no kidding ?!
It's a very LOOOOOWWW end card (aka, it can "barely" play HD, and forget anything else) as in, an 8600GT beats it easily ?, and so does an 8400, and probably a 6800 -LoL ?
btw: I finally got rid of my 520gt, and I just picked up a couple of "used" 9800GT's (single slots) for $25 /each; great shape, and OMFG, when the kids don't need to watch movies, I'm still able to play "ANY" of my games in beautifull HD, not to mention some 3D-flight Sims,... + it can do Directx10, and that's good enough, for almost "anything". !
2nd btw: a good used 8800GT (single-slot 512MB) would also have done the trick just as nicely.
And now, my other "used"-spare (and cheap) 9800GT can finally go into my other "used" FreeBSD Desktop.
Low profile you mention ? -so what !,
\if you can't afford 6 square-inches more?, then just move outta that cramped Mobile home man.
I think the "used" PC-market parts is coming back to life again.
and oh ya, I hear you Mr. electrical GREEN-nut, but it's ok, I don't mind spending and extra 0.29 cents per month to run these beauties.
So, this thread is now officially "Get Over It" !!!
"New" doesn't necessarily always mean better ppl, but holy-heck we all knew that down-deep, didn't we ?
Last edited by scjet; 11-30-2011 at 08:34 AM.
I got mines for around 27 dollars, with gst and hst... was on a sale on newgee canada..
the card is amazing XD, I dont understand why people are bitching about it so much :/
First of all there is no hardware video decoding (this only exist in "videoplay" asic cards), gpus have only general and 3d instructions and 3d dedicated units. The video acceleration part is implemented in the driver using shader instructions. So don't believe generation 4-5-6-7, and most benchmarks are fake anyway. In nvidia cards there are 2 generations: one floating point only (g80-gf300), and one float+integer (gf400fermi+). Also fermi has 64bit dual issue shader, so gt430(96cores) = gtx260(192cores) = 800-900Gflops(fmac32bit) = 800core-radeon(4madd/ops are 3fmac/ops). Radeon is bad for linux, bad d3d-ogl emulation(wine) performance(1/3nvidia), bad compatibility(css don't work in dx9+ mode), bad video acceleration and tearing, bad gpgpu(openCL apps ware?) mediacoder/cuda/wine rules, and bad price. Best card = used gtx460(90dollars), old model(16x32 not 8x48) in order to free at least 480cores with gtx480 bios = 4Tflops(fmac32bit).
It's also a small size, the price is right, and runs relatively cool which hopefully means long term life instead of the sudden death of power cards. I've also seen faster vdpau performance than in some beefy cards. They are bitching about it because they tried to run big games on high detail with it. I run mythtv with a pentium 4 pc with this card. I hate to sound like a commercial but it's true. If this card dies I give it average rating, much higher if it doesn't.
Originally Posted by Babuloseo
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
Originally Posted by Kano