Picked up a 350 this afternoon (got it for the same price as a 250 so why not right?) and installation was easier than any tuner I've had in the past (I've gone through two 150s and a 500). Picture quality is waaaayyyy better than the Roslyn 150 I had and I'm quite pleased. I'm still hanging on to that card though, we'll see what materializes ;)
Thanks again guys. Oh, for kicks and giggles here's what I'm running (This is all in a Shuttle SB75S, 2GB RAM, 3.4GHz Intel P4 EE and an NVIDIA GF6800GT 256MB): ivtv: ==================== START INIT IVTV ==================== ivtv: version 0.6.2 (development snapshot compiled on Mon Jun 12 18:49:47 2006) loading ivtv: Linux version: 2.6.16-1.2133_FC5smp SMP 686 REGPARM 4KSTACKS gcc-4.1 ivtv: In case of problems please include the debug info between ivtv: the START INIT IVTV and END INIT IVTV lines, along with ivtv: any module options, when mailing the ivtv-users mailinglist. ivtv0: Autodetected Hauppauge WinTV PVR-350 card (cx23415 based) ivtv0: Unreasonably low latency timer, setting to 64 (was 32) tveeprom 1-0050: Hauppauge model 48132, rev K268, serial# 8603112 tveeprom 1-0050: tuner model is LG TAPE H001F MK3 (idx 68, type 47) tveeprom 1-0050: TV standards NTSC(M) (eeprom 0x08) tveeprom 1-0050: audio processor is MSP4448 (idx 27) tveeprom 1-0050: decoder processor is SAA7115 (idx 19) tveeprom 1-0050: has radio, has IR remote tuner 1-0061: chip found @ 0xc2 (ivtv i2c driver #0) tda9887 1-0043: chip found @ 0x86 (ivtv i2c driver #0) saa7115 1-0021: saa7115 found @ 0x42 (ivtv i2c driver #0) saa7127 1-0044: saa7129 found @ 0x88 (ivtv i2c driver #0) msp3400 1-0040: MSP4448G-A2 found @ 0x80 (ivtv i2c driver #0) msp3400 1-0040: MSP4448G-A2 supports radio, mode is autodetect and autoselect ivtv0: loaded v4l-cx2341x-enc.fw firmware (262144 bytes) ivtv0: loaded v4l-cx2341x-dec.fw firmware (262144 bytes) ivtv0: Encoder revision: 0x02050032 ivtv0: Decoder revision: 0x02020023 ivtv0: Allocate DMA encoder MPEG stream: 128 x 32768 buffers (4096KB total) ivtv0: Allocate DMA encoder YUV stream: 194 x 10800 buffers (2048KB total) ivtv0: Allocate DMA encoder VBI stream: 120 x 17472 buffers (2048KB total) ivtv0: Allocate DMA encoder PCM audio stream: 455 x 4608 buffers (2048KB total) ivtv0: Create encoder radio stream ivtv0: Allocate DMA decoder MPEG stream: 16 x 65536 buffers (1024KB total) ivtv0: Allocate DMA decoder VBI stream: 512 x 2048 buffers (1024KB total) ivtv0: Create decoder VOUT stream ivtv0: Allocate DMA decoder YUV stream: 24 x 43200 buffers (1024KB total) ivtv0: loaded v4l-cx2341x-init.mpg firmware (155648 bytes) tuner 1-0061: type set to 47 (LG NTSC (TAPE series)) ivtv0: Initialized Hauppauge WinTV PVR-350, card #0 ivtv: ==================== END INIT IVTV ==================== Hans Verkuil wrote: > On Tuesday 13 June 2006 17:11, Chris MacDonald wrote: > >> Hi... >> >> I've currently got a PVR 150 (Roslyn, cx88-based so it runs the v4l >> driver) but I find the picture quality is absolutely horrendous. To >> be honest I haven't tried playing much with any kind of image >> settings, though mostly because I don't know where to start. If >> memory serves >> > > This may be much improved soon: I'm creating a cx2341x module for v4l2 > that is used by ivtv, cx88 and pvrusb2. From the cx88 developer I heard > that using that shared module improves the quality substantially. > > >> A while ago I got a PVR 500 but it ended up being DOA. I just >> returned it for credit and haven't played around much with a new >> tuner since. I'm ready to buy again and I'm mainly curious as to the >> difference in picture quality between the 500 and the 250. I'm aware >> of the differences in hardware, and I'd assume that the 250 is >> slightly better-supported due mostly to the fact that it's been >> around longer. Mainly though, I'm just trying to decide if the >> picture quality of the 250 and driver maturity for this card >> outweighs the swanky dual-tuner action on the 500. I don't *require* >> two tuners, but it would definitely be nice if there's no difference >> in quality between the 500 and the 250. Additionally, the remote with >> the 250 isn't required as I already have an MCE remote (yes, I did >> run MCE 2005 before this *hangs head in shame* ;D). >> >> Apologies if this is long-winded or turns into a battle of opinion, >> just trying to decide what would serve my needs best. >> > > Main problems with PVR500 is that the signal is split over two tuners, > so that will reduce the signal strength, and that IMHO the tuner > quality seems to be less than the PVR150/250/350. Also, the PVR500 > cards with a Samsung tuner need special programming that has only > recently been discovered. > > For me my PVR350 gives superior picture quality. On my PVR500 I only get > decent quality for channels with a strong signal. > > Hans > > _______________________________________________ > ivtv-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://ivtvdriver.org/mailman/listinfo/ivtv-users > _______________________________________________ ivtv-users mailing list [email protected] http://ivtvdriver.org/mailman/listinfo/ivtv-users
