Tweet
Marvel G400TV vs. ATI AIW 128 16mb: A Detailed Report
The following are my OPINIONS on the Matrox Marvel G400TV and the ATI All-In-Wonder 16Mb. Please feel free to correct me, but please don’t make me reach for the fire alarm. I wrote this for the purpose giving people the benefit of my experience and, learning from other people’s experiences.
I purchased the ATI All In Wonder 16Mb last year and have become very familiar with it’s capabilities. I picked up the Matrox Marvel G400TV last week. Although both cards target the video editing market, they each have different strengths and weakness.
TV Tuner – On the computer monitor quality
The doubt about it, the AIW has a sharper, more focused image when viewed on the computer monitor. The Matrox picture quality is definitely “soft,” almost as if the anti-aliasing is working overtime. I didn’t expect this result because I believe that the Matrox’s tv tuner is located in the break-out-box (BOB) and should therefore be less susceptible to computer interference. The ATI’s tuner is located on the board, it is quite well shielded though. Software for neither tuner can accurately discern a viable station from one that is not.
Advantage: ATI by a small but noticeable amount.
TV Tuner – TV out quality
The AIW lacks the ability to display full screen tv output unless the computer monitor is displaying full screen output. Basically, the AIW only has the “clone desktop” feature of the Marvel. Besides lacking a true tv out option, the tv out quality of the AIW is much lower than the Marvel. In addition, the software is very unstable when using this function and more often than not results in lock-ups. I rarely use the tv out option on the AIW because the lack of stability is not worth the effort for the poor output.
The Matrox, on the other hand, is supremely stable in this regard. The tv out quality on a tv display is also outstanding. Plus, you can watch tv without having to enable full screen tv on your computer monitor.
Advantage: Decisively Marvel
Video Capture – Capturing broadcast or cable TV
The softness of the Marvel’s tv quality really works against it when capturing tv broadcasts. As you know, captured images are always a little softer and appear more out of focus than the original broadcast. The Marvel’s “pre-softening” of the image makes the captured video even softer still. Not a good thing. Note that I’m primarily talking about tv video capture played back on the computer monitor, not using the tv out. Using the tv out of the Marvel and playing back tv capture from both cards, the result is very close, but the AIW is still a little better. I did the comparisons using full D1 capture. Highest quality MJPEG (3Mb/sec) for the Marvel and 8000kps MPEG II capture for the AIW.
Since my system is a Celeron 300 o/c450 I can only capture D1 MPEG II if I disable audio capture. That’s how I was able to compare captures. If you have the computing horsepower (at least a PIII 600), the AIW provides great captures with relatively small disk space requirements. Roughly 1 Mb/sec at the highest quality vs. 3 Mb/sec for the Marvel. Plus the AIW’s tv capture simply looks better.
Advantage: ATI
Video Capture – Using Composite in
I have yet to experiment with S video in captures so I can’t comment on that. I have compared Marvel and ATI full D1 composite video in captures and have found that the results look about the same. As above I am comparing highest quality capture of the Marvel with highest quality MPEG II AIW capture. I don’t think the VCR 1.0 or VCR 2.0 capture codecs on the AIW are as good as the MPEG II capture.
Advantage: Tie
Outputting to tape
There is simply no contest here. Using the tv out or dvdmax out option on the Marvel allows full screen captured video to be output painlessly with the Marvel. The AIW really cannot output to tape with any type of quality or stability. You can capture and edit video all you like on the AIW but YOU CAN’T GET IT BACK TO TAPE! This is a huge shortcoming of the AIW, and, as you may have guessed, the reason I purchased the Marvel G400TV.
I edit using Ulead’s VideoStudio 4.0. Using the Marvel I can actually see my editing progress on a tv connected to the Marvel’s tv out! Amazing.
Advantage: Marvel. The AIW is really lacking here.
MPEG II and DVD decoding – On computer monitor display
Everybody knows that ATI has the best DVD decoding. No surprise there. The Matrox is very good but it shows a bit more artifacting (you know, the jpeg compression induced “haze” around high contrast objects and “fluttering” patches, especially in shadow areas) than the ATI.
But the image quality isn’t really the big difference between these two cards. When displaying MPEG II at resolutions of 640x480 and higher on the computer monitor the Matrox creates jagged edges whenever an object on the screen moves horizontally. Very annoying. The AIW does not do this.
Advantage: AIW
MPEG II and DVD decoding – Using tv output
Since the AIW’s tv out is useless as noted above there is no comparison here. The Marvel is better and the jagged edges mentioned above do not appear when playing hi-res (D1) MPEG II files on a tv screen. I think those jaggies may have something to do with the interlaced nature of the capture but I’m just guessing.
