Hello everybody
The picture from my X-9 goes through a new fully digital AVR Pioneer SC LX 56 (European name) which uses a Marvell Q-deo processor for de-interlacing and scaling of any available analog or digital format to a latest Panasonic (3D) Projector PT-AT 5000. But, as I don't have any possibility for a comparison with other processors, I would like to ask if anybody here compared it with some pre-owned expensive stuff like Cristalio II or similar.
Is it better?
Greets, s.

Your first answer lie in whether it really uses qdeo for deinterlacing or not. When qdeo is mentioned it is often used for noise reduction and enhancement. It is usually another soc (system on chip) that does deinterlacing and scaling upto 1080p.
For example onkyo and yamaha use hqv vida for deinterlacing and scaling upto 1080p then qdeo for scaling to 4k and noise reduction.
Oppo digital use mediatek chip for deinterlacing and scaling. Qdeo for noise reduction/enhancing.

As for vs. Faroudja, it should be at least of its equal in deinterlacing in general. As for other newer video processors it wont even come close. Dvdo vp30 or newer, crystalio ii, lumagen offee much more than what an avr can do with picture

Thank you, substance.
During my internet research I found no information of other scaling / deinterlacing units in SC lx 56. It seems, Q-deo alone is responsible for everything together (deinterlacing, scaling and many other adjustable functions) and people are most impressed with the results - mostly concerning streaming, low res clips and DVD but nothing about LD. I must admit, the picture is really nice, harmonic, balanced and detailed in general, but LD picture is kind of soft, and I'm talking about Leterbox on approx 1,5 meter wide. However, Man in black and Starship Troopers look almost like a DVD. Thelma & Louise looks like some better VHS and Basic Instinct (the red one) looks much too soft. One can choose a resolution output from "native", "auto" (whatever. what does that mean?) , 576p, 720p, 1080 i , 1080p or 1080p/24 which gives best results in picture stability and detail. But if one corrects "detail" in Q-deo, the result is kind of ugly - Panasonic beamer has much better "detail clarity" and "sharpness" function. I also noticed, and I'm sorry to put it like that for all who like "video essentials" and similar approach - for LD's there is simple no parameter which can adjust the picture for all LD's in full. When I put the next movie in LD player, adjusting starts all over again and every LD has different problems, mostly depending where and when a film was transfered onto LD. But, it's nice to play with the picture; that's the part of this hobby.
I wonder if anything can top a seem-to-be new, most modern, versatile and celebrated processor today and that's why I write. If somebody read something about similar topic somewhere else, I would be very glad if one could post a link. I am sure there are lots of people like me who just bought some new piece of equipment and are wondering how it compares with old , much more expensive stuff which maybe isn't on it's technological peak any more. I repeat, this is only assumption - most of all I would like to hear from a person who has both Faroudja Cristallio II and Q-deo alone to write a detailed review of a comparison. Is there such a person around here?
Here's a link to official site:
http://www.marvell.com/digital-entertainment/qdeo/
There you can find links to reviews to all AVR's which have it inside for different and similar purposes.
Greets, s.

Maybe I have to refolmulate my question. Is comparing Qdeo with Crystalio II or Lumagen like comparing Aluminium with Gold ?

I got Crystalio II and finally could compare its Faroudja, it's VXP Gennom, Pioneer AVR's Marvell Q-deo and Panasonic projector's Reon.

The idea of Marvell'S Q-deo, as they advertise it, was to make a VP for every possible videoformat ever. It does a great job with HD though, also maybe with youtube streams and such as well. Q-deo for LD is no-go for de-interlacing: there are lot of artefacts which appear or not appear, depending on weather outside . 1080p/24 mode gives the better detail of all other resolutions but is completely unstable (a problem with recognising LD-signal for clean processing) and not even comparable with detail and stability of VXP Gennom. I would have like to have gotten this analisys before from someone else, but now I give it here for everybody else myself. Unstable means that the picture doesn't appear always steady. Sometimes parts of the picture shake until they get still, and sometimes there are heavy flickering de-interlacing-artefacts for a second, until they disappear. One may notice a process of computing of every new cut - it's not fast enough, not for LD. Also it has problems with CC - they shake a lot.
In 1080p - mode everything's steady but much less detailed, much softer.
Q-deo noise reduction modes are great, though. They are very subtle graded and do very sensitive and precise job. If I use YNR on VXP gennom sourced 1080/24 picture, I get the most enjoyable LD-picture.

Faroudja does a clean job but compared to VXP it looks soft and sort of outdated, on a big screeen at least. It's a little bit too soft and colors are washed like in cinemas of the 70's - yellow and brown tones rule there. But it's still more watchable then Q-deo's 1080p - mode. Maybe Faroudja is the one for people who like so called "movie-like quality", but only in really old-fashioned way. It reminds on some Sergio Leone's blurred sequences and "Bilitis" erotica.

Reon: I LD-tested for PT-AE's combing, Reon's de-interlacing and scaling when I bought it in my projector. It's no go for LD at all - no detail at all. S-Video was better, but still bad. It's just not made for SD.

TOP FROM BEST TO WORST FOR LD:

1. VXP GENNOM
2. FAROUDJA
3. Q-DEO
4. REON

BEST COMBINATION:
CRYSTALIO's 2D/3D Comb filter - VXP GENNOM for de-interlacing and scaling - Q-DEO for YNR : clean, detailed and just beautiful LD-picture.

Testing done from composite output of HLD-X9, except additional s-video for PT-AE reon

Faroudja has a green tint. You can fix this if you have a colormeter or spectrometer. Faroudja also failed a couple more deinterlacing test than vxp. I use real life test patterns from movies. Vxp has no colorshift issue and passes more tests on deinterlacing(some occasions faroudja did better though). Vxp looks more digitized comparing to faroudja. Faroudja noise reduction is also better but it only works when you enable faroudja deinterlacing.

I have to reconsider my sentiment about Faroudja. It's sub-menu, for example "true life" - functions are really stunning... i didn't know that it makes so much difference when tweaking with it. I'll be posting more about it, but I'm sure, they're more experienced people here who may be willing to write something long or short about it...