Can it really do VC1? The older models seem to chug and fail on old HD-DVD VC1 rips using in Kodi. I'm sure it's more a licensing ROI issue vs actual capabilities. Everything else always plays well.
I'm pretty sure it's not VC-1 that causes it, but specifically the implementation of Dobly TrueHD or Dolby Digital Plus found on HD-DVD. The fix (for me) has always been to change the audio source to stereo or standard Dolby Digital. YMMV
Can it really do VC1? The older models seem to chug and fail on old HD-DVD VC1 rips using in Kodi. I'm sure it's more a licensing ROI issue vs actual capabilities. Everything else always plays well.
Maybe if you turn off your adblocker to view Anandtech, it makes the differences pop out at you. Either that or you get brain cancer and the tumor makes the images look different.
And remember to click on the image to see a larger version.
Hopefully this will convince people to stop playing with the display settings of their TV. I am sick of oversaturated and oversharpened pictures so often on display in TV shops.
Thing is, you'll likely never notice the difference when watching TV or movies, since the differences are subtle and only really show up in static images.
The difference is sharpness in the regions in focus. The "AI-scaled" version shows very crisp detail which is not in the original image. If you look carefully, it looks almost unrealistic - but well balanced compared to other sharpening filters.
Click the image to see it a little larger. The fine detail is blurred in the ordinary upscale, but better preserved in the neural net upscale. The difference is not extreme, but I am happy that nVidia is not fudging the example for marketing purposes (to the best of my knowledge).
Often times the reason for such decisions comes down to product differentiation. They want to entice people to buy the higher priced part which is probably higher margin, as well. And 8 GB covers the utility of the vast majority of their market, they are multiple upgrade paths available for those who it does not, and every dollar they can successfully shave off in their cost to manufacture is important if a company wishes to be lean and profitable. It's a cost and benefit analysis. I'm not saying they made the right decision, I have no idea, but it's a lot more nuanced than "there was 16GB in phones 10 years ago" (a completely different market at a completely different price point, no less) or "it would only cost X to add it".
I had a Shield TV hooked up to my old TV. I bought a new Sony A9G with Android TV built in, and the Shield TV has been relegated to just playing MKVs, since the Sony won't decode TrueHD or DTS-MA.
So (serious question here, not trying to start a fight or argue a point) what is the market for a device like this?
The way I see it, there's a fairly obvious market for Apple TV -- it's a way to get content on your TV using an Apple-like UI, and it plays nicely with all your other Apple stuff.
Now if you're not part of the Apple world you still want to get stuff onto your TV using a nice UI. Options seem to be - use an HTPC - use a Google device like the various Chromecasts - use a Roku?
So is the idea that this is basically an Apple TV for people who are Android? Or Windows? What's the win over Chromecast? (Or do I misunderstand Chromecast? Is it PURELY about picking up a stream from another device, not about hosting apps like Netflix or Plex?)
What's the win over say Roku (which seems to be a LOT cheaper)? Is the point that the cheap boxes pretty much ONLY decode video, while this more expensive box does a reasonable job of playing games?
One reason I am asking all this is that for years Apple has been quietly pushing Apple TV as a box that can do more than just decode video, in particular it can also play games. And the claim is that this has never really gained traction. Maybe Apple Arcade will change that, but I'm curious whether this sort of strategy worked for Shield. Is there a big community of gamers around Shield? And if so, what made that happen compared to, say, Apple TV?
This is an Android TV device. So, it runs Android apps (many work surprisingly well with a remote and no extra changes by the dev) and acts as a Chromecast. It can act as a Plex server. It can play games locally, streaming from the cloud or streaming from your PC.
My Shield acts as, essentially, my entire media center. I use it for all TV and movie watching, which includes Netflix, Hulu, HBO Now, Amazon Video, and Curiousity Stream along with pulling media from my Plex server. I also use GameStream to play my PC games on my TV, as well as playing most any Android games with controller support. It also handles emulation up through PSX/N64 quite well.
There is really nothing that fully competes with the Shield. Other standalone Android TV devices (the few that there are) don't have the full breadth of features or the performance and it has had a better track record of OS updates than really any other Android device I've ever dealt with.
So, basically it acts like the Android version of an Apple TV? (Meaning not just the aTV functionality, but kind of "brandwise" the high-end solution, the one that you mostly trust to get things right, to provide all the functionality, and to stay up to date)?
OK, thanks!
As for the technologies you list, - mostly that's about the same sort of functionality as on an aTV.
- the one obvious missing piece is live/OTA TV. I do that by running Channels DVR on my Mac mini, and running a Channels DVR client on my aTV. I think Channels DVR is cross platform, or you can probably do something with Plex. But OTA recording is something some people care about, some don't!
- does Shield act as a hub for home devices? Home IoT is still a godawful mess (for everyone...) with every company requiring its own hub and app. But to the extent that stuff does support HomeKit, I have found it occasionally useful that I can get to this stuff when I'm outside the house because the aTV acts as a gateway from the outside internet to control (HomeKit) devices inside the house.
- how is GameStream different from any standard screencasting solution (like Airplay for Apple, or Chromecast)? I'm not a gamer, but I have occasionally used Airplay to throw video that was in a browser window onto my TV and that worked fine but of course that's not demanding of latency.
- I wonder if the emulation of old games was the real difference for gaming acceptance on Shield vs aTV? That might be an interesting business strategy, to port/rewrite a whole bunch of classic games from the Apple world (Oregon Trail and Wizardry, Snake, that Spectre tank game, Bolo, Myst, ...) to Apple Arcade to bring people in on the nostalgia ticket...
Shield has support for things like HD Homerun and other OTA DVRs. Plex works great with them so you can store you stuff locally (likely to an attached USB drive) or to a network drive.
There is support to use the Shield as an IoT hub using a SmartThings USB attachment.
