|
Maluco Marinero posted:HTPC bulding Firstly, while some motherboards have onboard video with HDMI output, the onboard video ain't gonna really help with rendering high def content. Seeing as the requirements sorta go hand-in-hand why bother (especially when HDMI-output equipped boards seem to attract a price premium you can buy a vidcard with)? Also remember you want analogue outputs, some HDMI output motherboards have onboard video that allow it, but again, even the cheapest crappiest vidcard is going to be a lot better than all but the best of onboard video. Speaking of crappy video cards, with a low profile case, that's what you're likely to be restricted to, there are small form factor 8500gt's around now but they're hard to come by. Point is, you're best off in my opinion getting a cheap card, cheap motherboard, and using the money saved on a decent enough CPU to decode high def content without hardware assistance. And atleast if you do it this way you don't have to stuff around trying to figure out the right set of playing software, codecs, and drivers that will allow you to even use hardware acceleration in the first place. And you will have a nice CPU for doing other tasks (like encoding video and audio files, something I find myself using my HTPC for a lot, which I guess shouldn't surprise me because that's where all my media is stored). Anyway here are the specs of mine: - Antec Minuet 300 (smaller than all the HTPC specific cases that were around at the time, and fairly cheap too. They make the 350 now, which hopefully has more than 1 sata power connector) - Gigabyte GA-945GCM-S2L (was cheapest mobo with an Intel chipset at the time, it has onboard video which I don't use, but all micro-atx board seem to have some sort of onboard) - 2 gb ram - Intel E2200 (just enough to decode most high def, or so I hear, if I find it's a bit slow, it overclocks easily) - 8400gs (for games its crap, slower than a 6600gt, has the outputs I want though, but it's TV-out aint best, ATI fairs better in this area I hear) - 750gb+250gb sata harddrives (250 will soon be replaced by another 750)
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2008 03:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 16:36 |
|
|
Fuzz1111 posted:
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2008 03:10
|
|
|
Does anyone have any suggestions for a media center package for Linux? I'm trying Mythbuntu right now and... well, I'm not really feeling it. I don't use any DVR functionality, just playing back local files. The main thing I don't like about MythTV is that there doesn't seem to be any decent OSD while playing local files.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2008 10:03
|
|
|
Kreez posted:I'm pretty sure you're completely wrong on this. The Intel G35 chipset can handle pretty much anything with it's onboard video. The G45 is coming out soon too I think, which should be even better. The same goes for AMD's 780g chipset and Nvidia's 8200/8300 chipset.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2008 13:31
|
|
|
Ok, I made us a HTPC front end thread: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=2874933 I hope it meets expectations and can provide a good place for discussion outside of this apparently hardware-oriented thread.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2008 14:32
|
|
|
Lemons posted:Does anyone have any suggestions for a media center package for Linux? I'm trying Mythbuntu right now and... well, I'm not really feeling it. I don't use any DVR functionality, just playing back local files. The main thing I don't like about MythTV is that there doesn't seem to be any decent OSD while playing local files. I think the next best option for you is going to be XBMC for Linux. I haven't tried the Linux port personally but it's been on my radar since I'm doing less DVR and more local file playback as well. Reports I've seen about XBMC indicate that it's a bit of a pain to set up, but once it's going it works quite well, even though it's "not yet mature enough" per the developers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2008 18:25
|
|
|
Kreez posted:I'm pretty sure you're completely wrong on this. The Intel G35 chipset can handle pretty much anything with it's onboard video. The G45 is coming out soon too I think, which should be even better. No, you're completely wrong on this. The G35 chipset (along with about every video card made in recent memory) can handle outputting video at 1080p. However, the hard part is decoding the video format. The G35 has no hardware based acceleration for VC-1/x264. That's all got to be brute-force decoded by your processor. So your PC might be able to run highdef media, but it's the CPU, not the video card, that's "handling" the media. The G45 chipset is going to have HD HWA. And somebody else mentioned the 780g AMD chipset, which also does HD HWA. Personally, after dealing with HWA, I think I'd prefer straight CPU-processing, but that doesn't change the fact the G35 onboard video doesn't do poo poo for video decoding. Crackbone fucked around with this message at 18:52 on Jun 13, 2008 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2008 18:50
|
|
|
