HTPC - TV Tuner Reviews
by Jarred Walton on December 7, 2005 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Smartphones
- Mobile
DVICO Fusion5 Gold
The Fusion5 Gold is the top-end product from DVICO. Having never used any of their other cards, we can't really say how it compares to previous models. We started with the latest software version at the time of testing, FusionHDTV version 3.11. As Murphy would have expected, a new beta version 3.19.05 is now available, so we've retested the card. (Don't worry about the software being "beta" as opposed to an official release; version 3.11 and all the preceding versions are just as "beta" in our opinion.) Updated software has been made available on a pretty regular basis (every month or two), and we would venture to say that earlier versions of the software had quite a few bugs. (Forum posts around the web will quickly show this to be the case.) 3.11 definitely has some problems, but 3.19 seems to have finally addressed the majority of our concerns.
The smaller design does have some drawbacks, unfortunately. For one, the card only has a single antenna input, with an S-VIDEO port that can also be used with a Composite dongle. The card also depends on software to do a portion of the work, helped by a Connexant CX23882 chip as well as additional chips inside the LG "tuner box". The decoding of the digital channels is done in software, but FusionHDTV supports DxVA graphics cards, which can be used to offload a decent amount of the work with most recent ATI and NVIDIA chips.
Besides the card, there are a couple of other pieces of hardware. A remote is included, along with a USB receiver with which the remote communicates. While the remote is fully functional, we can't say that it's very elegant. This is the largest remote of any of the products, and it's also the ugliest remote. If that matters to you, look elsewhere, but we really can't say that it's a deal breaker. You'll also want to be careful not to press the wrong power button (the one in the lower left corner of the remote), as you can accidentally shut down/suspend the PC rather than just turning off the software interface.
There is a Fusion5 Lite card available, with the primary difference being support for additional encoding options with the Gold version and some additional software. You can see the comparison sheet at the bottom of the DVICO specifications page. The Lite model also omits the remote, which adds another $20-$40 if purchased separately. For the extra $30, it's probably worthwhile to simply go with the Gold card, unless you're sure that you don't want the extras. The remote isn't technically necessary, especially if you have a wireless mouse with a decent reception range.
The Fusion5 Gold is the top-end product from DVICO. Having never used any of their other cards, we can't really say how it compares to previous models. We started with the latest software version at the time of testing, FusionHDTV version 3.11. As Murphy would have expected, a new beta version 3.19.05 is now available, so we've retested the card. (Don't worry about the software being "beta" as opposed to an official release; version 3.11 and all the preceding versions are just as "beta" in our opinion.) Updated software has been made available on a pretty regular basis (every month or two), and we would venture to say that earlier versions of the software had quite a few bugs. (Forum posts around the web will quickly show this to be the case.) 3.11 definitely has some problems, but 3.19 seems to have finally addressed the majority of our concerns.
Click to enlarge.
The smaller design does have some drawbacks, unfortunately. For one, the card only has a single antenna input, with an S-VIDEO port that can also be used with a Composite dongle. The card also depends on software to do a portion of the work, helped by a Connexant CX23882 chip as well as additional chips inside the LG "tuner box". The decoding of the digital channels is done in software, but FusionHDTV supports DxVA graphics cards, which can be used to offload a decent amount of the work with most recent ATI and NVIDIA chips.
 |
 |
| Click to enlarge. | |
Besides the card, there are a couple of other pieces of hardware. A remote is included, along with a USB receiver with which the remote communicates. While the remote is fully functional, we can't say that it's very elegant. This is the largest remote of any of the products, and it's also the ugliest remote. If that matters to you, look elsewhere, but we really can't say that it's a deal breaker. You'll also want to be careful not to press the wrong power button (the one in the lower left corner of the remote), as you can accidentally shut down/suspend the PC rather than just turning off the software interface.
