- May 13, 2015
- 7
- 0
- 36
For years I've been using my iMac as an HTPC connecting it to my Sony-TV via HDMI and moving Chrome windows with video streams into this extended desktop. I decided that I want a dedicated mini HTPC to be placed next my Sony-TV with the following criteria:
My first choice for a while was a i3 Broadwell NUC with Windows. This alternative would cost around 450 dollars (8Gb of RAM, 128Gb M.2 SSD etc.). However, while this mini PC would enable to playback different formats and use different apps, it might be an overkill considering lesser PCs could handle the job of streaming 1080p flash video from flash video websites.
I then arrived to choosing an Asus Chromebox. Many rave about these Chromeboxes and how their native OS (as well as OpenElec/Kodi) runs with the base model (Haswell Celeron 2955U, 2Gb of RAM) almost faster than Windows-desktops that cost 5x as much. Chrome OS is automated concerning updates and virus-protection so it's certainly seems the easiest OS there is. Moreover, it suits my needs as the whole point is to use the Chrome-browser. However, apart from flash, it does have limited support concerning formats (no Silverlight, Java etc.) which I can live with. I could get the Celeron-version of Asus Chromebox for 200 dollars and the i3-version with 4Gb of RAM for around 350 dollars (due to my location I have to pay a bit more).
I would now value any experience and/or input concerning this issue. I guess my first question is that am I on the right track choosing Chromebox instead of NUC (not wanting to pay for an overkill). My second question would be if choosing the i3-model with 2Gbs more RAM would be a better choice than choosing the Celeron-version (which people rarely say has any type of lag).
- Budget: 150-450 dollars (the less the better but I will still be using it in 2019 so the performance can not be "just barely sufficent")
- Small, quiet and energy-efficient
- Needs to handle streaming flash without lag (quality is mostly SD but sometimes 1080p)
- The OS needs to be relatively light and simple to use (I do not want to type terminal commands as I have enough of that with other devices)
My first choice for a while was a i3 Broadwell NUC with Windows. This alternative would cost around 450 dollars (8Gb of RAM, 128Gb M.2 SSD etc.). However, while this mini PC would enable to playback different formats and use different apps, it might be an overkill considering lesser PCs could handle the job of streaming 1080p flash video from flash video websites.
I then arrived to choosing an Asus Chromebox. Many rave about these Chromeboxes and how their native OS (as well as OpenElec/Kodi) runs with the base model (Haswell Celeron 2955U, 2Gb of RAM) almost faster than Windows-desktops that cost 5x as much. Chrome OS is automated concerning updates and virus-protection so it's certainly seems the easiest OS there is. Moreover, it suits my needs as the whole point is to use the Chrome-browser. However, apart from flash, it does have limited support concerning formats (no Silverlight, Java etc.) which I can live with. I could get the Celeron-version of Asus Chromebox for 200 dollars and the i3-version with 4Gb of RAM for around 350 dollars (due to my location I have to pay a bit more).
I would now value any experience and/or input concerning this issue. I guess my first question is that am I on the right track choosing Chromebox instead of NUC (not wanting to pay for an overkill). My second question would be if choosing the i3-model with 2Gbs more RAM would be a better choice than choosing the Celeron-version (which people rarely say has any type of lag).