Processor recs for Windows 7 desktop/media center?

[decrescendo]

I have an x2-3800 system sitting in my closet that I will not use because it idles at 100 watts.

How does one go about measuring power consumption?

I should fire up that 4200+ machine and see.

 

[Phynaz]

Do you think an i5 would do the trick if functioning as an HTPC?

No, it's not about the CPU, it's about the video.

You could also pair the i3 with a low end ATI card, like an HD 5450 for the same results.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

The Core i3 and it's integrated video can play back 1080p fine.

 

[nismotigerwvu]

Well, I currently have a Windows XP desktop machine with an AMD Athlon X2 4200+ processor in it. I built it in the summer of 2006.

The motherboard is having some grounding issues that may or may not be based on the power supply.

However, I think the processor is just fine. You think that processor would be able to push or play 1080P video with a good amount of RAM (4+ GB) in Windows 7?

As long as you have dxva compliant content (almost everything) and a suitable card ( for example http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814121377) your cpu utilization will be in the teens. Without help, the multithreaded decoder in ffdshow will get you through, but it miiiight drop a frame or two in high bitrate 1080p action scenes (A high bitrate rip I made of district 9 had a few choppy moments before I upgraded to a modern gpu. As mentioned, power draw will be much higher than an E-350, but if it is a system to have already it seems like a nice use for it.

 

[nismotigerwvu]

How does one go about measuring power consumption?

I should fire up that 4200+ machine and see.

With a kill-a-watt (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-001-_-Product)

 

[sm625]

Well, I currently have a Windows XP desktop machine with an AMD Athlon X2 4200+ processor in it. I built it in the summer of 2006.

The motherboard is having some grounding issues that may or may not be based on the power supply.

However, I think the processor is just fine. You think that processor would be able to push or play 1080P video with a good amount of RAM (4+ GB) in Windows 7?

Its funny I have that exact cpu running on a windows 7 machine. Mine is a 65nm chip and I overclock it to 2.6GHz. It still stutters when windows 7 is doing god knows what in the background. This is with standard def video. 1080p is handled by the chipset but I still think it is going to stutter on occasion because windoze likes to do stuff in the background.

 

[Phynaz]

The Core i3 and it's integrated video can play back 1080p fine.

Except for the 24fps issue.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

Except for the 24fps issue.

It's a non issue. It's something for videophiles to bitch about.
Honestly, 1 frame every 40 seconds isn't going to kill you or even be noticeable for 99% of people. I hear about people complaining about it but if you notice it more than as a dropped frame something else is happening causing a bigger than 1 frame drop.

 

[Tuna-Fish]

It's a non issue. It's something for videophiles to bitch about.
Honestly, 1 frame every 40 seconds isn't going to kill you or even be noticeable for 99% of people. I hear about people complaining about it but if you notice it more than as a dropped frame something else is happening causing a bigger than 1 frame drop.

Umm what? It's very clearly visible in any smooth pans. And very annoying.

 

[Phynaz]

Yep, the jerk it causes in playback is distracting.

 

[decrescendo]

Except for the 24fps issue.

what issue is that exactly?

 

[Phynaz]

Movies - in the US at least - are stored on disc at 23.976 frames per second. Intel's GPU's display this at 24fps.

So, once every 40 seconds the playback stops for an instant (1/24 of a second to be exact) to get everything back in sync again.

 

[Zap]

Do you think an i5 would do the trick if functioning as an HTPC?

Sandy Bridge CPUs have one of two IGP, HD 2000 and HD 3000. Neither will "properly" do that 23.X Hz refresh or whatever that home theater aficionados like to bicker about. Actually, I think no Intel IGP ever made supported that.

As for everything else asked of an HTPC, it should work.

Rather, get a Core i3 2100. Don't bother with the T version. The idle is the same, so the only time the normal version will ever draw more power is when you are loading it up pretty severely, like when you are transcoding videos. However, that's when you want the extra performance. Even though they are both "2100" CPUs, the "T" version is lower MHz to get the TDP capped at a lower wattage. SPCR's review said of the Core i3 2100T:

With a typical workload, it consumes about 5W less than the i3-2100, but the difference at idle is too small to count. If you're going to build a system that's going to idle mostly, there's really no advantage.