Advantage: Marvel
Some thoughts:
Since you can’t output to tv in an acceptable fashion using the AIW, you really can’t complete a video editing project with it. You can with the Marvel.
I like the MPEG II capture of the AIW. Sometimes I capture a 2 hour show at 352x240 resolution using only about 3gig, with very good capture quality. The Marvel’s capture quality using MJPEG at this data rate is quite poor in comparison. I’ve also noticed that if you capture using high data rates with the Marvel and then compress to MPEG II using VideoStudio 4, the quality isn’t as good as one MPEG II capture would have been with the AIW. Assuming, of course, that the final data rates are equal.
What I think I’m going to do:
Once I get a fast PIII processor (it’s on the way) I’m going to capture and edit with the AIW and then output to tape using the Marvel. I like the flexibility the AIW provides when capturing. It has more resolution choices and more audio encoding options.
Unfortunately, I’ll need two computers to do this, and a way to transfer the edit files from the computer with the ATI card to the one with the Matrox card. Maybe I’ll use my re-writer, or a USB network connection. I’ll leave the Marvel in the slower computer since it doesn’t need the PIII for full D1 capture.
To ATI:
Make the tv out provide full screen tv output whenever any video files are played!!!
To Matrox:
Sharpen the TV picture. Provide more control over capture options and formats. How about MPEG I/II recording options? People with fast CPU’s might want to bypass the conversion option. Especially now that MPEG II video editing solutions are affordably available for the PC. See last question below.
Some Questions:
How can I get rid of the jagged edges when viewing D1 MPEG II on the computer screen when using the Marvel?
The mpeg 1 encoding quality of FlasK is outstanding. At the same bitrates it blows Ulead VideoStudio 4 away in terms of quality. The problem is the audio disappears. The middle option I need is greyed out. Is there a way to encode my MPEG II files to MPEG I using FlasK AND have audio?
Has anyone found a way to output video to tape with good quality using the AIW?
Oh yeah, what’s the latest on the green line phenomenon? I only get it when in the clone mode but it’s still very annoying.
Has anyone does any MPEG II capturing with the Marvel? It can be done using a program like VideoStudio 4. I’ve tried it at 320 x 240 but the frame rate was low. This is strange because my computer with the AIW can easily capture at this resolution in MPEG II format. If neither card has any help from hardware when capturing MPEG II then ATI must have some pretty good MPEG II capture routines. Can someone clear me up on this?
I purchased the ATI All In Wonder 16Mb last year and have become very familiar with it’s capabilities. I picked up the Matrox Marvel G400TV last week. Although both cards target the video editing market, they each have different strengths and weakness.
TV Tuner – On the computer monitor quality
The doubt about it, the AIW has a sharper, more focused image when viewed on the computer monitor. The Matrox picture quality is definitely “soft,” almost as if the anti-aliasing is working overtime. I didn’t expect this result because I believe that the Matrox’s tv tuner is located in the break-out-box (BOB) and should therefore be less susceptible to computer interference. The ATI’s tuner is located on the board, it is quite well shielded though. Software for neither tuner can accurately discern a viable station from one that is not.
Advantage: ATI by a small but noticeable amount.
TV Tuner – TV out quality
The AIW lacks the ability to display full screen tv output unless the computer monitor is displaying full screen output. Basically, the AIW only has the “clone desktop” feature of the Marvel. Besides lacking a true tv out option, the tv out quality of the AIW is much lower than the Marvel. In addition, the software is very unstable when using this function and more often than not results in lock-ups. I rarely use the tv out option on the AIW because the lack of stability is not worth the effort for the poor output.
The Matrox, on the other hand, is supremely stable in this regard. The tv out quality on a tv display is also outstanding. Plus, you can watch tv without having to enable full screen tv on your computer monitor.
Advantage: Decisively Marvel
Video Capture – Capturing broadcast or cable TV
The softness of the Marvel’s tv quality really works against it when capturing tv broadcasts. As you know, captured images are always a little softer and appear more out of focus than the original broadcast. The Marvel’s “pre-softening” of the image makes the captured video even softer still. Not a good thing. Note that I’m primarily talking about tv video capture played back on the computer monitor, not using the tv out. Using the tv out of the Marvel and playing back tv capture from both cards, the result is very close, but the AIW is still a little better. I did the comparisons using full D1 capture. Highest quality MJPEG (3Mb/sec) for the Marvel and 8000kps MPEG II capture for the AIW.