GameStream is different because it is very low latency, quite high visual fidelity and it makes things like using a mouse/keyboard or controller on the Shield completely transparent to the game. I can launch Steam's Big Picture mode and launch a game just as easily as if I was at my PC.
Emulation is especially nice on the Shield because it is rather powerful compared to any other Android TV device and the Shield controller is, in my opinion, great.
Apple TV is like a stripped down Shield with markedly weaker internals aimed at Apple only customers. Nintendo's Switch uses a weaker version of the SoC from the 2015 Shield. Comparing Apple arcade, Shield has GeForce now, the native Android nVidia specific titles and the ability to steam your PC games to Shield using GeForce Experience (GeForce graphics card required).
Shield can also operate as a Plex server. Support for Shield TV is also better than any other Android device, the 2015 model still gets regular updates and even major version updates.
Apple's 4k TV offering was the first device they offered that wasn't laughably outclassed by Shield TV, and it still wasn't really comparable.
That is the WRONG way you answer this sort of question. - You're throwing out a whole lot of buzzwords from the Shield ecosystem that make no sense to anyone not inside it. (GeForce now, GeForce Experience)
- I (and I expect every reader) was specifically NOT interested in an Android vs Apple wank-off. The Apple folks aren't going to buy a Shield, the Shield folks aren't going to buy an aTV. That's fscking obvious. So why waste time with the silly insults?
You COULD provide a service to us by explaining these buzz words and why they matter...
Apple arcade was brought up, nobody explained that buzz word, and the ones I mentioned have been around a *lot* longer.
Also, the only thing I mentioned that was Android based was updates, all the rest are Shield specific, not Android TV. In other words, I was directly comparing two devices, not operating systems.
Apple tv is Many times more powerfull than shield... but all in all it depends on what platform you Are going to use... In feature wise shield has the same advantage as with all Android devices. A lot of apps... Apple has less, but there Are Also less those really badly made apps...
Basically I have a programmer friend and he loves to tinker with his Shield, and Apple's product is annoying locked down in comparison, but that doesn't change the hardware is slow and outdated, and yet still expensive. nVidia in a holding pattern until it is discontinued.
Except you're completely wrong. The nVidia Shield uses the same CPU core as the Note 4, from 2014, the Cortex A57, 5 years old. The Apple 4K TV's CPU is much stronger. And the GPU is good in the Shield, but is basically an iPhone 8 level GPU, also not any faster than the Apple TV which uses the A10X.
It was an ambitious product when it released 4 years ago, but is mediocre today. The $35 Raspberry Pi has a faster CPU... that's how bad it is. It is a TV setup box and its improvements are software only, but the hardware is nothing special 5 years later.
The AppleTV does have better hardware, but I think it's a HUUUGE stretch to say the Raspberry Pi 3B+ has a better CPU. The Pi 3B+ uses quad A53 cores, the Shield has quad A57 cores. That gives the Shield superscalar and out-of-order instructions.
The Shield also has a great GPU, though it is less impressive today than when it launched.
I'm pretty sure Nintendo wouldn't have used the Tegra X1 if it's CPU was no better than a Pi 3B+.
Apple's 'great' GPUs for mobile are a silly rumor because they get compared to Qualcomms garbage. That's the A11 losing to a four year old nVidia mobile GPU.
why are you ranting about the wrong cpu and gpu? why don't you actually look it up next time? the apple TV uses the GPU focused iPad Pro cpu, the A10X...
A8, I showed A8x and A11 benches, both of which showed Shield is clearly superior despite your absurdly dishonest claims that the A8 was comparable.
Was that a flat out lie or are you that ignorant on the subject?
So you seem to be trying to change to a discussion about the Apple TV 4k. If that is the case, you need to specify. A Mac and a Mac, which one is faster? The i or Pro matter.
Apple currently sells two Apple TVs. The cheaper one is based on the A8, The more expensive (4K) one is based on the A10X. https://www.apple.com/apple-tv-4k/specs/
It is LIKELY, based on previous history (though who knows for sure) that at some point soon (this year?) Apple will release an even newer version based on the A12.
As for benchmarks, especially GPU benchmarks, I don't know what to tell you. I have no idea what the site benchmarks.ul.com does, but their benchmark numbers for the iPhone 11 seem completely unrelated to what AnandTech reported, and I'd trust AnandTech a lot more. (AnandTech shows numbers for both cooled and uncooled GPU. Cooled is more relevant to aTV because it has a fan and is physically larger than iPhone.)
Another imperfect benchmark for GPUs is GeekBench Compute, but at least it's cross platform and has a large database. The Summary number there for the iPad Pro (ie A10X) is 32000. (For iPhone the appropriate number is about 10000). The best Summary number there I could find for Shield is a value from late 2017, of 20000. Presumably this new device has a better GPU. Is it 1.6x better? No idea.
So yeah, it looks like old Shield is 2x better (at least for GPU compute) than old aTV, but 1.6 worse than the newer 4K aTV. New Shield numbers? I guess we'll see when it's in users' hands.
I know, I was being outrageous comparing the device people explicitly named that cost $149 to a Shield that cost $149, I should have assumed that they meant the other, higher end model that has a SoC that throttles to a comical degree in every test I can find in some other device, assume that it is a *vastly* superior version that doesn't drop 50% or more of its performance when used for an extended period of time *and* ignore that Shield had an upgraded SoC.... Apple fans have to be in amazing shape with the leaps and mental gymnastics it takes :)
You seem to think the point of a discussion in a forum is to win points. The adults of us here see the point of a discussion as to enlarge understanding.
BTW the life winner is the person who collects the most understanding, not the one who scores the most petty points.
The type of understanding where people flat out lie about performance?
The type of understanding where people say one thing, get shown that isn't accurate then claim it is juvenile to state hard facts?
The type of understanding where people result to personal insults when even their wholly dishonest straw mans are exposed?
