I got my Draco AW80 today!

[BTR11]

I look at this from two perspectives.

The marketing perspective would be that because 4k as a concept is being pushed and will continue to be, the next big thing to persuade people to part with the money to get rid of their HD TV's in the belief that they are 'future ready'.

The practical perspective is that even HD has by no means because completely mainstream and as far as 4k content to the masses is concerned, we will be waiting quite a while for this to happen. Even this time next year, 4k will be something of a niche market in terms of availability but there will be the next big thing in terms of TV boxes out that will incorporate 4k, whilst we may then start to see 8k pushed as the future. It's a continual cycle.

So I would say in general that to produce such a product that lacks HDMI 2 could be seen as a mistake by those that want something now, even though it has less in the way of real and general practical use but for those buying from the other side of the proverbial coin, it gives them something that is relatively good value for it's overall functionality, which may well likely be redundant in a years time when the next generation of tech arrives.

Yes, agreed with you, but must be considered that there is people today (as it is in my case) that owns already 4K TVs with HDMI 2.0 port built-in, so this lack of that port on AW80 or the A80-allwinner it´s a real handicap for them; but for the other part this Box and SoC support natively USB 3.0 which is good to play 4K content through that port or through the SATA port (however it´s a brigde to USB); for the counter part R89 or Nagrace/Ugoos latest PCB and FW have full HDMI v2.0 and H.265 Hardware Decoding but unfortunately do not have the USB 3.0 port nor SATA port. Looks like A80 Allwinner being the latest chinese high end SoC for TV Boxes, It´s almost getting the point, but with that big handicap and not congruent with the rest of the specs of this SoC, specially considering that the competitor lower specs SoC as RK3288 already support HDMI v2.0 which it´s the most logical thing for any advertised 4k TV box. Just this it´s a fact that ppl must to know.
For the instance, I think I will connect the two TV Boxes R89 and Draco AW80 to the same 4K TV to have the full solution, but this is not the ideal, not right and of course it´s not desirable from the cost side for the end users. I think, I was emotional purchasing the AW80, my bad, specially because it´s not cheap...

[bluesmanuk]

Yes there will always be some for whom the lack of HDMI 2 will be a handicap if they have it on their 4k TV, although there are still many very high end TV's that only come with 1.4, so it may well be that those able to afford such TV's may well look for a more high end product to match their TV.

I'm sure that the Draco will sell well and once another vendor comes out with a similar product that matches RK3288 pricing, I have a feeling that the tide may turn rather quickly towards the A80 SOC.

[no_spam_for_me]

I think the same...
4K is a nice to have at the moment (specially via 2.0 because most of the existing 4K TV's using 1.4 (at the user and not the new ones at the shop )) because most using 1080p and as long as there doesn't exist enough 4K content they will never upgrade to 4K (and I don't talk only about sources but also about on-air)...

If you really have a 4K with HDMI 2.0 and you will use the device over years, then you should buy another device OR wait until there is also enough 4K content available and buy then one of the next generation devices...

H.265 is something I think they will be able to handle via s/w at the future (1080P@30 seems to be supported by hw but not verified at the moment) and this SoC is powerful enough to handle it this way...

BTW:
USB 2.0 => 480Mbit/s brutto => ~240Mbit/s netto
if you show me one video with bitrate higher then this, we can begin to discuss about 2.0 vs. 3.0
(my latest info is ~120Mbit/s at the 100GB Bluray)

[BTR11]

I think the same...
4K is a nice to have at the moment (specially via 2.0 because most of the existing 4K TV's using 1.4 (at the user and not the new ones at the shop )) because most using 1080p and as long as there doesn't exist enough 4K content they will never upgrade to 4K (and I don't talk only about sources but also about on-air)...

If you really have a 4K with HDMI 2.0 and you will use the device over years, then you should buy another device OR wait until there is also enough 4K content available and buy then one of the next generation devices...

Yeah, really I have a 4K TV, one of the latest models, it´s a 65" LG 65UB950T (3*HDMI v2.0 ~ 4k-60p; + 1*HDMI v1.4); and sure I expect to use it for some years, I hope many.....after investing a couple of thousands USD on it. Which I don´t have yet on hand are the 4K TV boxes; currently I´m using a Minix Neo X7 which have the same HDMI v 1.4 as Draco AW80, but with older RK3188, pure 1080p Firmware.

