# Powercolor Radeon HD 2400 Pro



## W1zzard (Jun 18, 2007)

Powercolor's Radeon HD 2400 Pro uses AMD's new RV610 GPU with 256 MB of DDR2 memory. With its special video acceleration features and low-profile PCB design the card seems to be a good choice for small form factor media PC systems.

*Show full review*


----------



## DaMulta (Jun 28, 2007)

Now this only has video out HDMI, audio on this one at all right? The only reason I could see myself buying this card is for a media machine, or to get a cheap DV-i connector with the ability to run Aero in Vista. 

Being able to run 1080p with a $50.00USD video card would be a great buy to some people on the market.


Edit: I noticed at the end you said it does have audio. Is it HDMI 1.3 do you know by chance?


----------



## Grings (Jun 28, 2007)

someone needs to (and no doubt will) release a fanless version


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jun 28, 2007)

Grings said:


> someone needs to (and no doubt will) release a fanless version



Fanless.

Crossfire.

Times 4.


Win.


----------



## hat (Jun 28, 2007)

Well, for $60...


----------



## W1zzard (Jun 28, 2007)

fixed the specs table on the first page

as far as i know it is NOT hdmi 1.3, which doesnt really matter because there's no 1.3 equipment out there anyway


----------



## newtekie1 (Jun 28, 2007)

The only saving grace is the $60, but for the performance you might as well get a $30 cheapo video card if you want something for you media center PC.


----------



## dmce (Jun 28, 2007)

Definitely need a fanless version of this. Complete offloading of HD content upto and inc 1080p for a small price. The fanless version of this will be going in my MediaPC unless a better integrated solution appears soon.


----------



## Ripper3 (Jun 28, 2007)

newtekie1 said:


> The only saving grace is the $60, but for the performance you might as well get a $30 cheapo video card if you want something for you media center PC.



Depends, if you've got a weak CPU, this is amazing in an HTPC.
Totally offloads (or mostly) the CPU from media de/encoding. Some older cards will not offload the CPU enough to let it multi-task properly, unless you're running a fast-ish dual core.
Means you can grab something like a cheap Sempron, and still have enough speed, but with low noise and power consumption, to run 1080p media without skipping.
With prices for CPUs, RAM and motherboards as they are now, building an HTPC is cheaper than ever, so I think it's easily justifiable to spend a bit more to get a card like this.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jun 29, 2007)

Ripper3 said:


> Depends, if you've got a weak CPU, this is amazing in an HTPC.
> Totally offloads (or mostly) the CPU from media de/encoding. Some older cards will not offload the CPU enough to let it multi-task properly, unless you're running a fast-ish dual core.
> Means you can grab something like a cheap Sempron, and still have enough speed, but with low noise and power consumption, to run 1080p media without skipping.
> With prices for CPUs, RAM and motherboards as they are now, building an HTPC is cheaper than ever, so I think it's easily justifiable to spend a bit more to get a card like this.



I disagree.  Lets just say you have about $100 to spend on a CPU and Video Card combination, everything else being the same in the PC no matter what combination you decide on.

Now, for that money you can get the HD2400Pro for $60 and a Sempron 3200+ for $36.  Total comes to $96.  With this combination all the media decoding is done via the video card when you are watching HD video.  However, as far as I know it doesn't do anything when you are encoding video(correct me if I am wrong).

Now, for that money you can also decide to go with a weaker video card like a 7100GS for $33(cheapest PCI-E card on newegg that supports HDTV out) and a X2 3600+ for $63.  Total comes to $96.  The CPU has to handle video decoding, and it is more than powerful enough to do it.  However you now have a CPU that is good enough to do some encoding along with the decoding and powerful enough to do other things as well if needed.


----------



## Ketxxx (Jun 29, 2007)

Its gotta be said.. this 2400Pro is just craptacular. For $60 you should be getting something better than this, I mean come on, it cant even handle Farcry @ 1024*768 with no AA or AF, and look how old Farcry is.


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jun 29, 2007)

newtekie1 said:


> I disagree.  Lets just say you have about $100 to spend on a CPU and Video Card combination, everything else being the same in the PC no matter what combination you decide on.
> 
> Now, for that money you can get the HD2400Pro for $60 and a Sempron 3200+ for $36.  Total comes to $96.  With this combination all the media decoding is done via the video card when you are watching HD video.  However, as far as I know it doesn't do anything when you are encoding video(correct me if I am wrong).
> 
> Now, for that money you can also decide to go with a weaker video card like a 7100GS for $33(cheapest PCI-E card on newegg that supports HDTV out) and a X2 3600+ for $63.  Total comes to $96.  The CPU has to handle video decoding, and it is more than powerful enough to do it.  However you now have a CPU that is good enough to do some encoding along with the decoding and powerful enough to do other things as well if needed.