This is an article about the new Shield, some Apple fanboys jumped in spreading misinformation, I corrected it providing links including directly to Apple. This isn't about scoring points, it's about keeping dishonest trolls in check.
You are a twit not worth talking to. I already rebutted every single one of your points. Put a clear link for you also. You might want to plant your flag and stand on something that is true, not a fanboy's juvenile fantasy.
I understand your embarrassment, you open with an outrageous fairy tail about the A8's performance, try to double down on it, then swap to claim you really meant another entirely different piece of hardware in a different device then link benchmarks that show even after jumping through three different levels of strawmans the numbers you picked out show that it *still* loses for extended gaming sessions.
In my first post I stated the 4k Apple TV was the first device that didn't get crushed by Shield after talking about how the Apple TV was laughable in comparison. It's almost like when there are two different devices I use the modifier so people know which one I'm talking about. I guess you could call that juvenile, it's what, a third grade lesson?
Again, you twit, you responded to my comment. Since you can't read, my comment was "The Apple 4K TV's CPU is much stronger. And the GPU is good in the Shield, but is basically an iPhone 8 level GPU, also not any faster than the Apple TV which uses the A10X."
Notice I said Apple TV 4k? And anyways you are just playing juvenile games pretending people are talking about the Apple TV non 4k because everything you said was wrong. Have a nice day.
Anyways sorry for the insults, having a crappy day. But I said Apple TV 4k from the beginning, and the only one that has said "A8" is you, none of my comments have referred to the A8.
Sorry to say, but you've been the troll. Alistair clearly said from the beginning the ATV 4K with the A10X was faster, which it is.
This refresh by Nvidia is pathetic, still pushing nearly five year old hardware for the same price. 25% faster than the original Shield from 2015? WTF?
Does roku now finally support hevc? Last time I checked shield tv was the only really versatile box. Albeit in these 4 years it's become near irrelevant as my tv can do all that stuff itself. It had it's place but know it either needs to be sub $100 or get new hardware and more features.
"The way I see it, there's a fairly obvious market for Apple TV" which is essentially the same market for the Shield in the Android ecosystem. Given that most of the world doesn't use Apple devices, I'm kind of surprised this is somewhat baffling to you.
As for the options you listed: Chromecast is essentially a stream receiver. It doesn't have a remote or built in UI, you use other devices to pick the content and then cast it to the Chromecast. It's a wonderful device (I own like 3), but it's a completely different experience from Android/Apple TV. Roku is another fine choice, but comes with its own ecosystem and Shield has some other uses, like game streaming, that Roku doesn't cater to (to my knowledge).
As far as being a gaming device, I have no clue, but I'd be surprised to learn it's doing any better than Apple TV.
I have 2x Apple TV boxes, the latest 4K compliant ones, they struggle to play most 4K files from my plex server, and sure they work with Streaming services but the remote sucks, its a pain to use, and they aren't cheap, at least they weren't when I got them about 18 months ago. $259.00 if I remember.. I just got a new Shield Pro and I love it compared to my Apple TV, the remote alone makes it a far more pleasant experience, add to that the friendly way Android pulls logins and Wi-fi settings from my phone, great. Picture quality on my 4K TV is beautiful and it is very snappy in terms of running with my other hardware.
Additionally, over the last 18 months apple has basically let the apps store coast when it comes to updates to many apps we use, good enough seems to be the operational reality. I know its not up to apple to update the apps, but many of them are buggy and have problems with lock up and crashing. Android isn't perfect either but it seems that the Shield just runs smoother with the same apps.
I admit I am a bit concerned with security in all this but in terms of picture quality, as well as the benefit of being able to use my HD Home-run OTA gear from a central solution, it is a full range solution. Really like it.
Seems the older models were cheaper since they came with the game controller?
I have 2 Shields, one I got just last month. I hope I get the upscaling AI update, but regardless I've gotten years of updates from my first one. Hope other companies take note.
Most consumers that just stream netflix and dont have an amplifier or proper HD can get by with their crummy built in smart TV . This is for folks that want ATMOS and HDR and a variety of streaming apps (i.e. like Disney+ which you don't get on your Vizio TV streaming platform).
What do you want? 8K120 support? A CPU that can emulate a i9-9900K PC? A GPU as fast as a 2080 Ti? Please... this is still the best streaming multimedia player you can get. And even for enthusiasts it offers pretty much everything.
I miss the IR functionality, I still have a launch Shield I use hooked up to my main AV setup and my Harmony Ultimate works with it, but won't with newer versions(17 or 19). Yes, that does matter considering my remote control costs more then a new Shield Pro.
Yes I can use the Shield remote or controller, my phone or Google Home but I like one remote for everything.
It's cheaper and much smaller. It also has a much more mature platform than the raw device that one was paying for 4 years ago. The target market of the offering has shifted as NVIDIA has learned who the market is. It now comes with a remote instead of a controller, and the remote is supposedly improved over the original remote one had to pay extra for in 2015. They were probably hoping to add value with game sales in some way or another at the time of their 2015 launch. The only thing that matters as far as the price is how does the current device compare to the current competition at its current price point.
I really can't stand the hyping. Here's the first video with benchmarks. 2-15 percent faster, never 25 percent (memory bandwidth is too limited unlike with the Tegra X2?)
2 percent faster for gfxbench Manhattan. 3 percent for T-rex. Enjoy the video:
But why does it really have to be faster anyway? The old one was fast enough already to display 4K60 HDR content without hiccups.
We all know that a manufacturers claim about performance is always overdone. They always just select one single thing where they can achieve the biggest numbers.
I am just happy that I can actually get the best multi media streaming player for $150 now instead of 200, because I need 2 of them.
The "faster" question has to do with whether there is a viable gamer community around this (and whether such a community can form around the Apple TV). Sure, if your only use case is displaying content, and that content is decoded in real time by the box, that's fast enough! That's certainly my situation.
