KitGuru KitGuru.net – Tech News | Hardware News | Hardware Reviews | IOS | Mobile | Gaming | Graphics Cards
HQV Benchmark has always been a very useful application to ascertain the quality of video output from the hardware, through the driver into the panel. V 2.0 literally doubles the amount of tests on offer, giving the end user more options to fine tune and enhance their viewing experience.
The suite is designed to detail and report any weaknesses with video output and to educate and inform the user with possible driver adjustments. After many many hours of testing, our final results are shown below.
|
Intel GMA X4500 (G41)
|
Intel HD Graphics
|
ATI HD4200 (IGP)
|
ATI HD5450 (Discrete)
|
ATI HD5550 (Discrete)
|
ATI HD5770 (Discrete)
|
ATI HD5850 (Discrete)
|
ATI HD5870 (Discrete)
|
NV G210 (Discrete)
|
NV G220 (Discrete)
|
NV GTX 465 (Discrete)
|
NV GTX 480 (Discrete)
|
|
|
Dial
|
0
|
4
|
0
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
0
|
2
|
4
|
4
|
| Dial with static pattern | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Gray Bars | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Violin | 0 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Stadium 2:2 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
| Stadium 3:2 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Horizontal Text Scroll | 3 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| Vertical Text Scroll | 3 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 3 |
| Transistion to 3:2 Lock | 0 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
| Transition to 2:2 Lock | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
|
2:2:2:4 24 FPS DVCAM Video
|
0 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
|
2:3:3:2 24 FPS DVCam Video
|
0 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
|
3:2:3:2:2 24 FOS Vari-Speed
|
0 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 5 |
|
5:5 FPS Animation
|
0 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
|
6:4 12 FPS Animation
|
0 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
|
8:7 8 FPS Animation
|
0 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
|
Interlace Chroma Problem (ICP)
|
2 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 5 |
|
Chroma Upsampling Error (CUE)
|
2 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
|
Random Noise: Sailboat
|
0 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
|
Random Noise: Flower
|
0 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
|
Random Noise: Sunrise
|
0 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
|
Random Noise: Harbour Night
|
0 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
|
Scrolling Text
|
0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
|
Roller Coaster
|
0 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
|
Ferris Wheel
|
0 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
|
Bridge Traffic
|
0 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
|
Text Pattern/ Scrolling Text
|
0 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
|
Roller Coaster
|
0 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
|
Ferris Wheel
|
0 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
|
Bridge Traffic
|
0 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
|
Luminance Frequency Bands
|
2 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 5 |
|
Chrominance Frequency Bands
|
5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Vanishing Text | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
|
Resolution Enhancement
|
15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 |
|
Theme Park
|
2 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Driftwood | 5 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
|
Ferris Wheel
|
0 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
|
Skin Tones
|
0 | 0 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| Total | 49 | 111 | 152 | 173 | 175 | 175 | 193 | 193 | 82 | 114 | 172 | 175 |
It is worth pointing out again that HQV Benchmark 2.0 is not an exact science, the testing is subjective. While many people will be using a panel or television with heavy processing, we have attempted to negate this by using one of the most expensive panels on the market with a very wide gamut and colour depth. This ensures that the output from the hardware, via the driver to the panel is clean and pure. We also studied reference documentation from the creators of the benchmark to educate ourselves on all the tests beforehand. Knowing exactly what you are looking for is tantamount to ensuring you can accurately measure the results.
Here are the various performance figures stacked for each solution.
So what can we say about the 3 companies who compete for your hard earned bucks in this market?
.
