Quick Sync is not available for P67 motherboards

[Nemesis 1]

you have to wait for z67 boards to come out later this year, sorry.

Yep as long as your waiting the 2700K should arrive around the same time.

 

[gaban]

that sucks... i planned on buying p67, i thought it will have onboard graphic, will be useful if anything happens to gpu card. and quicksync is disabled for p67 and also h67 when using dedicated gpu. Why would intel do this? I dont think they oversaw it, qs would be the reasons for many to go for sandy bridge.

 

[sticks435]

From the way it sounds, not even Z67 is the answer. From what I've read, it will support overclocking and the GPU, but only if you use Intel's GPU, not if you use a discrete GPU, so we're right in the same place we are now with P67. The problem is that switchable graphics aren't available on the desktop and that is what is required to access the functions of both GPU's. It doesn't sound like that's gonna get figured out in 6 months.

 

[Hogan773]

Read the other thread....still potential light in the tunnel that this could be bad information re: H67 and overclocking. If I can OC with the CPU multiplier on an H67 I'll probably settle for that one.

 

[AkumaX]

Omg, I was gonna get a 2600k + P67 tomorrow, now I'm not sure =/

 

[IntelUser2000]

From the way it sounds, not even Z67 is the answer. From what I've read, it will support overclocking and the GPU, but only if you use Intel's GPU, not if you use a discrete GPU, so we're right in the same place we are now with P67. The problem is that switchable graphics aren't available on the desktop and that is what is required to access the functions of both GPU's. It doesn't sound like that's gonna get figured out in 6 months.

On Sandy Bridge, you can have the discrete graphics run with the integrated chip, even on desktop.

 

[Nemesis 1]

As I said AMD/NV have to do there part.

If you read our Sandy Bridge Review you’ll know that we were very excited about Intel’s Quick Sync hardware transcode engine. It easily offers at least twice the performance of existing GPU based transcoding solutions without sacrificing image quality. There’s just one little problem: you can’t use Quick Sync you're using a discrete GPU, you need to use Intel's processor graphics.



Lucid presented a potential solution to the problem at this year’s CES. Through software alone, Lucid is able to copy the frame buffer from a discrete PCIe GPU to the frame buffer of SNB’s HD Graphics in main memory. The result is that you can hook a single monitor up to your motherboard’s video output and use a discrete GPU when you want it. Lucid’s technology would enable switchable graphics on the desktop, without any hardware requirements (it still obviously won’t work on P67, shame on Intel).

To demonstrate the technology Intel ran an H67 motherboard with a GeForce GTX 480. Lucid’s software was installed which allowed for the GTX 480 to run and its frame buffer output to be copied to main memory and sent out via Intel’s Flexible Display Interface through the DVI port on the back of the motherboard.

At the same time, Intel demonstrated that it could run a Quick Sync enabled transcode in Cyberlink’s Media Espresso 6 - all thanks to Lucid’s software.

Lucid expects that there will only be a 1 - 3% impact in performance (although that’s something we’d have to see for ourselves), but there’s no firm date on when the driver will be available. I’m expecting a beta version of Lucid’s software in the coming weeks however.

Motherboard manufacturers could bundle Lucid’s solution with their boards to avoid upsetting end users thanks to Intel’s Quick Sync oversight. There’s still no getting around the fact that you can’t overclock your CPU on H67 motherboards. You’ll still have to wait for Z68 to fix that problem.

 

[mclaren777]

Time for the million dollar question: when in Q2 will Z68 be available?

People are chomping at the bit for Sandy Bridge and it's unfortunate that we don't have solid information to guide our purchasing decisions. And how can we even be sure that Quick Sync will be fully supported by Z68? Furthermore, how much of a price premium will Z68 command over P67?

I hate it that we're left grasping at straws for this kind of information.

 

[lothar]

If it's not switchable, turn off you computer, go to BIOS(or EFI) and enable/disable whatever discrete/integrated GPU you need, and restart. What's the problem? If you're doing a Youtube upload, it's probably not worth to do that, but if you're doing a DVD/BR encode, it's worth it to do that.

I don't understand this issue people seem up in arms about...
So with the higher end P67 chipsets, there's no option to go into BIOS(or EFI whatever) and enable Sandy Bridge integrated graphics, while disabling your discrete card so you can run Quick Sync? What the heck??? Fail on Intel's part if so.

So people are saying it's not possible to do this on P67 motherboards AT all?
Thank God I got an i7 860 in Dec '09 and don't have to upgrade for a while.
At the same time, I don't really care for Quick Sync so far because none of the software I use support it yet.
Someone really needs to do a "detailed" image quality analysis on Quick Sync vs CPU comparing different types of movies and scenes, and not the 1 or 2 image quality comparisons shown in reviews so far.

 

[Hogan773]

P67 boards apparently CANNOT use the integrated graphics.

You apparently need to get an H67 to use IG.

Apparently the H67 doesnt allow one to overclock the CPU.

Therein lies the dilemma.

I say "apparently" a lot because it appears nobody is really sure. And that is quite surprising that info like this wouldn't be certain, and even Intel is not stepping up to answer the question definitively.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Read this and move on.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4113/lucid-enables-quick-sync-with-discrete-graphics-on-sandy-bridge

 

[Dark Shroud]

Read this and move on.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4113/lucid-enables-quick-sync-with-discrete-graphics-on-sandy-bridge

(it still obviously won’t work on P67, shame on Intel).

P67 users still get the shaft.