Of course there's a slippery slope of additional functionality... Most obvious is if you want to add Picture in Picture and now need two decoders (or the decoder to be twice as fast; or you have to provide a horrible user experience where some pairs of streams can support PiP, but not others. But then you can start adding things like supporting multi-person Video Chat (think family chat with multiple separated family members on Christmas Day or Thanksgiving day), and now we need even more stream decoders... (Nobody, as far as I know, really supports something like the above yet. You can fake it with Apple using AirPlay, likewise I assume on Android, but you still have to use the phone camera. The next step in usability is camera support on these media console devices, but that's a tricky issue of where you place the camera... I think it's coming, likely with a separate wireless camera, but we'll see. And once you have a camera, you make available a whole lot of "body motion" games likes Wii and DDR. But you now need a kick-ass image processing engine and NPU to extract that body motion from the video stream. And then you want to do that for two bodies...
And that doesn't just have to be for games. One could imagine this sort of thing being part of workout apps [make sure you do the movements correctly] or health apps [keep old people moving, physical therapy].)
You know what *does* use VP9.2 and AV1? YouTube. I agree it would have been a push to put the latter in it but they're goibg to need to step up and the reduced prices kinda reflect that.
No question, they *are* reduced, and the new form factor is more convenient, but personally if I was paying for one at all, I'd pay the $50 more for the capacity and expandability of the Pro.
This is unlikely. New hardware would be needed for AV1 decode. The main reason they did this refresh is so that they do not have to continue making this chip on two different process nodes. This is a tiny market relative to the Nintendo switch. Shield is overpriced, but still the best device in its class.
Is there a way to confirm what I saw a reviewer mention (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpOVxKtM-Nc) that the $149.99 (non-Pro version) is NOT 64-bit enabled and only works with 32-bit apps?
I want to see some benchmarks to prove it is faster one youtuber already posted some interesting results the 2017 and 2019 version both score the same. So now we get 1 less remote no hdmi cable for more then the 2017 is going for right now. Software has changed AI but I bet it can be ported over with no issue. Please reviewers benchmark the devices nvidia is playing us again.
Standard version looks like a minor upgrade and step back (at the same time) versus previous Standard version. Pro version looks like a minor upgrade over previous Standard version. Previous Pro version has no continuation.
Addition of Dolby Vision is a welcome upgrade for many (but not for me since I have a Samsung QLED TV, Samsung does not like/support Dolby Vision, they promote own HDR10+ standard).
Many would like to see addition of Dolby Vision for older Shield devices too but let's be realistic, due to licensing costs these older devices will not receive that.
From my point of view the biggest limitation of previous generation was lack of VP9.2 support 'due to hardware limitations' of X1 chip i.e it couldn't play YouTube HDR videos. Now I'm reading that this new generation does not have VP9.2 support either ! I would like to hear whether this is again not hardware-supported by updated X1+ chip (I'm guessing so) or it wasn't added yet. Certainly I'm not going to upgrade upgrade to this new model until VP9.2 is added... Otherwise it is no-upgrade for me (my TV does not support Dolby Vision, I don't need Dolby Atmos).
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
80 Comments
Back to Article
abufrejoval - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Perhaps a new Jetson Nano based on the impoved SoC?mammothboy - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Can it really do VC1? The older models seem to chug and fail on old HD-DVD VC1 rips using in Kodi. I'm sure it's more a licensing ROI issue vs actual capabilities. Everything else always plays well.nathanddrews - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
I'm pretty sure it's not VC-1 that causes it, but specifically the implementation of Dobly TrueHD or Dolby Digital Plus found on HD-DVD. The fix (for me) has always been to change the audio source to stereo or standard Dolby Digital. YMMVHixbot - Saturday, November 2, 2019 - link
Very disappointed Nvidia hasn't launched HDMI 2.1 yet.mammothboy - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Can it really do VC1? The older models seem to chug and fail on old HD-DVD VC1 rips using in Kodi. I'm sure it's more a licensing ROI issue vs actual capabilities. Everything else always plays well.Operandi - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
I honestly can't see any difference between those two upscaled images....SirMaster - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
You might need glasses. I see clear differences looking casually on my 23" 1080p from 1.5ft away.imaheadcase - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
That is not how pictures work online...lolPeachNCream - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Maybe if you turn off your adblocker to view Anandtech, it makes the differences pop out at you. Either that or you get brain cancer and the tumor makes the images look different.PeachNCream - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
I'm having trouble really seeing a substantial improvement. There is a minor increase in sharpness, I think, but I'm not sure it matters.BikeDude - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
Check around the lizard's eye.And remember to click on the image to see a larger version.
Hopefully this will convince people to stop playing with the display settings of their TV. I am sick of oversaturated and oversharpened pictures so often on display in TV shops.
imaheadcase - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Same i can't see a difference at all. lolDigitalFreak - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Thing is, you'll likely never notice the difference when watching TV or movies, since the differences are subtle and only really show up in static images.MrSpadge - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
The difference is sharpness in the regions in focus. The "AI-scaled" version shows very crisp detail which is not in the original image. If you look carefully, it looks almost unrealistic - but well balanced compared to other sharpening filters.Sivar - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
Click the image to see it a little larger.The fine detail is blurred in the ordinary upscale, but better preserved in the neural net upscale. The difference is not extreme, but I am happy that nVidia is not fudging the example for marketing purposes (to the best of my knowledge).