Intel: Even though the original programme for discrete Larrabee was cancelled, it's obvious that Intel's engineers have already learned a lot about high quality video processing and each generation is definitely getting better. Comparing an integrated graphics processor against a state-of-the-art GPU from someone like ATI is never going to look good for Intel. Dedicated hardware solutions are always going to rock. But you must to take your hat off to Intel when you consider that its latest chips score more than 125% higher than its previous generation. Intel may not be a leader right now, but it is very definitely moving in the right direction – and it's doing so faster than anyone else.
nVidia: Again, progress has been made. The jump from nVidia's G210/220 scores to the present generation of Fermi processor is substantial. Also, once nVidia's engineers have had a chance to look through KitGuru's test results, it will be straightforward for them to target issues the issueswe've flagged and eliminate them. It's unlikely that the lower scores are anything to do with hardware, so we'd expect the scores to pick up within a few driver iterations. Likewise on the functionality side of things, we expect to see some of ATI's new functions mirrored in the nVidia driver panels soon enough, for example mosquito noise reduction and deblocking.
ATI: It seems that ATI's background with the production of processing chips for digital TVs still gives it some kind of advantage. Even budget cards like the passively cooled Sapphire HD 5550 generate similar video quality when compared with nVidia's flagship GTX480. Obviously a lot of this is down to driver development and advancements. For now, KitGuru can state clearly that ATI's Radeon HD 5000 series cards offer the best HD video reproduction quality available in the market.
Our findings have also shown that Catalyst 10.6 is without a doubt the best ATI driver yet, specifically in regards to the quality of video rendering. The new features incorporated into Catalyst 10.6, such as Mosquito Noise Reduction and DeBlocking, really to help to enhance picture quality output, with our reference monitor it was easy to ascertain quality differences. Just as we're sure that ATI's discrete solutions are leading the HD video quality pack right now, we're also positive that nVidia will be working hard to catch up with subsequent driver releases over the coming months.
KitGuru says: We hope that this article today has not only informed you on slight variances with hardware and driver configurations but has educated you on how to run and analyse these tests for yourself … we would like to hear your own reports in our forums.
what a stunning article Zardon, im speechless.
I really dont know how you get time to do all these articles man, its highest quality journalism. seriously.
Shit thats good info ! AMD for me next GFX I think 🙂
Glad the site came back up there, I was reading this and I lost it !
What an amazing read man, top job.
Amazing, absolutely bloody amazing. Surprised how well intel did actually considering.
wow, ive been reading an hour and im not even half way through it, will check out the rest later, what detail ! love it guys.
Yeah, the 480GTX did well too I think, nVidia were well known not to have great IQ in video, and this shows they are still lagging but catching up a bit.
so much detail in this id need the weekend to really take it all in. Interesting to see the Catalyst 10.6 in this. when they arent even out yet !
staggering level of work in this chaps. most impressed
Well I would be lying if I said I understand even half of it, but what I do get is AMD ROCKS 🙂
Catalyst 10.6, I must have it. now!
Nice writeup. good info and id like to try this myself, how much does it cost? is it out yet?
Amazing editorial piece, best ive read all year by a long shot. Cant even imagine the work load in this.
43 pages, eh? is this for real. shit. I just read the conclusion, sorry ! but ill read more later. Intel did well didnt they? i thought they would end up with 5 points.
I don’t really even know what to say after reading that. how long did this take to test? 3 weeks? insane testing and very useful to get information about driver quality. I am sure nvidia will release a set shortly to target this benchmark which is good as it will assuredly improve IQ real world for everyone.
lol. really, lol 🙂 I gave up after page 10, information overload. but I get the point from the conclusion which is all I need, ATi seem to have trhe edge.
simply staggering detail and what a great idea for a benchmark. Lets use OUR OWN EYES and not have some coder tell us what is better. and then we get fake results when they can optimise drivers. real world testing FTW.
Well I really do love this article. why? as someone said earlier, its not sythethic crap. its real world to the core. I am sure different people might get slightly different results, but ive known Zardon long enough on Driverheaven over the years to know he is pretty expert on video stuff.
Brilliant to read and actually understand. great the way all the tests MEAN something and a great benchmark idea from HQV. ill get myself a copy and hopefully a 5550 shortly too 🙂
Amazing reading. im not a fan of futuremark style tests. what does a score of 25,000 really mean? apart from epenis on the forums. This is what I wanted to see for a long time. I think nvidia will add some new features to their drivers also. soon.