 

[Hogan773]

Given the choices of P67 or H67, I'd still choose P67

1) QuickSync may or may not be adopted by the specific video software I'm using in the future

2) I can still do whatever QS can do through the CPU so I'm not "LOSING" anything.....just speed potentially

3) If I OC my K chip, that speed of transcoding thru the CPU will be better anyway and maybe closer to the QS

4) Transcoding is only one of several tasks where I use the CPU

 

[sticks435]

Given the choices of P67 or H67, I'd still choose P67

3) If I OC my K chip, that speed of transcoding thru the CPU will be better anyway and maybe closer to the QS

You won't come close to the speed increase QS gives, even with an overclocked K chip.

 

[sticks435]

On Sandy Bridge, you can have the discrete graphics run with the integrated chip, even on desktop.

Yes, but not at the same time without workarounds, and not on a P67.

 

[Nemesis 1]

P67 users still get the shaft.

So your just complaining to complain. You can use discrete with IGP if you choose . If it doesn't run on the P chipset big deal. Buy the H if you want That usage with a 2600K you can still O/C to 4.2ghz. Better yet just buy AMD . As your complaining about a none issue for 99% users. Or see if you can get a Z chipset now . There in the field being tested have been for sometime.

 

[dougri]

You won't come close to the speed increase QS gives, even with an overclocked K chip.

The developers of x264 may disagree with you... we need an objective comparison of QS vs overclocked x264 at equivalent output quality. I do not consider 640x480 transcoding high quality, and the times associated with this are not troubling (heck, even x264 can reach 400fps at sufficient quality settings for a 4" screen). Encoding BR at high quality for projection on to a 120" screen IS painfully slow (as in 980x overclocked is about real time... 1hr BD movie takes about 1 hr to encode). I have seen no demonstrations of this for QS, so I have no idea how fast it is.

 

[stahlhart]

You won't come close to the speed increase QS gives, even with an overclocked K chip.

The hell I won't. I'm upgrading from Socket A.

I'll just get a Z68 board later, if it matters. Cost of a motherboard? It'll be like a GPU upgrade.

 

[mclaren777]

The developers of x264 may disagree with you... we need an objective comparison of QS vs overclocked x264 at equivalent output quality. I do not consider 640x480 transcoding high quality, and the times associated with this are not troubling (heck, even x264 can reach 400fps at sufficient quality settings for a 4" screen). Encoding BR at high quality for projection on to a 120" screen IS painfully slow (as in 980x overclocked is about real time... 1hr BD movie takes about 1 hr to encode). I have seen no demonstrations of this for QS, so I have no idea how fast it is.

I'm really hoping that Anand does a comprehensive story on Quick Sync in the near future because the results might greatly influence whether I build a new computer now or wait until Z68 releases in Q2.

 

[Zoomer]

Intel seems bent on being an ass. I might just wait it out for bulldozer. If it's competitive, AMD will get a sale from me.

 

[Hogan773]

You won't come close to the speed increase QS gives, even with an overclocked K chip.

Ok then

The other points I made are still in play. I'm moving up from Win XP, so for all I know I might be using Windows DVD Authoring for free. Who knows.

I guess my point is, at this time QS is somewhat of an unknown quantity for me, so to make QS the PRIMARY decision factor doesn't make sense. ALL that QS offers is speed. I don't believe QS can do something that CANNOT be done through the CPU......so its just a matter of shaving a few seconds, minutes, whatever off of a transcoding job. But to get that, I now need to agree never to OC my chip, plus live with the compromises of an H67 mobo (1333-only RAM, mostly microATX implementations, PCIx16 issues, etc)

Or I can continue waiting for the promised-land of Z68. And then BD, or S2011, or Ivy Bridge.

Or buy P67, and if for some reason Z68 is so awesome, then Ebay my P67 mobo and swap in a Z68 and pay whatever difference that makes.

I've wasted much more time analyzing this than I will ever save in a lifetime of using QuickSync!

 

[Nemesis 1]

Zoomer How is intel being an ass. How about NV? Cuda/ PX and what ever else they don't offer as an open standard. Than the upcoming Z chipset . Whats your problem . Money burning Hole in pocket. You were likely buying AMD anyway. I know a guy that already has a Z chipset M/B . He had it befor Xmas.

 

[Hogan773]

or maybe I should not get so hung up on overclocking.......

maybe I should get an H67 mobo, save $50 by not buying a discrete GPU (I'm not a gamer), and then I can still run up to 4.3 or something just using the "LIMITED TURBO OVERCLOCK" or whatever.

I assume the H67 still allows that? I mean, 4.3, 4.6, whatever. Maybe its safer for me not to push the voltage super-high to get a 4.9 OC anyway.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Time for the million dollar question: when in Q2 will Z68 be available?

People are chomping at the bit for Sandy Bridge and it's unfortunate that we don't have solid information to guide our purchasing decisions. And how can we even be sure that Quick Sync will be fully supported by Z68? Furthermore, how much of a price premium will Z68 command over P67?

I hate it that we're left grasping at straws for this kind of information.

You should read AT article on Z series chipset . It brings more than just QS.

 

[Nemesis 1]

or maybe I should not get so hung up on overclocking.......

maybe I should get an H67 mobo, save $50 by not buying a discrete GPU (I'm not a gamer), and then I can still run up to 4.3 or something just using the "LIMITED TURBO OVERCLOCK" or whatever.

I assume the H67 still allows that? I mean, 4.3, 4.6, whatever. Maybe its safer for me not to push the voltage super-high to get a 4.9 OC anyway.

You can get 4.2 ghz with the 2600 . If your not a gamer H is way to go . As it is I have to buy 2 z series chipset M/B. 1 for self and one to replace the one thats in another system . I also have to replace the 6970 with a 6990. As per agreement.