ABR - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Man that's a big honkin' remote. Bigger than the smaller set top box.shabby - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
With 2gb of ram and a paltry 8gb of storage this thing should cost $99 at best.imaheadcase - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Its for for streaming..quiksilvr - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
But isn't it also for gaming? How much extra would it have really cost to put 16 GB.shabby - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
50 cents, geez 16gb was in phones 10 years ago.Yojimbo - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
Often times the reason for such decisions comes down to product differentiation. They want to entice people to buy the higher priced part which is probably higher margin, as well. And 8 GB covers the utility of the vast majority of their market, they are multiple upgrade paths available for those who it does not, and every dollar they can successfully shave off in their cost to manufacture is important if a company wishes to be lean and profitable. It's a cost and benefit analysis. I'm not saying they made the right decision, I have no idea, but it's a lot more nuanced than "there was 16GB in phones 10 years ago" (a completely different market at a completely different price point, no less) or "it would only cost X to add it".DigitalFreak - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
I had a Shield TV hooked up to my old TV. I bought a new Sony A9G with Android TV built in, and the Shield TV has been relegated to just playing MKVs, since the Sony won't decode TrueHD or DTS-MA.metal571 - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
But can it do proper 24p thoname99 - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
So (serious question here, not trying to start a fight or argue a point) what is the market for a device like this?The way I see it, there's a fairly obvious market for Apple TV -- it's a way to get content on your TV using an Apple-like UI, and it plays nicely with all your other Apple stuff.
Now if you're not part of the Apple world you still want to get stuff onto your TV using a nice UI. Options seem to be
- use an HTPC
- use a Google device like the various Chromecasts
- use a Roku?
So is the idea that this is basically an Apple TV for people who are Android? Or Windows?
What's the win over Chromecast? (Or do I misunderstand Chromecast? Is it PURELY about picking up a stream from another device, not about hosting apps like Netflix or Plex?)
What's the win over say Roku (which seems to be a LOT cheaper)?
Is the point that the cheap boxes pretty much ONLY decode video, while this more expensive box does a reasonable job of playing games?
One reason I am asking all this is that for years Apple has been quietly pushing Apple TV as a box that can do more than just decode video, in particular it can also play games. And the claim is that this has never really gained traction.
Maybe Apple Arcade will change that, but I'm curious whether this sort of strategy worked for Shield. Is there a big community of gamers around Shield? And if so, what made that happen compared to, say, Apple TV?
jordanclock - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
This is an Android TV device. So, it runs Android apps (many work surprisingly well with a remote and no extra changes by the dev) and acts as a Chromecast. It can act as a Plex server. It can play games locally, streaming from the cloud or streaming from your PC.My Shield acts as, essentially, my entire media center. I use it for all TV and movie watching, which includes Netflix, Hulu, HBO Now, Amazon Video, and Curiousity Stream along with pulling media from my Plex server. I also use GameStream to play my PC games on my TV, as well as playing most any Android games with controller support. It also handles emulation up through PSX/N64 quite well.
There is really nothing that fully competes with the Shield. Other standalone Android TV devices (the few that there are) don't have the full breadth of features or the performance and it has had a better track record of OS updates than really any other Android device I've ever dealt with.
name99 - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
So, basically it acts like the Android version of an Apple TV? (Meaning not just the aTV functionality, but kind of "brandwise" the high-end solution, the one that you mostly trust to get things right, to provide all the functionality, and to stay up to date)?OK, thanks!
As for the technologies you list,
- mostly that's about the same sort of functionality as on an aTV.
- the one obvious missing piece is live/OTA TV. I do that by running Channels DVR on my Mac mini, and running a Channels DVR client on my aTV. I think Channels DVR is cross platform, or you can probably do something with Plex. But OTA recording is something some people care about, some don't!
- does Shield act as a hub for home devices? Home IoT is still a godawful mess (for everyone...) with every company requiring its own hub and app. But to the extent that stuff does support HomeKit, I have found it occasionally useful that I can get to this stuff when I'm outside the house because the aTV acts as a gateway from the outside internet to control (HomeKit) devices inside the house.
- how is GameStream different from any standard screencasting solution (like Airplay for Apple, or Chromecast)? I'm not a gamer, but I have occasionally used Airplay to throw video that was in a browser window onto my TV and that worked fine but of course that's not demanding of latency.
- I wonder if the emulation of old games was the real difference for gaming acceptance on Shield vs aTV? That might be an interesting business strategy, to port/rewrite a whole bunch of classic games from the Apple world (Oregon Trail and Wizardry, Snake, that Spectre tank game, Bolo, Myst, ...) to Apple Arcade to bring people in on the nostalgia ticket...
jordanclock - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Shield has support for things like HD Homerun and other OTA DVRs. Plex works great with them so you can store you stuff locally (likely to an attached USB drive) or to a network drive.There is support to use the Shield as an IoT hub using a SmartThings USB attachment.
GameStream is different because it is very low latency, quite high visual fidelity and it makes things like using a mouse/keyboard or controller on the Shield completely transparent to the game. I can launch Steam's Big Picture mode and launch a game just as easily as if I was at my PC.
Emulation is especially nice on the Shield because it is rather powerful compared to any other Android TV device and the Shield controller is, in my opinion, great.
BenSkywalker - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Apple TV is like a stripped down Shield with markedly weaker internals aimed at Apple only customers. Nintendo's Switch uses a weaker version of the SoC from the 2015 Shield. Comparing Apple arcade, Shield has GeForce now, the native Android nVidia specific titles and the ability to steam your PC games to Shield using GeForce Experience (GeForce graphics card required).Shield can also operate as a Plex server. Support for Shield TV is also better than any other Android device, the 2015 model still gets regular updates and even major version updates.
Apple's 4k TV offering was the first device they offered that wasn't laughably outclassed by Shield TV, and it still wasn't really comparable.
name99 - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
That is the WRONG way you answer this sort of question.- You're throwing out a whole lot of buzzwords from the Shield ecosystem that make no sense to anyone not inside it. (GeForce now, GeForce Experience)
- I (and I expect every reader) was specifically NOT interested in an Android vs Apple wank-off. The Apple folks aren't going to buy a Shield, the Shield folks aren't going to buy an aTV. That's fscking obvious. So why waste time with the silly insults?