Good to see ATI dont win ALL the tests ! seems nvidia have a bit of driver work to do. In 6 months I bet both companies are over 200 points each, battling to max out the scores.
Great testing and I liked the use of a reference monitor, rather than a processed loaded TV which would alter the raw settings anyway
Id like that monitor myself, any chance I could trade it for my 24 inch Dell? its a good deal, really.
Intel did pretty well didnt they for not really spending much time doing this kind of work? very impressed with their results in some of those tests. That said, AMD here I come 🙂
that was a wicked read over lunch here. have to take it all in again later then get the new drivers and maybe order the benchmark, how much is it ?
I think its only $25 on their store.
great read, but it seems a bit biased to me for ATI!
lol, always one idiot isnt there 🙂 I would think you should get a copy and try it out yourself man.
im sold, I want these drivers, cant get them on ATIs site yet ;(
I have been refreshing to try and get them, nothing yet 🙁
What a fucking brilliant editorial KG. I nkow you get a bit of stick for your news sometimes, but the reviews are top drawer.
I ordered the bluray disc, need to check this out for myself 🙂
10/10. Thank you for the work. bookmarked it as a reference.when I order the bluray myself.
I would like to just pass on my regards for spending all this time for something so informative and educational. This is a credit to the website and will be bookmarked by thousands I feel for a reference. I hope in 3 months time you can follow up with new drivers from all companies and measure the changes
Posted this on the wrong article ! urgh. Thanks for the article, its the most indepth ive seen online. very helpful, even if I struggled to keep up with some of the tests.
I used to think I could be a reviewer/writer for a tech site, until I read something like this and realise I would just jump out the window or shoot myself in the head.
work overload 🙂
fabulous reading and it shows that drivers do make a massive difference. ATI have came a long way in 4 years. I remember when their drivers were a disaster.
stunning work guys, I have to read this more later.
Interesting to see termingology for things ive seen with my HD movies but never understood. invaluable.
Great to see such an indepth analysis for an important subject matter.
ATI winning another video quality shoot out is not a surprise, we agree.
nVidia’s improvement was good to see, but for me the biggest story here
is just how much Intel has come on. If they ever manage to get a discrete
graphics solution to market, these boys will be dangerous.
I am so annoyed I bought a GT220 for media after reading this. should have went for a 5550 🙁
Glad I went for a HD5850 ! worth the cost. I think lol
I wonder do ATI do trade in deals for HD4 series cards anywhere? id like a 5 series but just cant afford it
I agree, Intel did very well, I wasnt expecting that at all.
Very very interesting. Wasnt expecting intel to outperform one of the nvidia boards. that g210 really is a piece of shit.
Intel scoring so hard blew my mind, I thought their onboard solutions sucked ass.
Zardon I love you. Really. glad to see you back and kicking ass with this level of article.
speechless. ill come back later when I can digest a third of it 🙂
Wow just what I wanted, im sick seeing game benchmarks, which mean nothing to me.
Amazing detail of testing there fella. cant imagine how long that took. thank you.
well that was quite the ride and very informative to someone who knows very little about IQ.
That really got me worked up KitGuru. very good article, I shall b e back.
While it was important you used a reference panel, I think people should know this is subjective testing and as such errors can creep in depending on the user.
Why not use a TV, no one will have a panel that expensive.
@ Paul sheers. read the pages, explains why. you can’t test something if TV processing and enhancements are between the driver/hardware and viewer. We need to see quailty of the raw image to the panel, not work out what is being processed by the panel to improve on things.
Brilliant. Top job – shall use this as a guide in college
Wow ive been trying to read this thoroughly all night and the site has been up and down. problems? Great article, still cant get seeing it all yet as I cant load some pages, but ill try later.
