Question for anyone with an Intel X4500HD or X4500 graphics card

I know a lot of the Lenovos come with this graphics card. Does it stream HD video ok? That is an important issue with my next system and I want to find out how it works streaming HD/high quality video from abc.com, fox.com, and cbs.com in full screen mode.

Can a few people play a television show from these sites and tell me how it goes?


http://www.fox.com/fod/play.php?sh=hellskitchen

http://fep.abc.go.com/fep/player?src=abccomjs&lid=ABCCOMGlobalMenu&lpos=FEP

Clicking on the links doesn't seem to work. They need to be copy and pasted.

For the second link click on the "Full Episode Player" link and then click on "Better off Ted" which streams in HD. (You might have to reload it a second time for it to work.)

I want to buy a particular system. My only other choice for a card is a NVIDIA GeForce 9300GS which I understand is low end. Not sure how much better the performance will be.

The system will not be used for gaming in any way.

Not sure if the processor matters, but can you list it with the results?

 

I don't think the Intel video cards help with video decoding. The Nvidia 9300 would though. Probably would run better graphics than the Intel as well.

 

One review says:

"However, representatives were keen to point out that it scores around 1,100 in 3DMark06 and also hardware-decodes H.264 and VC-1 content, much like the competition."

 

I know the Intel card does help decode Blu-rays. I wish I could shoehorn one into my R60.

 

Yup 1080p. That is discussed all over the internet. But there is not much mentioned about streaming.

 

The issue you are going to find is that the vast majority of streaming websites use Adobe Flash as the delivery mechanism. Flash does NOT support decoding acceleration on ANY GPU (Intel, ATI, or NVidia). It is 100% CPU bound (assuming you have adequate bandwidth).

However, for videos that are properly supported (e.g. 720p MKVs with h.264 video of profile <=4.1 or Blu-Rays) the x4500MHD is perfectly able to accelerate them and play them back smoothly.

Therefore, if you are only worried about streaming flash video, I would suggest you get the fastest CPU you can afford and don't worry about the GPU (the Intel x4500, x3100, or even GMA950 in netbooks is just as good as a Radeon 4650 or any "gaming card" for streaming video).

 

Great info.

I am buying a particular system with limited choices.

The problem is I would have to invest another $400 (right now I am at $799) to bump up to the Intel Core 2 Duo E7400 2.8GHz. With the $400 I would get alot of other things (1 MB additional RAM (from 3 to 4 MB). bigger hard drive (not faster) , and NVIDIA 9300 which I understand is low end and also integrated, and blu-ray which I have zero use for on a computer).

The system I have now has the e5200. Here is a comparison of the two:

•Intel Pentium Processor E5200 2.5 GHz
•2 MB L2 Cache, 800 MHz FSB Speed

with 3MB of RAM.

vs.

•Intel Core 2 Duo E7400 2.8 GHz Processor
•3 MB L2 Cache, 1066 MHz Bus speed

with 4MB of RAM.

If this is relevant, here are the CPU becnmarks from this site.

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php

E5200: 1,611

E7400: 1,849

I think this information might be useful. Both chips are tested with encoding and other tasks (located on other pages). Although the versions of the software are different. Is encoding relevant to streaming video? If not, what test from those reviews would be?

E5200

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2duo-e7300-pdc-e5200_7.html#sect0

E7400
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/phenom-athlon-ii-x2_10.html#sect0

Another consideration is how much longer will this computer last if I get the better chip? I like to get as much use as possible.

 

In reality the difference between the E5200 and E7400 is not that large. Despite being labeled a "Pentium Dual Core" the e5200 really is a C2D with slightly less L2 cache. The main difference would be 300MHz of CPU frequency (a 12% bump) and a 33% bump in the FSB.

The E7400 may have a slight edge long term as it's on the newer platform (I assume DDR3 as well). The real question with long term is what do you expect to be doing in the future and what item is most likely to bound your future applications (e.g. CPU, RAM, HDD, battery life, weight, build quality, et. al.).

Encoding performance is roughly analogous to streaming decoding. However, decoding is usually faster. The main issue as I said before is Adobe Flash. Despite its popularity it really is an incredibly inefficient platform for delivering media (especially HD video) and adds A LOT of overhead to video decoding that can be pretty tough on a CPU even without additional overhead.

 

•4096 MB DDR2 (PC2-6400) RAM Max: 4GB if that is what you are referring to.

The computer is actually for my mother who does nothing but play solitaire and surf the internet, watch soap operas on the net, and word processing.

What does the future hold for HD video in terms of delivery and how might that influence my decision on which processor I get?

I just realized if I want the E7400, I will have to pay 50% more ($799 to $1,199). WOW.

 

In that case you actually don't gain that much by going to the E7400 (I don't think it's worth even close to a $400 upgrade if that's the only difference).

HTML5 may free us from Flash video and allow acceleration of streaming video to be supported but it's still a ways off ( read this). If this actually pans out the CPU would be far less important for HD video streaming.

The x4500MHD is almost certainly fine for your mother. A GeForce 9300 is a low end DEDICATED card and will provide superior performance in games but little to no difference in anything else. In addition, the x4500MHD is more energy efficient and translates to reduced heat and increased battery life.

 

How does go Counter Strike: Source on x4500MHD ?

Well Im going to have X200Tablet with 1,86Ghz, 4GB DRR3 RAM and SSD. Will it be playable ? This is the only FPS I play. I love also Age of Empires 1,2,3 or some Warcraft 3 Thats all what I play because I dont have much free time

 

I'm not speaking from experience, but CS:S should be playable... it's almost playable all low on netbooks... so a beefier processor and an X4500 should be able to at least handle it on low settings.