 would boot faster with Toshiba, than with WD, and would run significantly cooler too!
WD is absolutely NOT the best drive they could have chosen! The cheapest perhaps yes.
ganeshts - Sunday, October 3, 2010 - link
Looks like the WD Scorpio Black is as good as the Momentus XT from Seagate (except for the Disk Capture benchmark):http://www.storagereview.com/western_digital_scorp...
So, from a price-performance ratio, it makes sense to go with WD.
I have also mentioned in my review that a mini-PCIE SSD for the boot drive would have been good :)
sprockkets - Sunday, October 3, 2010 - link
The best notebook drives were made by IBM, and now Hitachi. Whether that still is the case, who knows.Zok - Sunday, October 3, 2010 - link
CUDA is not supported on ATI/AMD cards. DirectCompute and OpenCL are, however, supported by both.LtGoonRush - Sunday, October 3, 2010 - link
Studies of both operating disk populations and drives sent in for data recovery show that no brand of drives is measurably more or less reliable than others, with the notable exception of the Seagate model ranges affected by their firmware bugs. It's also been conclusively proven that drive usage doesn't affect failure rates; lightly loaded and heavily loaded drives fail at the same rate. It's true that a failing drive will have its death hastened by heavy load, but you shouldn't be using a drive that's failing anyway, it should be replaced with the first SMART error it logs. The WD Scorpio Black drives in particular are the fastest notebook HDDs available, balancing high throughput with excellent seek times (Seagate drives have always had abysmal seek performance). It's also a little silly to complain about heat when we're talking about drives with sub-4W PEAK power draw.chrnochime - Sunday, October 3, 2010 - link
great job for correcting him without making it more obvious how wrong he is. I would've not sugarcoat it as much as you did though heh.lexluthermiester - Sunday, October 3, 2010 - link
Seriously? Not liking Nvidia, well that is just personal preference. You not having a TV/Monitor that supports what this system can put out is not the fault of the maker or the system itself, it your problem. But bashing WD? They make the finest hard drives in the world and there are certainly worse hard drive makers. Now I'm not going to be low class and name names, but really? And if you don't like this little system, then don't buy it, but don't bash something that certainly has usefulness to a certain audience of users and at a very fair price.Parhel - Sunday, October 3, 2010 - link
False. WD drives are not "known" for high failure rates. All drive manufacturers compare about evenly in most areas. WD is one of, if not the, best choice out there.Samus - Sunday, October 3, 2010 - link
I was a WD fan in the 90's and after the 7200.7's came out and they ditch the wetsuits I became a die-hard Seagate fan because of the 7200.7's legendary reliability, low cost, 5-year warranty and 'decent' performance. These were all big selling points during an era where the Deathstar 75GXP rocked the storage industry with what some circles were calling a "definitive" failure rate within the warranty period.The Seagate drives just worked. However, recently I've had a lot of Seagate 7200.10 and 7200.11 drives giving me SMART errors, specifically reallocated sector counts. They also run hot compared to my new WD Blue 1TB drive and they're all mounted in the same cage. A few years ago I had a 1.5TB Seagate I had to flash to CC1G because of the firmware 'recall' which was definitely a quality control concern. I didn't loose data, but I know somebody who did, one day their drive was just blank. We flashed the firmware and his data was back, but the drive failed after a few months without warning, just spun up and clicked. Tried freezing it. No dice.
Seems like WD is taking the quality/reliability crown, where as they've always had the performance crown...but performance wasn't as important to me as making sure the drive would work for 3-5 years without any issues.
I'd consider a Hitachi in the future, but will probably continue to stick with Seagate and WD drives. Considering how many dead Samsung and Fujitsu drives I've pulled and replaced from friends' desktop and laptop's over the years, it's a no-brainier to stay the hell away from those. Toshiba I have mixed feelings about because over the past 20-years, I just didn't care much for their laptops. Hypocritically, I love Thinkpad's but when IBM had those 75GXP failures, I didn't change my mind about their laptops, and still think they make the best laptop's out there. Ironically things are different now, because Hitachi makes the hard drives and Lenovo makes the Thinkpad's. IBM has little to do with either now.