Celeron 430 enough for HTPC?

[EarthwormJim]

I was just wondering if anyone has any experience running a Celeron 430 in a HTPC. I'm putting together a HTPC with an m-itx board and Celeron 430's are dirt cheap, not to mention they have a low TDP.

I do have an ATI 4350 for hardware H.264 acceleration, so provided I have that video card (and acceleration enabled with ffdshow), can a Celeron 430 keep up with running XBMC or other media center software?

All this computer needs to do is play 1080p HD video streamed over my network.

 

[lopri]

I could be wrong but video card off-loading is for the local display? I don't know if that can be carried over network. A typical scenario of HD streaming over the network is:

1) Decode on server -> network transfer -> some sort of receiver -> display
2) Raw data from the server -> network transfer -> decode from a media player (such as PS3, XBox, or a HTPC) -> display

For 2) all you need is a gigabit connection. The PC will send the data and the media player will do the decoding. I think this is the most desirable way but probably most limited (except the client is a PC).

For 1) you need a decent CPU. A quad-core is definitely preferable. I don't know if this can be done using GPU. I haven't paid much attention to recent development so maybe someone else can chime in. I'm curious about it as well. But what you're thinking of building (Celeron + 4350) is likely to be at the receiving end (not sending).

 

[EarthwormJim]

I could be wrong but video card off-loading is for the local display? I don't know if that can be carried over network. A typical scenario of HD streaming over the network is:

1) Decode on server -> network transfer -> some sort of receiver -> display
2) Raw data from the server -> network transfer -> decode from a media player (such as PS3, XBox, or a HTPC) -> display

For 2) all you need is a gigabit connection. The PC will send the data and the media player will do the decoding. I think this is the most desirable way but probably most limited.

For 1) you need a decent CPU. A quad-core is definitely preferable. I don't know if this can be done using GPU. I haven't paid much attention to recent development so maybe someone else can chime in. I'm curious about it as well.

That's not how it works. The remote content is treated as it if exists on the HTPC's own hard drive (mapped network locations). To the decoder, there's no difference.

The computer with the video files actually on it is just acting as an NAS. All the decoding is done on the HTPC.

Maybe streamed isn't the right word that I should have used?

 

[lopri]

OK, so the HTPC you're building will be a client, correct?

 

[EarthwormJim]

OK, so the HTPC you're building will be a client, correct?

Yes that's correct.

I'll probably be using 802.11g, however if it can't keep up with 15mbps videos (even with caching by XBMC) I'll use 802.11n.

Right now though I just want to make sure that a single core celeron 430 is fast enough coupled with hardware decoding. I do appreciate your input so far though

 

[lopri]

Well, then I'd say it'll depend on the content. As long as 4350 does decoding, Celly should have no problem feeding it. I'm guessing that it's still not going to be the smoothest experience, though, because the OS and the front-end software are still running in the background and doing there things. And simple things like rewinding/fast-forwarding might not be as smooth.

I really have no idea because I have never used that CPU. Sorry for not being of help here, hopefully someone with experience may chime in.

 

[ElFenix]

unless you've got a 775 board laying about i'd look hard at a dual core athlon setup rather than that single core celeron.

 

[kornphlake]

unless you've got a 775 board laying about i'd look hard at a dual core athlon setup rather than that single core celeron.

With a 785g or better chipset you wouldn't likely need a discrete video card, unless you want 7.1 audio over hdmi.

 

[EarthwormJim]

unless you've got a 775 board laying about i'd look hard at a dual core athlon setup rather than that single core celeron.

With a 785g or better chipset you wouldn't likely need a discrete video card, unless you want 7.1 audio over hdmi.

I got the 775 board for free (zotac m-itx) and I already have the 4350 (low profile too).

I looked a little bit more online of the Celeron VS Athlon 64's. It's actually pretty close to an Athlon 64 3500+ (single core), which I was just using a couple of weeks ago as a htpc ( stock cooler is too loud, full atx 939 board is too big).

Guess I answered my own question with just a google search .

 

[jaqie]

As for cpu power and 1080p... I had a laptop with an athlon64 2GHz single core socket 754 (single channel DDR1) and it could *BARELY* keep up with decoding 720p... that was without any real hardware assist from the gpu. My dual core athlon64 x2 2GHz socket 939 manchester has no problem at all decoding 1080p with hardware assist, it stumbles a bit without (geforce 6100 integrated on mobo stealing a good bit of the ram bandwidth from the CPU!, an x16 pcie slot I put a better card in, it ran fine with). That should give you a little bit of a clue as to what kind of hardware speed is needed for 1080p watching.