Idle = whenever you aren't pushing CPU more than a couple percent. I pretty much consider file serving, torrenting and web browsing to be idle.

I'd say the Core i3 2100 would be fairly ideal. It has pretty much as low idle power draw as anything out there, but has the oomph to be more like a higher end CPU when the conditions call for it (like video encoding/transcoding) plus is reasonably priced with cheap motherboards available (as well as expensive ones) and the CPU costing around $125 (or $99 at Micro Center). Any AMD Athlon II/Phenom II uses much more power. Anything Intel not socket 1155 is not worth getting at this point. E-350 doesn't get much better on power draw and can't compete in performance. Atom isn't any better than E-350 in... anything?

A big letdown with these review sites is that they never tell us how these things run if you completely remove the fan. Because ideally you dont want any fans running.

No. Just... no. Sheesh. I should abuse my admin powers and put up a sticky in Cases & Cooling that says, "don't do all passive."

Fact: You pretty much need airflow. However little, you need airflow to keep a computer using normal desktop components from overheating. Yes, even an Atom CPU.

Now, yes there are examples of passive systems out there, but they use custom chassis that act as big heatsinks, with heatpipes running to them from the CPU and other hot spots. Of course you can just go huge with the heatsink, but are you going to stick it all in a case? If so, you will need to force air through the case, because it ain't gonna move through it on its own since I can't recall seeing any cases that are set up to passively cool internal components. If you want to see how it can work I would suggest you start looking inside stereo/home theater receivers. See how the whole top is a vent, and how some of them allow air from the bottom. Also, see how huge the heatsink is and how widely spread the fins are.

 

[decrescendo]

Sandy Bridge CPUs have one of two IGP, HD 2000 and HD 3000. Neither will "properly" do that 23.X Hz refresh or whatever that home theater aficionados like to bicker about. Actually, I think no Intel IGP ever made supported that.

As for everything else asked of an HTPC, it should work.

Rather, get a Core i3 2100. Don't bother with the T version. The idle is the same, so the only time the normal version will ever draw more power is when you are loading it up pretty severely, like when you are transcoding videos. However, that's when you want the extra performance. Even though they are both "2100" CPUs, the "T" version is lower MHz to get the TDP capped at a lower wattage. SPCR's review said of the Core i3 2100T:


Idle = whenever you aren't pushing CPU more than a couple percent. I pretty much consider file serving, torrenting and web browsing to be idle.

I'd say the Core i3 2100 would be fairly ideal. It has pretty much as low idle power draw as anything out there, but has the oomph to be more like a higher end CPU when the conditions call for it (like video encoding/transcoding) plus is reasonably priced with cheap motherboards available (as well as expensive ones) and the CPU costing around $125 (or $99 at Micro Center). Any AMD Athlon II/Phenom II uses much more power. Anything Intel not socket 1155 is not worth getting at this point. E-350 doesn't get much better on power draw and can't compete in performance. Atom isn't any better than E-350 in... anything?



No. Just... no. Sheesh. I should abuse my admin powers and put up a sticky in Cases & Cooling that says, "don't do all passive."

Fact: You pretty much need airflow. However little, you need airflow to keep a computer using normal desktop components from overheating. Yes, even an Atom CPU.

Now, yes there are examples of passive systems out there, but they use custom chassis that act as big heatsinks, with heatpipes running to them from the CPU and other hot spots. Of course you can just go huge with the heatsink, but are you going to stick it all in a case? If so, you will need to force air through the case, because it ain't gonna move through it on its own since I can't recall seeing any cases that are set up to passively cool internal components. If you want to see how it can work I would suggest you start looking inside stereo/home theater receivers. See how the whole top is a vent, and how some of them allow air from the bottom. Also, see how huge the heatsink is and how widely spread the fins are.

Zap, thanks so much for this very informative post. I really appreciate the help.

 

[sm625]

I have a sempron 140 that I have underclocked and undervolted and it surfs the web and plays youtube videos just fine. I can barely even tell that it is underclocked. It runs just fine without a fan. And this is the stock heatsink of a $30 chip. It is tiny. I dont see how you can seriosuly make the claim that with a decent heatsink, you shouldnt be able to do all the HTPC stuff you'd need to do without any fans. I dont have a problem with using a large tower from 1998, space isnt that much of a concern. Noise is.