You COULD provide a service to us by explaining these buzz words and why they matter...
BenSkywalker - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Apple arcade was brought up, nobody explained that buzz word, and the ones I mentioned have been around a *lot* longer.Also, the only thing I mentioned that was Android based was updates, all the rest are Shield specific, not Android TV. In other words, I was directly comparing two devices, not operating systems.
haukionkannel - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Apple tv is Many times more powerfull than shield...but all in all it depends on what platform you Are going to use...
In feature wise shield has the same advantage as with all Android devices. A lot of apps...
Apple has less, but there Are Also less those really badly made apps...
Alistair - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Basically I have a programmer friend and he loves to tinker with his Shield, and Apple's product is annoying locked down in comparison, but that doesn't change the hardware is slow and outdated, and yet still expensive. nVidia in a holding pattern until it is discontinued.Beaver M. - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
Exactly. You simply dont buy Apple when you want a more open architecture. I mean just their Bluetooth hassle is just not worth it.Alistair - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Except you're completely wrong. The nVidia Shield uses the same CPU core as the Note 4, from 2014, the Cortex A57, 5 years old. The Apple 4K TV's CPU is much stronger. And the GPU is good in the Shield, but is basically an iPhone 8 level GPU, also not any faster than the Apple TV which uses the A10X.It was an ambitious product when it released 4 years ago, but is mediocre today. The $35 Raspberry Pi has a faster CPU... that's how bad it is. It is a TV setup box and its improvements are software only, but the hardware is nothing special 5 years later.
jordanclock - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
The AppleTV does have better hardware, but I think it's a HUUUGE stretch to say the Raspberry Pi 3B+ has a better CPU. The Pi 3B+ uses quad A53 cores, the Shield has quad A57 cores. That gives the Shield superscalar and out-of-order instructions.The Shield also has a great GPU, though it is less impressive today than when it launched.
I'm pretty sure Nintendo wouldn't have used the Tegra X1 if it's CPU was no better than a Pi 3B+.
SarahKerrigan - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Nobody said 3B+, which is not the current model. The Raspberry Pi 4 uses a quad A72 processor.BenSkywalker - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
A8X vs Tegra X1?https://www.anandtech.com/show/8811/nvidia-tegra-x...
Some mighty strong kool aid to try and pretend those are close.
Let's step up to the A11
https://benchmarks.ul.com/hardware/phone/Apple+iPh...
https://benchmarks.ul.com/hardware/tablet/NVIDIA+S...
Apple's 'great' GPUs for mobile are a silly rumor because they get compared to Qualcomms garbage. That's the A11 losing to a four year old nVidia mobile GPU.
Alistair - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
why are you ranting about the wrong cpu and gpu? why don't you actually look it up next time? the apple TV uses the GPU focused iPad Pro cpu, the A10X...BenSkywalker - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Why don't you look up, literally, anything?https://www.apple.com/apple-tv-hd/specs/
A8, I showed A8x and A11 benches, both of which showed Shield is clearly superior despite your absurdly dishonest claims that the A8 was comparable.
Was that a flat out lie or are you that ignorant on the subject?
So you seem to be trying to change to a discussion about the Apple TV 4k. If that is the case, you need to specify. A Mac and a Mac, which one is faster? The i or Pro matter.
name99 - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Apple currently sells two Apple TVs.The cheaper one is based on the A8, The more expensive (4K) one is based on the A10X.
https://www.apple.com/apple-tv-4k/specs/
It is LIKELY, based on previous history (though who knows for sure) that at some point soon (this year?) Apple will release an even newer version based on the A12.
As for benchmarks, especially GPU benchmarks, I don't know what to tell you.
I have no idea what the site benchmarks.ul.com does, but their benchmark numbers for the iPhone 11 seem completely unrelated to what AnandTech reported, and I'd trust AnandTech a lot more.
(AnandTech shows numbers for both cooled and uncooled GPU. Cooled is more relevant to aTV because it has a fan and is physically larger than iPhone.)
Another imperfect benchmark for GPUs is GeekBench Compute, but at least it's cross platform and has a large database.
The Summary number there for the iPad Pro (ie A10X) is 32000.
(For iPhone the appropriate number is about 10000).
The best Summary number there I could find for Shield is a value from late 2017, of 20000.
Presumably this new device has a better GPU. Is it 1.6x better? No idea.
So yeah, it looks like old Shield is 2x better (at least for GPU compute) than old aTV, but 1.6 worse than the newer 4K aTV.
New Shield numbers? I guess we'll see when it's in users' hands.
BenSkywalker - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
You've never heard of 3DMark?I know, I was being outrageous comparing the device people explicitly named that cost $149 to a Shield that cost $149, I should have assumed that they meant the other, higher end model that has a SoC that throttles to a comical degree in every test I can find in some other device, assume that it is a *vastly* superior version that doesn't drop 50% or more of its performance when used for an extended period of time *and* ignore that Shield had an upgraded SoC.... Apple fans have to be in amazing shape with the leaps and mental gymnastics it takes :)
name99 - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
You seem to think the point of a discussion in a forum is to win points.The adults of us here see the point of a discussion as to enlarge understanding.
BTW the life winner is the person who collects the most understanding, not the one who scores the most petty points.
BenSkywalker - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
The type of understanding where people flat out lie about performance?The type of understanding where people say one thing, get shown that isn't accurate then claim it is juvenile to state hard facts?
The type of understanding where people result to personal insults when even their wholly dishonest straw mans are exposed?
This is an article about the new Shield, some Apple fanboys jumped in spreading misinformation, I corrected it providing links including directly to Apple. This isn't about scoring points, it's about keeping dishonest trolls in check.
Alistair - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
and clearly you have no idea what you are talking about, but just to humor you:gfxbench: https://gfxbench.com/compare.jsp?benchmark=gfx40&a...