Lemons posted:Does anyone have any suggestions for a media center package for Linux? I'm trying Mythbuntu right now and... well, I'm not really feeling it. I don't use any DVR functionality, just playing back local files. The main thing I don't like about MythTV is that there doesn't seem to be any decent OSD while playing local files. I'm really digging Elisa. It's a little buggy right now but the 0.5 release is due out in July and it should be pretty good. Kinda reminds me of a combination of Front Row and XBMC.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2008 19:29
|
|
|
Alowishus posted:Yeah if local media playback without DVR functionality is the goal, then Myth is definitely the wrong place to be. Their video playback is functional, but far from good. I tried the windows port for XBMC a few weeks ago and threw some random videos at it and it played them without a hitch. I still use my xbox1 for XBMC almost daily so moving to a HD version of the frontend I'm used to is a no brainer. I would love to hear from anyone who's had experience with XBMC for the PC because quite honestly it does everything I want with minimal tweaking.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2008 19:36
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:No, you're completely wrong on this. The G35 chipset (along with about every video card made in recent memory) can handle outputting video at 1080p. However, the hard part is decoding the video format. The G35 has no hardware based acceleration for VC-1/x264.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2008 19:55
|
|
|
Alowishus posted:Umm you sure about this? Intel's product brief on the G35 says it supports "dedicated hardware acceleration for MPEG2, WMV9, and VC1 content." The best thing about Intel chips is that they're open sourcing their drivers for Linux. Without going into long details, MPEG2 acceleration is worthless (any processor from 5 years ago can decode it with no problem), WMV9 isn't typically used for HD video (and thus acceleration isn't that great), and the VC-1 acceleration is about the same at the early Geforce 8000 series (500/600), which is to say minimal at best. The press releases don't mean much compared to the experiences of users, of which you can read lots and lots of over at AVSforum (if you deal with asperger-videophiles). On top of all that x264 is really the codec that puts a strain on processors, and what almost every piece of HD media uses now. The G45 is incorporating "proper" HD HWA, that truly moves the majority of the processing to the video card. Even then you require software that supports HWA and those are few in number, and none in Linux at the moment, to reference your post. Short version: The press release is largely marketing bullshit, x264 is the only one that truly matters if you're wanting your video card to "handle" high def material. Otherwise stick to a beefy processor to run it. Crackbone fucked around with this message at 20:45 on Jun 13, 2008 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2008 20:38
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:stuff I mean, I'm sure some people need their processor free while watching their movies, but I'd say for 98% of the HTPC's out there, nobody is running Prime95 or something while watching their movies. edit: I guess maybe someone might want to have the CPU free to encode from their tuner. Kreez fucked around with this message at 21:23 on Jun 13, 2008 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2008 21:15
|
|
|
Kreez posted:Ok, so if G35 doesn't provide any hardware acceleration worth mentionning, and it can still handle anything thrown at it with any core 2 duo, what's the point in recommending that people buy a video card on top of that? I didn't recommend somebody buy a card on top of that. I specifically said with all the pitfalls of videocard HWA I lean towards brute force CPU decoding anymore. The G35 is a good board, particularly because it's an Intel chipset with HDMI out that can also carry lossless audio over the HDMI port. I used to prefer HWA video cards, but with the price of processors dropping and the speed jumping up, it's starting to become easier to just slap in a fast chip and not have to dick around with driver/powerdvd/filter horseshit. And from a movie standpoint, you don't want decoding to do 90% on your processor because at that point anything else that happens (encoding, updates, rogue process) is going to max your processor, leading to dropped frames. Keep in mind a lot of people were and are running chips that can't handle 1080p x264 well, and a HWA card was a cheap fix to allow it without redoing your entire setup. Crackbone fucked around with this message at 21:41 on Jun 13, 2008 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2008 21:32
|
|
|
Yeah, it was the guy I replied to first who was recommending that, though I guess he has a point. But with all the info thrown around in this thread, I wish people would elaborate a bit more. (ie. Onboard video doesn't provide any hardware acceleration... but you don't necessary need it!) As far as G45 chipsets go, are there any good previews out there? It would be really nice if I could just buy a G45 motherboard and some DDR2 next month and keep this ancient Prescott P4 and still be able to run H.264 encoded 1080p.  edit: I Read your post history in this thread, I feel smarter now. Kreez fucked around with this message at 21:54 on Jun 13, 2008 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2008 21:39
|
|
|
In regards to Blu-Ray drives that are out there; what one do you guys recommend? I'd assume since we're on a PC here that profile 2.0 and whatnot is fully usable, but in this early age of technology I don't wanna grab the wrong one  .