There is a Fusion5 Lite card available, with the primary difference being support for additional encoding options with the Gold version and some additional software. You can see the comparison sheet at the bottom of the DVICO specifications page. The Lite model also omits the remote, which adds another $20-$40 if purchased separately. For the extra $30, it's probably worthwhile to simply go with the Gold card, unless you're sure that you don't want the extras. The remote isn't technically necessary, especially if you have a wireless mouse with a decent reception range.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
77 Comments
View All Comments
Brian23 - Thursday, December 8, 2005 - link
I'm supprised more people aren't talking about this. I haven't downloaded them, but I assume they are recordings of OTA broadcasts. If that's the case, then I'm suprised Anandtech posted them. In the news section they're always posting stuff about how people are getting sued for sharing movies. Most of the movies out there on torrents have been broadcast OTA at some point which would make them public domain. Everyone is so quick to judge someone when they post a torrent of something, but mysteriously no-one has said anything about this yet.JarredWalton - Thursday, December 8, 2005 - link
They're basically 30 second clips demonstrating analog/HDTV videos. If anyone wants to come after me for posting sample content... wow, they have way too much time on their hands. I guess I didn't bother to get "express, written consent" though....Brian23 - Thursday, December 8, 2005 - link
I don't fault you for posting this, and I don't think you need express written consent. I think the whole lawsuit thing over p2p file sharing is a bunch of crap. My point I was trying to make in my previous post was that I was suprised that no-one was was posting anything about copywrite violations. Normally the people here at Anandtech scream and yell if there's something being distributed that's copywritten, no matter what it is. I think people should be able to share stuff that they recorded from OTA.valnar - Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - link
Perhaps I missed something in the review, but what's the point of posting screen shot comparisons of a transport stream? They would all be identical across all the cards, unless there were bit errors in the stream. Of course they all look good! They should also look the same too. The only way to show a difference would be through a video card, such as a particular ATI or nVidia in either overlay or VMR9 mode. Or with the hardware output of the MyHD series of cards, which is vastly superior to the software based cards. If you have an HDTV and have used the DVI or Component out of the MDP-1xx, they are fantastic. Of course, a screenshot wouldn't show that. Maybe a digital photo or something(?).It should also be noted that watching HDTV on overlay is a big no-no. The overlay was never meant to register more than 540 lines of resolution. While deciding between overlay or VMR9 for DVD (740x480/NTSC) watching is a matter of religious debate, overlay can never resolve HD properly. I would submit that the reviewer possibly didn't see any of those cards in their full glory.
-Robert
xtknight - Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - link
Where is this overlay limitation stated and what happens when you go above said lines? I'm sorry but I find that hard to believe. SIL overlay vs. SIL VMR9 looks the exact same to me as I remember it. What does 540 lines mean? What resolution is the max (x by y)?JarredWalton - Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - link
I'm a little confused by this overlay limitation as well. I mean, obviously the Fusion5 only works through overlay, but the video stream is transferred digitally from the TV Tuner to the graphics card. There should be no limitation other than bandwidth, I thought? Maybe I'm using the term "overlay" incorrectly here?As for the HD images, I mentioned that they are all identical for TP captures. They were included to show people exactly how much data HDTV contains (and how much better looking HDTV is) relative to analog/SDTV. The upsampled SDTV image is also there to show how poor that looks in comparison to a real HDTV stream - and I get far too much upsampled content on most HD channels.
valnar - Thursday, December 8, 2005 - link
These limits are discussed in all the usual forums, like avsforum.com.JarredWalton - Thursday, December 8, 2005 - link
Link please? I just don't see how the hardware overlay interface on your video card could possibly be limited to only 720 x 480. Windows Media Player uses the overlay mode for playing video. Last I checked, it's fully capable of playing 1080I resolution. NTSC signals have nothing to do with overlay mode inside computers.valnar - Thursday, December 8, 2005 - link
It not limited per se, but you won't see much of an improvement at a rez above 540 lines horizontal. Everything (like WMP) can use the Overlay, but if you were to truly show a video in 1080P mode, for example, it wouldn't be as sharp - because of most video card overlay limitations. It's hard to explain, as the resolution of overlay is more an "analog" style of limitation, to use that metaphor inaccurately. It simply doesn't resolve the detail of HDTV, period. Get a 100" screen and a projector and it becomes obvious. Forgive me for not being able to articulate it, hence my recommendation to visit Home Theater/HTPC specific forums.xtknight - Thursday, December 8, 2005 - link
I can't find anything about this limitation with google or avsforum search. Are you mixing up overlay with interlacing? It would be nice if you could provide us with a link because we effectively have no clue what you're talking about here...