Hi<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2009/3/12 David Zanetti <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dave2@wetstring.net">dave2@wetstring.net</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Be aware there's two variants of the 8400 GS. One is based on the G86<br>
core, and the other is based on the G98 core. The G98 core is actually<br>
better supported and more capable at HD acceleration than any other core<br>
currently available, including your 9400GT.<br>
</blockquote><div><br>That's certainly not correct. You're confusing two things here.<br><br>the G98 based 8400 only has 8 shaders units vs 16 for the 9400GT<br><br>I have both a 9400GT *and* a G98 8400gs.<br><br>
the 8400gs won't do any Temporal/Spatial (advanced in Myth) on 1080i content, while the 9400GT will happily do both<br><br>The only advantage of the G98 is that it can do full VC-1 decoding in hardware. it doesn't mean it's a more powerful card in the great scheme of things<br>
<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
If you read the README with the Nvidia drivers, you'll see there's full<br>
acceleration on a G98 core where the other cores only provide partial.<br>
<font color="#888888"></font></blockquote><div><br>Irrelevant when it comes to deinterlacing. <br></div></div><br>Jean-Yves<br>