Manhattan 3.1.1 offscreen ipad vs shield, it is 40fps vs 25fps, i.e. the apple tv is about 60 percent faster than the Tegra X1.
BenSkywalker - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Manhattan extended test, 93.5 to 38.2, ouch, that is an embarrassing result.They seriously need massive help getting a remotely decent GPU done, don't they?
Alistair - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
You are a twit not worth talking to. I already rebutted every single one of your points. Put a clear link for you also. You might want to plant your flag and stand on something that is true, not a fanboy's juvenile fantasy.BenSkywalker - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
I understand your embarrassment, you open with an outrageous fairy tail about the A8's performance, try to double down on it, then swap to claim you really meant another entirely different piece of hardware in a different device then link benchmarks that show even after jumping through three different levels of strawmans the numbers you picked out show that it *still* loses for extended gaming sessions.In my first post I stated the 4k Apple TV was the first device that didn't get crushed by Shield after talking about how the Apple TV was laughable in comparison. It's almost like when there are two different devices I use the modifier so people know which one I'm talking about. I guess you could call that juvenile, it's what, a third grade lesson?
Alistair - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
Again, you twit, you responded to my comment. Since you can't read, my comment was "The Apple 4K TV's CPU is much stronger. And the GPU is good in the Shield, but is basically an iPhone 8 level GPU, also not any faster than the Apple TV which uses the A10X."Notice I said Apple TV 4k? And anyways you are just playing juvenile games pretending people are talking about the Apple TV non 4k because everything you said was wrong. Have a nice day.
BenSkywalker - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
Let's go back to your initial claim that started this entire discourse, you said the Shield had an A8 level SoC- back that up.If you can't, you're just a silly troll.
Alistair - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
Anyways sorry for the insults, having a crappy day. But I said Apple TV 4k from the beginning, and the only one that has said "A8" is you, none of my comments have referred to the A8.Katana - Thursday, October 31, 2019 - link
Sorry to say, but you've been the troll. Alistair clearly said from the beginning the ATV 4K with the A10X was faster, which it is.This refresh by Nvidia is pathetic, still pushing nearly five year old hardware for the same price. 25% faster than the original Shield from 2015? WTF?
Beaver M. - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
Oh please... The $35 Raspberry isnt even able to deal with 4K, much less with HDR or 60 FPS.Morbius007 - Monday, November 4, 2019 - link
Did you see the hardware is not the same, its a new chip, welcome to 2019.Fulljack - Thursday, October 31, 2019 - link
"Nintendo's Switch uses a weaker version of the SoC from the 2015 Shield."Before Nvidia release refreshed 2019 Shield TV, Nintendo actually release refreshed Switch based on the same Tegra X1+
https://www.anandtech.com/show/14651/nintendo-anno...
beginner99 - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Does roku now finally support hevc? Last time I checked shield tv was the only really versatile box. Albeit in these 4 years it's become near irrelevant as my tv can do all that stuff itself. It had it's place but know it either needs to be sub $100 or get new hardware and more features.phoenix_rizzen - Wednesday, November 6, 2019 - link
https://developer.roku.com/en-ca/docs/specs/stream...Appears to support it for awhile now, although it doesn't mention which specific hardware models.
Celos - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
"The way I see it, there's a fairly obvious market for Apple TV" which is essentially the same market for the Shield in the Android ecosystem. Given that most of the world doesn't use Apple devices, I'm kind of surprised this is somewhat baffling to you.As for the options you listed: Chromecast is essentially a stream receiver. It doesn't have a remote or built in UI, you use other devices to pick the content and then cast it to the Chromecast. It's a wonderful device (I own like 3), but it's a completely different experience from Android/Apple TV. Roku is another fine choice, but comes with its own ecosystem and Shield has some other uses, like game streaming, that Roku doesn't cater to (to my knowledge).
As far as being a gaming device, I have no clue, but I'd be surprised to learn it's doing any better than Apple TV.
Morbius007 - Monday, November 4, 2019 - link
I have 2x Apple TV boxes, the latest 4K compliant ones, they struggle to play most 4K files from my plex server, and sure they work with Streaming services but the remote sucks, its a pain to use, and they aren't cheap, at least they weren't when I got them about 18 months ago. $259.00 if I remember.. I just got a new Shield Pro and I love it compared to my Apple TV, the remote alone makes it a far more pleasant experience, add to that the friendly way Android pulls logins and Wi-fi settings from my phone, great. Picture quality on my 4K TV is beautiful and it is very snappy in terms of running with my other hardware.Additionally, over the last 18 months apple has basically let the apps store coast when it comes to updates to many apps we use, good enough seems to be the operational reality. I know its not up to apple to update the apps, but many of them are buggy and have problems with lock up and crashing. Android isn't perfect either but it seems that the Shield just runs smoother with the same apps.
I admit I am a bit concerned with security in all this but in terms of picture quality, as well as the benefit of being able to use my HD Home-run OTA gear from a central solution, it is a full range solution. Really like it.
JoeyJoJo123 - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
How much did Netflix pay to have its own dedicated big button and logo(tm)?*smiles and rubs hands*
webdoctors - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Seems the older models were cheaper since they came with the game controller?I have 2 Shields, one I got just last month. I hope I get the upscaling AI update, but regardless I've gotten years of updates from my first one. Hope other companies take note.
Most consumers that just stream netflix and dont have an amplifier or proper HD can get by with their crummy built in smart TV . This is for folks that want ATMOS and HDR and a variety of streaming apps (i.e. like Disney+ which you don't get on your Vizio TV streaming platform).
eastcoast_pete - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
NVIDIA, you're lazy bums! What, only a die shrink, and not even an attempt at a more recent BIG ARM core? Not even trying anymore!MadDuffy - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Correction: SHIELD TV Pro (2019) now lacks micro sd card slot.wrkingclass_hero - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Amazing how virtually no progress has been made in the last 4 years. Several steps back too.Alistair - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Party like it is 2014, Note 4 style, with the nVidia Shield 2019.Beaver M. - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
What do you want?8K120 support? A CPU that can emulate a i9-9900K PC? A GPU as fast as a 2080 Ti?