SO useful this in my thinking about a future card. can nvidia catch up though with their drivers or could it be more hardware related?
Have had a real hard time getting here tonight. traffic issues? I am surprised intel did so well really compared to some of the discrete solutions, but its impressive for them. I think.
This is exactly why ive always bought AMD, even when I know nvidia often make better gamign cards. I watch A LOT OF HD content and it verifies my own findings.
BIG APOLOGIES
Zardon’s HQV 2 article has generated a wave of traffic the like of which we’ve never seen before
Our dedicated server just could not cope as traffic spiked >8x normal!
Fear not, we have a solution coming in the next day or so, which will change KitGuru’s capability massively
In the meantime, please bare with us
I dont normally post comments on sites, but I wanted to lay down a thanks for this work. its really benefited me in the decision for a card.
I really rated HQV 1 and bought it, and will buy HQV2. This is a killer article however and ive noticed it linked a lot tonight. Will really help you get attention from the media audience.
Finally got to read this after 3 hours of trying ! you trying to create false demand by taking the site down ?
ITs an overrated review, not much work at all in it.
No, im kidding, awesome, just messing around with you faith 🙂
Hey man, if you ever need work, let me know, ive a magazine will employ you in an instant 🙂
Had to post a thanks for this Kitguru, a considerable read by any definition of the words.
Linked to this from our site,and thought id pop on and say congrats on the work, very definitive.
polished, indepth and educational. Good read.
Hello there, very informative and useful. I like the idea of a real world ‘benchmark’ rather than a prescripted figured based thing.
yeah, nice work, HQV rocks and this is a showcase of how damn good it is. we need more tests like these on the market. Actually relating directly to how we enjoy movies and theater.
Hello from Spain! read this earlier then the site went down and my friends couldn’t see it.
Many thanks from us, this is very useful. HD5850 ordered 🙂
Hello from Spain! read this earlier then the site went down and my friends couldn’t see it.
Many thanks from us, this is very useful. HD5850 ordered 🙂
We like this for news and for breath of informative nature. useful in circumstances to get hardware needed.
HD5850 is the king of all cards, for the money its impossible to beat. nothing has changed. HQV V 2.0 is impressive.
I like the style of testing they use, as it covers all forms of artificating and issues we experience with less than perfect configurations. Once they make a 52 inch version of the LaCie 730 screen so I can watch my movies I will be happy. and quite possibly broke.
Thank you, I almost bought a G210 last month, I just ordered a 5450.
Good test procedures, as the reference monitor has no filtering or interlacing. Clean image out means clearer to see the importance of the driver coding and quality throughput of hardware. 10/10
I love this writing and testing is very useful. I was surprised to see the GTX480 being outclassed by lesser powerful ATI solutions, however ATI I tink have many new driver features in 10.6 maybe nvidia will copy them and get the standard higher.
This site is now my homepage. I never knew it existed, and its almost criminal I didn’t I just read 10 reviews. KEEP IT UP PLEASE ! (ex tomshardware fan).
This article has helped me work out the wheat from the chaff. Decided to order a 5750 for my media center. It can also play games if I need on the TV> anything lower is fine, but not good for gaming. Thanks kitguru for an education read, I feel so much more capable in picking my hardware this time around for what I need (HD and bluray first, gaming next)
very overjoyed to read this. excuse english, informative good. Figures interesting. result helped buy card. HD5850. thank you.
Fuck it, just ordered two 5850s for my system. I hate this site now 🙂
J’aimerais vous remercier les gens pour l’écriture ceci. J’ai voulu une bonne base de données pour mesurer l’exécution dans les secteurs clés, comme la cadence. Ceci a aidé me choisit la solution vidéo juste pour mes besoins très heureux.
Vad ett stort jobb och kvaliteten av skrift är översta skåra. Vi tackas som för tiden och ansträngning att hjälpa oss att köpa kort.