H.265 is something I think they will be able to handle via s/w at the future (1080P@30 seems to be supported by hw but not verified at the moment) and this SoC is powerful enough to handle it this way...

Yes, agree, I think so, but for me it´s not the same of native H.265 hardware decoding...

BTW:
USB 2.0 => 480Mbit/s brutto => ~240Mbit/s netto
if you show me one video with bitrate higher then this, we can begin to discuss about 2.0 vs. 3.0
(my latest info is ~120Mbit/s at the 100GB Bluray)

No, I don´t have that tech background to show you that, or I don´t have any data to say anything different on this matter, but I consider a good point for Draco or A80 allwinner having that USB 3.0 port, specially because I have 2 TB HHD USB3.0 which I prefer to connect it to the TV box through the USB 3.0 and not throught the USB 2.0, however, of course it´s back compatible and can be connected to USB 2.0 port.

Thanks for all your inputs, I will have to wait for a new device to emerge on the market, that fix the HDMI 2.0/ h.265 hardware decoding handicap of AW80 even the upcoming Telos version will have the same handicap because it´s another A80 based box; sure it´s a great device for HD, Full HD and first generation of 4K TVs which surely are the majority, and still will have a good perfomance of the latest 4K generation but not the optimal, but I will have to evaluate it when I receive the box.
However, I don´t know if with the upcoming Tv boxes based on Allwinner A80, another manufacturer decide to built a system with an independent HDMI v2.0 transmitter on the board and bypass the built-in transmitter into the A80 SoC....Don´t know if this is possible... may be...who knows...

[Zahir]

4K or Not To 4K

My wife and I went shopping for a 4K TV last month. We are both exceptionally critical of picture quality in general, and - after years of saving - money itself was not our first consideration. After doing my research, the shortlist consisted of Sony and Samsung. We went to three "big box" stores to see and compare several sets "eyes-on". The 55" curved Samsung HU8500 did indeed impress us mightily, even as we recognized that more than 80 per cent of our viewing would be 1080p programs up-scaled. Even then, picture detail and quality seemed outstanding to us as we stood close to the screen. It seemed we had found our new TV.

At the last store we visited, a peculiar thing happened. They had a proper home theater lounge to simulate living room conditions, so we settled into some plush chairs and looked at the same TV - this time from a distance of 10 or 11 feet, about the same distance we have at home. The HU8500 still looked great but - to our surprise - the TV next to it- which was not on my shortlist - looked breathtaking to both of us. "What's that one?", I asked the salesman. "it's even better". "Oh, that's the Samsung UNF8000, a late 2013 model, Sir - it only does 1080p."

We stared at both TVs for 10 - 15 minutes, tried different program sources, and we both came to the same conclusion: beyond a distance of 5ft, all the extra pixels of 4K cease to matter because they are simply not discernible. Most eyes will not see the extra information. And where the 4K TV was up-scaling 1080p material through another layer of electronic processing, the 1080p set was rendering natively. In all respects that count - saturation, contrast, color spectrum, shadow detail, backlight dimming etc etc. the "lesser" set simply looked better at a normal viewing distance.

You know which set came home with us in the end. With the money we saved, we went up to the 65" version of the UNF8000. After calibration, it remains the object of awe and admiration of all who sample it at our home. Most of them say: "Oh, you've got one of those fancy 4k TVs..."

[clarkss12]

My wife and I went shopping for a 4K TV last month. We are both exceptionally critical of picture quality in general, and - after years of saving - money itself was not our first consideration. After doing my research, the shortlist consisted of Sony and Samsung. We went to three "big box" stores to see and compare several sets "eyes-on". The 55" curved Samsung HU8500 did indeed impress us mightily, even as we recognized that more than 80 per cent of our viewing would be 1080p programs up-scaled. Even then, picture detail and quality seemed outstanding to us as we stood close to the screen. It seemed we had found our new TV.