Why are you encoding video on a low end machine?

Any logical person would delegate the encoding to a higher end multi CPU machine, then just transfer or stream the files.

Cuz I'll tell you what.

Both those CPU's are gonna suck at encoding. The x2 is just significantly faster than the sempron.


Everyone also needs to keep in mind theres still a large market of people that play "the sims" and "rollercoaster tycoon 4" and "hello kitty playland 999+1".

Maybe this isn't aimed at you


----------



## newtekie1 (Jun 29, 2007)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> Why are you encoding video on a low end machine?
> 
> Any logical person would delegate the encoding to a higher end multi CPU machine, then just transfer or stream the files.



Media Center PCs are usually rather low end due to people looking for quiet and cool running machines.  However they are often called on to encode video as they are usually used as PVRs to record live TV and such and a lot of people use them to encode that video into a format that can be easily transfered.


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jun 29, 2007)

newtekie1 said:


> Media Center PCs are usually rather low end due to people looking for quiet and cool running machines.  However they are often called on to encode video as they are usually used as PVRs to record live TV and such and a lot of people use them to encode that video into a format that can be easily transfered.



My DVR doesn't use a dual core x2 3600+.

And it works fine.


----------



## W1zzard (Jun 29, 2007)

newtekie1 said:


> like a 7100GS for $33(cheapest PCI-E card on newegg that supports HDTV out) and a X2 3600+ for $63.  Total comes to $96.  The CPU has to handle video decoding, and it is more than powerful enough to do it.  However you now have a CPU that is good enough to do some encoding along with the decoding and powerful enough to do other things as well if needed.



i dont think a 3600+ can handle full 1080p decoding. my 3000+ in the media pc was running at like 3 frames per second


----------



## newtekie1 (Jun 29, 2007)

Maybe, does anyone have a 3600+ that can say if it can handle 1080p decoding?

Did the media you were using require any audio decoding as well?  A second core would certainly aid in decoding if there is a second stream of audio that needed decoding as well.



Dippyskoodlez said:


> My DVR doesn't use a dual core x2 3600+.
> 
> And it works fine.



If you are talking a straight dedicated stand alone DVR, it also doesn't have to handle Windows and anything else a PC has to handle.

If you are talking a media center PC used as a DVR, usually the TV Tuner card will have at least a hardware mpeg encoded on it that will handle the recording of TV.  However the need to shrink those output files to something more managable does come up from time to time.


----------



## hat (Jun 29, 2007)

Wait... my FX5200 performed better. Sure it required a power connector, but it costs around the same and performed better... but it doesn't decode video. Eh... what is decoding anyway?


----------



## WarEagleAU (Jun 30, 2007)

for 60 bucks its not bad and would be spectacular in a htpc case. Kudos.


----------



## Pinchy (Jun 30, 2007)

Perfect for a comp that wants to run HD video. Period.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jul 2, 2007)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102100

First sighting on newegg, and it is fanless already.


----------



## tkpenalty (Jul 2, 2007)

whoa shit that is oficially the shortest PCI-E 16X GPU i've seen... You could call that cooler overkill


----------



## Kasparz (Jul 2, 2007)

HD2400Pro=9800Pro
HD2400XT=9800XT
I would love to play with HD2400/2600.


----------



## mtosev (Jul 2, 2007)

64bit mem interface

no comment


----------



## newtekie1 (Jul 2, 2007)

Kasparz said:


> HD2400Pro=9800Pro
> HD2400XT=9800XT
> I would love to play with HD2400/2600.



No way, I've seen a 9800Pro pull better numbers than the HD2400Pro.  Far Cry@1280x1024 2xAA 8xAF was at least playable on my 9800Pro as was FEAR.

The 64-bit memory interface simply kills the card.  The 9800Pro had 3 and a half times the memory bandwidth of the HD2400Pro.  So while the core might be more powerful it is going to waste with such shitty memory bandwidth.


----------



## Kasparz (Jul 3, 2007)

newtekie1 said:


> No way, I've seen a 9800Pro pull better numbers than the HD2400Pro.  Far Cry@1280x1024 2xAA 8xAF was at least playable on my 9800Pro as was FEAR.


Whats?
I remember my overclocked 9800XT could barely, barely play quake 4(mid settings) and nfs:mw(max settings) at 1024x768 with 2.6Ghz Athlon XP mobile.


----------