Since my system is a Celeron 300 o/c450 I can only capture D1 MPEG II if I disable audio capture. That’s how I was able to compare captures. If you have the computing horsepower (at least a PIII 600), the AIW provides great captures with relatively small disk space requirements. Roughly 1 Mb/sec at the highest quality vs. 3 Mb/sec for the Marvel. Plus the AIW’s tv capture simply looks better.
Advantage: ATI
Video Capture – Using Composite in
I have yet to experiment with S video in captures so I can’t comment on that. I have compared Marvel and ATI full D1 composite video in captures and have found that the results look about the same. As above I am comparing highest quality capture of the Marvel with highest quality MPEG II AIW capture. I don’t think the VCR 1.0 or VCR 2.0 capture codecs on the AIW are as good as the MPEG II capture.
Advantage: Tie
Outputting to tape
There is simply no contest here. Using the tv out or dvdmax out option on the Marvel allows full screen captured video to be output painlessly with the Marvel. The AIW really cannot output to tape with any type of quality or stability. You can capture and edit video all you like on the AIW but YOU CAN’T GET IT BACK TO TAPE! This is a huge shortcoming of the AIW, and, as you may have guessed, the reason I purchased the Marvel G400TV.
I edit using Ulead’s VideoStudio 4.0. Using the Marvel I can actually see my editing progress on a tv connected to the Marvel’s tv out! Amazing.
Advantage: Marvel. The AIW is really lacking here.
MPEG II and DVD decoding – On computer monitor display
Everybody knows that ATI has the best DVD decoding. No surprise there. The Matrox is very good but it shows a bit more artifacting (you know, the jpeg compression induced “haze” around high contrast objects and “fluttering” patches, especially in shadow areas) than the ATI.
But the image quality isn’t really the big difference between these two cards. When displaying MPEG II at resolutions of 640x480 and higher on the computer monitor the Matrox creates jagged edges whenever an object on the screen moves horizontally. Very annoying. The AIW does not do this.
Advantage: AIW
MPEG II and DVD decoding – Using tv output
Since the AIW’s tv out is useless as noted above there is no comparison here. The Marvel is better and the jagged edges mentioned above do not appear when playing hi-res (D1) MPEG II files on a tv screen. I think those jaggies may have something to do with the interlaced nature of the capture but I’m just guessing.
Advantage: Marvel
Some thoughts:
Since you can’t output to tv in an acceptable fashion using the AIW, you really can’t complete a video editing project with it. You can with the Marvel.
I like the MPEG II capture of the AIW. Sometimes I capture a 2 hour show at 352x240 resolution using only about 3gig, with very good capture quality. The Marvel’s capture quality using MJPEG at this data rate is quite poor in comparison. I’ve also noticed that if you capture using high data rates with the Marvel and then compress to MPEG II using VideoStudio 4, the quality isn’t as good as one MPEG II capture would have been with the AIW. Assuming, of course, that the final data rates are equal.
What I think I’m going to do:
Once I get a fast PIII processor (it’s on the way) I’m going to capture and edit with the AIW and then output to tape using the Marvel. I like the flexibility the AIW provides when capturing. It has more resolution choices and more audio encoding options.
Unfortunately, I’ll need two computers to do this, and a way to transfer the edit files from the computer with the ATI card to the one with the Matrox card. Maybe I’ll use my re-writer, or a USB network connection. I’ll leave the Marvel in the slower computer since it doesn’t need the PIII for full D1 capture.
To ATI:
Make the tv out provide full screen tv output whenever any video files are played!!!
To Matrox:
Sharpen the TV picture. Provide more control over capture options and formats. How about MPEG I/II recording options? People with fast CPU’s might want to bypass the conversion option. Especially now that MPEG II video editing solutions are affordably available for the PC. See last question below.
Some Questions:
How can I get rid of the jagged edges when viewing D1 MPEG II on the computer screen when using the Marvel?
The mpeg 1 encoding quality of FlasK is outstanding. At the same bitrates it blows Ulead VideoStudio 4 away in terms of quality. The problem is the audio disappears. The middle option I need is greyed out. Is there a way to encode my MPEG II files to MPEG I using FlasK AND have audio?
Has anyone found a way to output video to tape with good quality using the AIW?
Oh yeah, what’s the latest on the green line phenomenon? I only get it when in the clone mode but it’s still very annoying.
Has anyone does any MPEG II capturing with the Marvel? It can be done using a program like VideoStudio 4. I’ve tried it at 320 x 240 but the frame rate was low. This is strange because my computer with the AIW can easily capture at this resolution in MPEG II format. If neither card has any help from hardware when capturing MPEG II then ATI must have some pretty good MPEG II capture routines. Can someone clear me up on this?
Comment