ATI ALL IN WONDER vs. MARVEL G450 ETV, under Windows2000.

[Zyn]

Does anyone want to make a comment on either of these two video cards?

Im writing a review on this subject matter, and I would like any personal experiences you may have on either of these two video cards.

Anything from hardware, to software, to dvd, to tv tuner input.

[IM_Riktar]

I played around with a AIW Radeon that I got for a system I was building. These are my observations:

1. VERY good DVD playback. I am impressed with the job ATI did on their player. Since I haven't tried every type of player (computer based) on the market I won't claim it is the best. Then again from what I have seen I find it hard to believe anyone could beat the quality. And this was on a system that only used a Celeron 433 processor!

2. 2D display quality was sharp, although a little over-contrasted.

3. 3D quality and speed was very good. I am not an avid gamer so take this for what it's worth. Unreal Tournament played smoothly up to 1024x768 in 32bit color. I didn't measure the frame rate, but "by eye" it was glitch free.

4. Video capture/edit/production was a mixed bag. ATI promises alot but due to driver issues it falls short, at least by my standards.

If you are going to capture content solely for the purpose of viewing back on your computer in a TIVO like manner you will be pleased with it's capabilities. If you want to transfer out to tape you will be un-impressed (See point 5) to say the least.

VCD/SVCD creation was another area of frustration that sounds good but comes up short. ATI has a VCD template that works ok. SVCD creation involves jumping through a set of hoops that isn't 100% reliable. The SVCD issue may have been solved since I tried (2 months ago) my hand at it.

5. TV. The tuner is something I didn't have enough time to play around with at length. It found all my over the air channels just fine, but since I don't have cable I can't speak to it's cable station tuning capabilities. The TIVO type recording abilities worked ok for the limited testing I did but I was rushed to get this box built and out the door so I didn't try any long captures or playback.

TV-Out is average. I wouldn't go so far as to call it poor, but it isn't up to the Matrox Gx00 cards capabilities. Lack of a dual-head feature makes taping of your captures frustrating to say the least.

6. Drivers. To repeat the point stated in #1, I haven't tried every companies offering so all the driver likes and dislikes are solely based on what I tried to use the card for. In it's basic form, without streching the limits of the cards abilities, it worked ok.

All the items I have listed are based on the comparison of my Marvel G400 that is in my present system.

If the reasoning for the purchase of this card is to build a system that can be used for gaming, school work, and replacement of a TV, like in a college dorm room, you will not find a better solution. If you think you are going to compete with Hollywood for video masterpiece creation, dream on. Then again if you think any card under $500 is going to give you this you had better wake up and do some more research.

I am sure the person I built this for (College student, cramped dorm room) will be singing praises about this system I built for her.

It does have some nice features, but it is far from the "swiss army knife" kudos that some sites claim it to be. For that matter, I have yet to find A*N*Y company that deserves that title. If you read enough articles, and research enough from "real-world" users in the forums, you will find dull-edges on all of the "knives" out there.

Then again, WTF do I know? I am not a Computer hardware site, just another guy who likes his hobby. Take all this for what it's worth: One guys opinion.

Riktar

[Zyn]

Your opinion is valuable. And thanks for the feedback, I will be using some of the things you said in my report. Thanks!

[Hulk]

I posted the following on the forum about a year ago:

The following are my OPINIONS on the Matrox Marvel G400TV and the ATI All-In-Wonder 16Mb.

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
No 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.

[AndrewDV]

Thank you for a good review!

I agree completely! ATI really has good quality, but the TV-Out is just plain bad when compared to the Matrox solution.

[IM_Riktar]

One last thought,,,,,

The biggest detraction I noticed with the AIW was the Mpeg2 capturing. Not from a quality standpoint, but from a compatibility with SVCD standards.

If someone comes up with a way that allows the AIW to direct capture Mpeg2 that can be burned directly to SVCD and be played in my standalone DVD player I am going to take another serious look at replacing my Marvel G400.

TV-Out doesn't become much of a factor if the final destination doesn't require using the excellent dualhead feature Matrox has to copy to tape.

[dZeus]

even in that situation wouldn't it be much better to capture to huffyuff and then clean up the video and stuff before encoding it to mpeg2 for use with SVCD, at which there are programs that give a WAY better result than a codec that's been optimized for realtime conversion. for example Cinema Craft Encoder (CCE).

[IM_Riktar]

While I will agree that software will (Dollar for dollar) outperform Hardware from a quality standpoint, I would like to find some way of reducing the wait time for the encoding to a "legal" format that Nero can burn and play in a standalone DVD player.

My hope was that the AIW would do this. As it turned out the encoding took just as long as what I am presently using.

It was just a thought. But the card is quite impressive in it's own element.

[arbymo]

check this link

Zyn, i was in the search for a good VGA+capture board a while ago, so u might check this link

[Zyn]

Thanks dude, thats a good thread.