Vielen Dank für das Helfen von mir mit einem Kauf des HD5850 für meine Medien zentriert. und für ein Gaming auch(sorry bad english)
Well above and beyond the call Z man. well done.
Quite surprised when I saw text links to 43. then saw it was actually 43 pages.
I would hate this job, but I appreciate the work for everyone. Not often you get a man nuts enough to write 43 to help for a video card purchase. bookmarked for later.
nvidia doubters take note. if you want IQ and gaming performance, you dont buy green.
wow quite a few new faces here.
Ik maakte een geïnformeerde beslissing om een 5 seriekaart te krijgen bedankt naar dit artikel. Ik kijk hoofdzakelijk MKV bestanden en Bluray. Slechts wat ik wilde lezen. Dank u kitguru
This is way too much to read. but thank you, you do need therapy for writing all that however
I wonder why ATI did so bad in a few of the tests. they seem quite important ones too. anyone else notice it ?
@ MAX – yes 2:2 lock – wondered why they failed that so badly when nvidia did so well.
2:2 lock can be important in some situations, but I think ATI might have it fixed by the time driver 11 is out.
I dont understand the specific test though, what would it affect in real movie terms, fast moving multicolored objects moving across axis?
“When the globe is moving through the right side of the screen, it is displayed with a 3:2 cadence, while on the left, the cadence is 2:2. A scoring guide is provided on the screen, with a green zone that begins right at the cadence boundary, a yellow zone which starts a half-second later, and a red zone that begins one second into the cadence zone.”
It seems to be more a transitional state between areas and brightly coloured boundaries which could mean the cards have a slight delay in locking onto them for processing reasons. Maybe Terry Makedon would have info?
Zardon, dont know if you read these, but can you ask Terry about that test? and if they can get a score on it? transitition locks seem a rather important processing element.
Takes more than one second to transition from 3:2 to 2:2- Scores 0
Sounds like a processing glitch when moving from primary coloured areas to another ?
wow. what an article. would take me a week to read it all.
thank you for all the testing, most helpful!
Definitive. if the site goes down at some stage, this will be the article to remember kitguru by!
Not sure how to really say it with feeling, but ill try.
Maximum headshot! nailed IQ. nailed the testing. we want MORE!
I have been following Zardon since he was a moderator on Rage3d and was actually probably one of their best too. When he started DriverHeaven I loved the reviews. Now KitGuru. One of the most unashamedly talented technology writers on the planet and doesnt get half the credit he should. This is an epic piece of work. Mucho gracias.
He was a moderator on Rage3d? didnt know that. but yeah … what charles said. where ever he goes, ill find him !
I just ordered the ASUS bluray online, that is such a sexy little drive. had to have it.
Zardon , you may rule Middle Earth, you are wothy!!!
The people that make HQV must be impressed. Every search engine ranks Zardon’s article as the best on benchmarking video. Maybe they should hire him 🙂
STunning, but maybe more pictures of the tests?
Why do you guys use the antiquitated 8.15.10.1952 drivers for Intel while the competitors use the nearly/latest drivers? One might say that’s called a “bias”.
There has been at least 6 driver versions since 1952.
Actually there is nothing biased about it at all. Due to an administration error the wrong intel driver was listed. it was V15.17.4.2119
Zardon can you please tell us what where the settings used in Catalyst Control Center, I mean besides the ones that you already wrote about (like Brither Whites, EE ?)
Thanks
No shots for denoising\sharpening?! That’s REALLY bad! 😉
I always prefer to check such things myself, just because too often I see something like “great resolution enhancement algo in nvidia Purevideo” etc., but when I try to compare… well, it’s just “cheap and fast” version of unsharp mask, and it kill too much real details and adds too much galos\noise to make sharp edges.
This conclusion is based on my old (2007) tests and may be absolutely wrong now. But I have no need for deeply re-evaluate DXVA decoding… I choose software decoding with ffdshow, because it’s sharpening\upsampling\denoising capabilities are just outstanding. 🙂