Please... this is still the best streaming multimedia player you can get. And even for enthusiasts it offers pretty much everything.
BenSkywalker - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
I miss the IR functionality, I still have a launch Shield I use hooked up to my main AV setup and my Harmony Ultimate works with it, but won't with newer versions(17 or 19). Yes, that does matter considering my remote control costs more then a new Shield Pro.Yes I can use the Shield remote or controller, my phone or Google Home but I like one remote for everything.
Yojimbo - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
It's cheaper and much smaller. It also has a much more mature platform than the raw device that one was paying for 4 years ago. The target market of the offering has shifted as NVIDIA has learned who the market is. It now comes with a remote instead of a controller, and the remote is supposedly improved over the original remote one had to pay extra for in 2015. They were probably hoping to add value with game sales in some way or another at the time of their 2015 launch. The only thing that matters as far as the price is how does the current device compare to the current competition at its current price point.Alistair - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
I really can't stand the hyping. Here's the first video with benchmarks. 2-15 percent faster, never 25 percent (memory bandwidth is too limited unlike with the Tegra X2?)2 percent faster for gfxbench Manhattan. 3 percent for T-rex. Enjoy the video:
https://youtu.be/AYN4LUwXMxw?t=410
Beaver M. - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
But why does it really have to be faster anyway?The old one was fast enough already to display 4K60 HDR content without hiccups.
We all know that a manufacturers claim about performance is always overdone. They always just select one single thing where they can achieve the biggest numbers.
I am just happy that I can actually get the best multi media streaming player for $150 now instead of 200, because I need 2 of them.
name99 - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
The "faster" question has to do with whether there is a viable gamer community around this (and whether such a community can form around the Apple TV).Sure, if your only use case is displaying content, and that content is decoded in real time by the box, that's fast enough! That's certainly my situation.
Of course there's a slippery slope of additional functionality...
Most obvious is if you want to add Picture in Picture and now need two decoders (or the decoder to be twice as fast; or you have to provide a horrible user experience where some pairs of streams can support PiP, but not others.
But then you can start adding things like supporting multi-person Video Chat (think family chat with multiple separated family members on Christmas Day or Thanksgiving day), and now we need even more stream decoders...
(Nobody, as far as I know, really supports something like the above yet. You can fake it with Apple using AirPlay, likewise I assume on Android, but you still have to use the phone camera.
The next step in usability is camera support on these media console devices, but that's a tricky issue of where you place the camera... I think it's coming, likely with a separate wireless camera, but we'll see.
And once you have a camera, you make available a whole lot of "body motion" games likes Wii and DDR. But you now need a kick-ass image processing engine and NPU to extract that body motion from the video stream. And then you want to do that for two bodies...
And that doesn't just have to be for games. One could imagine this sort of thing being part of workout apps [make sure you do the movements correctly] or health apps [keep old people moving, physical therapy].)
And so it goes.
GreenReaper - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
You know what *does* use VP9.2 and AV1? YouTube. I agree it would have been a push to put the latter in it but they're goibg to need to step up and the reduced prices kinda reflect that.No question, they *are* reduced, and the new form factor is more convenient, but personally if I was paying for one at all, I'd pay the $50 more for the capacity and expandability of the Pro.
Beaver M. - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
Well, AV1 support might come later, since its not really used much yet anyway.And then VP9.2 will stop being used, too.
quorm - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
This is unlikely. New hardware would be needed for AV1 decode. The main reason they did this refresh is so that they do not have to continue making this chip on two different process nodes. This is a tiny market relative to the Nintendo switch. Shield is overpriced, but still the best device in its class.Beaver M. - Thursday, October 31, 2019 - link
Why would new hardware be needed? Phones and PCs didnt need new hardware to support it. Only software patches.KillerFry - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
Woah!Is there a way to confirm what I saw a reviewer mention (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpOVxKtM-Nc) that the $149.99 (non-Pro version) is NOT 64-bit enabled and only works with 32-bit apps?
quorm - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
That sounds really unlikely and dumb as hell if true.Beaver M. - Thursday, October 31, 2019 - link
Looks like its true.Wow, Nvidia... just wow...
Bedazoid - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
I want to see some benchmarks to prove it is faster one youtuber already posted some interesting results the 2017 and 2019 version both score the same. So now we get 1 less remote no hdmi cable for more then the 2017 is going for right now. Software has changed AI but I bet it can be ported over with no issue. Please reviewers benchmark the devices nvidia is playing us again.atomt - Saturday, November 2, 2019 - link
Article says Bluetooth 5.0 but table lists 4.1klosz007 - Tuesday, November 5, 2019 - link
Standard version looks like a minor upgrade and step back (at the same time) versus previous Standard version.Pro version looks like a minor upgrade over previous Standard version.
Previous Pro version has no continuation.
Addition of Dolby Vision is a welcome upgrade for many (but not for me since I have a Samsung QLED TV, Samsung does not like/support Dolby Vision, they promote own HDR10+ standard).
Many would like to see addition of Dolby Vision for older Shield devices too but let's be realistic, due to licensing costs these older devices will not receive that.
From my point of view the biggest limitation of previous generation was lack of VP9.2 support 'due to hardware limitations' of X1 chip i.e it couldn't play YouTube HDR videos. Now I'm reading that this new generation does not have VP9.2 support either ! I would like to hear whether this is again not hardware-supported by updated X1+ chip (I'm guessing so) or it wasn't added yet. Certainly I'm not going to upgrade upgrade to this new model until VP9.2 is added... Otherwise it is no-upgrade for me (my TV does not support Dolby Vision, I don't need Dolby Atmos).