 

[Blastman]

Personally, I would get the Celeron E3300 (2.5) over the 430. The 3300 is a .45nm Wolfdale core compared to the 430 which is the 0.65 Conroe and clocked at only 1.8. The 3300 should use less power and will be substantially faster.

According to Newegg the 3300 is only $11 more (52 vs 41). The 3300's will overclock to 3.0 or 3.3Ghz easy if you need some extra speed for encoding.

 

[jaqie]

I actually have a wolfdale E3200 as my main gaming computer CPU right now, and you are completely right, they are awesome CPUs. I've got mine at 1333x10.5 default volts oem hsf and it never gets to 60c in my old antec tower. IIRC the E3200 can be had for $50 shipped right now, if not less.

I had thought this person already had the CPU in question. >.>

 

[Zap]

Personally, I would get the Celeron E3300 (2.5) over the 430.

This is what I would do as well, or even as high as a Pentium Dual Core E5300 or something like that. I think Micro Center sells them for $49.99. I'm not sure you need the extra performance, but if the cost difference is only $10-15 I'd say to do it because you never know if some day you go to higher bit rates or something and suddenly your CPU chokes. Do shop around because sometimes you can find deals at eWiz or even Fry's. I picked up a Celeron E3300 bundled with an MSI motherboard for around $65 out the door BEFORE a rebate. I can sell the motherboard for $25 and be money ahead.

 

[Blastman]

This is what I would do as well, or even as high as a Pentium Dual Core E5300 or something like that.

I was thinking along the same lines -- the Celeron 3300 is the minimum he should even be looking at.

The Celeron 430 the OP is looking at is a single core processor and a complete dog as far as performance goes. If we take a look at the YouTube 1080p video playback benches at xbit. The Celeron 450 (2.2, a faster 430) literally choked on the video playback of the 1080p video with 2.8fps. You will need at a minimum the dual core Celeron 3300 to get 1080p playback without GPU acceleration. The Pentium E5300/5400 (for a few dollars more) would even be a preferable option to the Celeron 3300 as Zap suggested.

 

[EarthwormJim]

I was thinking along the same lines -- the Celeron 3300 is the minimum he should even be looking at.

That the Celeron 430 the OP is looking at is a single core processor and a complete dog as far as performance goes. If we take a look at the YouTube 1080p video playback benches at xbit. The Celeron 450 (2.2, a faster 430) literally choked on the video playback of the 1080p video with 2.8fps. You will need at a minimum the dual core Celeron 3300 to get 1080p playback without GPU acceleration. The Pentium E5300/5400 (for a few dollars more) would even be a preferable option to the Celeron 3300 as Zap suggested.

But the point is I have GPU acceleration (including for flash). I can pick up a Celeron 430 second hand for $15. Everything else on the computer (besides the GPU) has been free. Just trying to keep this as cheap as possible.

 

[happy medium]

The Celeron will do 2.8 with the stock cooler, pair it with your 4350, you should be good to go.
I googled the subject and it seems others have done it.

 

[happy medium]

I was thinking along the same lines -- the Celeron 3300 is the minimum he should even be looking at.

That the Celeron 430 the OP is looking at is a single core processor and a complete dog as far as performance goes. If we take a look at the YouTube 1080p video playback benches at xbit. The Celeron 450 (2.2, a faster 430) literally choked on the video playback of the 1080p video with 2.8fps. You will need at a minimum the dual core Celeron 3300 to get 1080p playback without GPU acceleration. The Pentium E5300/5400 (for a few dollars more) would even be a preferable option to the Celeron 3300 as Zap suggested.

I got this from the same acticle.............

At the same time, according to the results of this express test, Flash Player 10.1 is way better optimized for AMD graphics: the CPU utilization is minimal in systems built with AMD components. However, despite 90% CPU utilization HD video will be played pretty smoothly even on Celeron 460."


A Celeron 460 is 2.4ghz. So like I said a Celeron @ 2.8 should play fine.
Overclock the 430.

 

[happy medium]

DP sorry

 

[heyheybooboo]

< -----


Another vote to go for it (with hardware acceleration)




--