 

[decrescendo]

Movies - in the US at least - are stored on disc at 23.976 frames per second. Intel's GPU's display this at 24fps.

So, once every 40 seconds the playback stops for an instant (1/24 of a second to be exact) to get everything back in sync again.

so do AMD processors have this issue?

 

[aigomorla]

I'm about to build a Windows 7 64-bit machine to do the following:

1. store ~4TB of mp3s, movies, photos, and documents
2. stream audio to speakers connected to Win7 laptop or Squeezebox
3. stream 1080p video to an HTPC-connected TV
4. be constantly running uTorrent
5. ability to rip optical discs (Blu-Ray, DVD)
6. function as backup computer in case laptop breaks
7. store backup image of laptop

Additional attributes:
8. Will sit in a corner of my living room or bedroom without being connected to a keyboard or monitor
9. The data on it will probably be backed up to some sort of NAS or set of USB drives

Wrong OS...

If your going 64-Bit... u really want windows server 2008 R2 or WHS 2011
If your going 32-Bit... Windows 2008 Enterprise

As it will meet what ur asking for in that box a lot better then a bloated w7 ultimate.

 

[Phynaz]

so do AMD processors have this issue?

The first AMD processor with built in graphics isn't due for two weeks yet (code name Llano), so we don't know 100% yet.

That said, I'd be I'd be shocked it it did have the issue, as AMD makes some HTPC video cards.

That's why I said if you are looking at home theater PC then you should wait. If you want a streaming machine then go with the i3 system.

 

[Zap]

The first AMD processor with built in graphics isn't due for two weeks yet (code name Llano), so we don't know 100% yet.

AMD's first APU is Zacate/Brazos, which came out a few months ago. It is the E-350 which often gets mentioned. It has built-in graphics (Radeon 6310 with 80 cores). IIRC it did have some HTPC specific issues, but AFAIK they were some driver issue and they do play the 23.x framerate.

 

[Phynaz]

AMD's first APU is Zacate/Brazos, which came out a few months ago. It is the E-350 which often gets mentioned. It has built-in graphics (Radeon 6310 with 80 cores). IIRC it did have some HTPC specific issues, but AFAIK they were some driver issue and they do play the 23.x framerate.

Derp. How did I forget that? Guess I was thinking desktop cpu's.

Thanks Zap.

 

[mrcmtl]

If you have enough budget then the low power i3 would probably be your best buy. If you're on a tight budget, then go for the E-350. I just built a machine around that for 300$ total.

 

[decrescendo]

If you have enough budget then the low power i3 would probably be your best buy. If you're on a tight budget, then go for the E-350. I just built a machine around that for 300$ total.

I seem to have found the E-350 review on this site but does anyone have a link to the proper i3 review?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4134/the-brazos-review-amds-e350-supplants-ion-for-miniitx/

 

[sm625]

Some Pentium G620 benches: http://translate.google.com/transla...&u=http://news.mydrivers.com/1/193/193434.htm

Specifically I'd most likely buy this combo for $160:
http://www.directron.com/msigh61combo1.html?gsear=1 I would upgrade the RAM slightly just to make sure I'm actually getting 2x2GB sticks. It isnt exactly clear on that point.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

Umm what? It's very clearly visible in any smooth pans. And very annoying.

Don't blame intel then. Their IGP is outputting at 24fps which is what movies are shot in now. Blame Sony for making BluRay backwards compatible with older TVs that couldn't do true 24fps or 60hz. Instead they fell back to the archaic 23.976 frames per second and 59.94hz (I think thats the right rate) that was put in place in the 50's with the advent of broadcast color TV.

If you output to a good modern TV it won't have these problems.

I guess that since I was used to watching DVD's on my computer in the days of needing the Creative Dxr2 decoder cards, that those made me immune to noticing judders. lol

 

[decrescendo]

Thanks for the help, everyone. I think I'm going to buy an i3-2100.

Now, to find a motherboard...