At the last store we visited, a peculiar thing happened. They had a proper home theater lounge to simulate living room conditions, so we settled into some plush chairs and looked at the same TV - this time from a distance of 10 or 11 feet, about the same distance we have at home. The HU8500 still looked great but - to our surprise - the TV next to it- which was not on my shortlist - looked breathtaking to both of us. "What's that one?", I asked the salesman. "it's even better". "Oh, that's the Samsung UNF8000, a late 2013 model, Sir - it only does 1080p."

We stared at both TVs for 10 - 15 minutes, tried different program sources, and we both came to the same conclusion: beyond a distance of 5ft, all the extra pixels of 4K cease to matter because they are simply not discernible. Most eyes will not see the extra information. And where the 4K TV was up-scaling 1080p material through another layer of electronic processing, the 1080p set was rendering natively. In all respects that count - saturation, contrast, color spectrum, shadow detail, backlight dimming etc etc. the "lesser" set simply looked better at a normal viewing distance.

You know which set came home with us in the end. With the money we saved, we went up to the 65" version of the UNF8000. After calibration, it remains the object of awe and admiration of all who sample it at our home. Most of them say: "Oh, you've got one of those fancy 4k TVs..."

Thanks for that great evaluation.

[no_spam_for_me]

Yeah, really I have a 4K TV, one of the latest models, it´s a 65" LG 65UB950T (3*HDMI v2.0 ~ 4k-60p; + 1*HDMI v1.4); and sure I expect to use it for some years, I hope many.....after investing a couple of thousands USD on it.
:

Misunderstanding !
Of cause you want to use it many years
I talk about the BOX

BTW: But as you wrote "after investing a couple of thousands USD on it" and this is why I don't understand why many people have problems with a BOX which they buy for less then 200USD and maybe update in 1 year

[no_spam_for_me]

Thanks for that great evaluation.

+1
Wonderful how you describe the reality

[trebor]

+1
Wonderful how you describe the reality

+1 for how you describe how it is, be it reality or the Fact

Cheers

[Zahir]

Thank you, all, for appreciating our experience. It happened pretty much that way. Once the additional pixels were out of the equation, we were left comparing a superb translator with a fluent native speaker...

[BTR11]

Misunderstanding !
Of cause you want to use it many years
I talk about the BOX

Ahh, Ok.
Anyway with the right specs on the box, well manufactured I think It can be used for a couple of years as well.

BTW: But as you wrote "after investing a couple of thousands USD on it" and this is why I don't understand why many people have problems with a BOX which they buy for less then 200USD and maybe update in 1 year

This is related to product segment price level, and this latest box it´s clearly 40 to 50% more expensive than the direct competitors currently on the market, which, indeed, they are supporting HDMI v2.0 / H.265 hardware decoding; I can not avoid to receive this fact as a big handicap on a box like Draco is, as the market it´s as today.

--------


Regarding to the other post discussing about 4K or Not: sure the humanity can survive without a 4K resolution, you can stay with SD, HD or full HD resolution if it´s that you have, or even without any of those; this is not critical for life; it´s a free personal and budget decision for anybody. I think we are talking here about of clarifying technical specs and evolution of SoC and TV Boxes technology that it´s matter on these threads of this forum.

[ouquoi]

Thanks for your opinions on 4k it helps me a lot. And what about h265 hardware decoding and usage ?

[Zahir]

it´s a free personal and budget decision for anybody. I think we are talking here about of clarifying technical specs and evolution of SoC and TV Boxes technology that it´s matter on these threads of this forum.

I agree - each chooses as he/she sees fit. If I went off-topic a bit, it was to make that same point, but I'm sorry if I cluttered your technical thread.

[no_spam_for_me]

Thanks for your opinions on 4k it helps me a lot. And what about h265 hardware decoding and usage ?

=>

...
H.265 is something I think they will be able to handle via s/w at the future (1080P@30 seems to be supported by hw but not verified at the moment) and this SoC is powerful enough to handle it this way...
...

Which means MAYBE hardware decoding at 1080P@30 and less (maybe also by software because not verified at the moment)
BUT definitely NO hardware decoding at > 1080P@30 (best case by software)

[no_spam_for_me]

I agree - each chooses as he/she sees fit. If I went off-topic a bit, it was to make that same point, but I'm sorry if I cluttered your technical thread.

No matter, live is more than 'only' technical