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2008 20:05
|
|
|
Mugmoor posted:In regards to Blu-Ray drives that are out there; what one do you guys recommend? I'd assume since we're on a PC here that profile 2.0 and whatnot is fully usable, but in this early age of technology I don't wanna grab the wrong one The LG dual format BD/HD drive I recently bought works as advertised, is relatively quiet, uses SATA connectors and ships with a copy of powerdvd which will get you the cyberlink directshow filters to enable hardware accelerated video on nvidia and ati cards which support it. Also, being a dual format drive means you can take advantage of the closeout deals on hd-dvd movies now and have a nice little HD movie library for hardly any money.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2008 10:18
|
|
|
Lemons posted:Does anyone have any suggestions for a media center package for Linux? I'm trying Mythbuntu right now and... well, I'm not really feeling it. I don't use any DVR functionality, just playing back local files. The main thing I don't like about MythTV is that there doesn't seem to be any decent OSD while playing local files. I use the MePo-wide theme, but the OSD that comes with it is crap. Thankfully, another person put together their own version of the OSD that matches the overall theme that looks pretty sweet MePo: http://home.comcast.net/~zdzisekg/ MePo osd: http://www.ronfrazier.net/mythtv/
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2008 18:37
|
|
|
dfn_doe posted:The LG dual format BD/HD drive I recently bought works as advertised, is relatively quiet, uses SATA connectors and ships with a copy of powerdvd which will get you the cyberlink directshow filters to enable hardware accelerated video on nvidia and ati cards which support it. Also, being a dual format drive means you can take advantage of the closeout deals on hd-dvd movies now and have a nice little HD movie library for hardly any money. Does the nVidia 8600GT support the hardware acceleration? I'm very interested in getting the dual drive (for the HD DVD reasons) and that might just seal the deal.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2008 04:13
|
|
|
Mugmoor posted:Does the nVidia 8600GT support the hardware acceleration? I'm very interested in getting the dual drive (for the HD DVD reasons) and that might just seal the deal. Yeah the 8500 and 8600 both support hw acceleration with the cyberlink directshow filters. However after recently upgrading from an 8500gt to an ati hd2600 I have to say I much prefer the visual quality of the ATI, the hw deinterlacing looks much smoother and the driver configuration is much more up front with exposing the configuration options. YMMV
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2008 09:14
|
|
|
Is a GeForce 8400GS sufficient to play 1080p x264 content on a Pentium D 3.0Ghz? It plays 720p fine right now with a crappy no-acceleration video card, but 1080p is not possible. Low profile case, so 8400gs is the best I can find in low profile. or an ATI x1650pro?? Any suggestions for low profile cards?
NuclearFusi0n fucked around with this message at 10:40 on Jun 17, 2008 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2008 10:35
|
|
|
NuclearFusi0n posted:Is a GeForce 8400GS sufficient to play 1080p x264 content on a Pentium D 3.0Ghz? It plays 720p fine right now with a crappy no-acceleration video card, but 1080p is not possible. In theory, yes, as the card should offload the decoding from the CPU. That chip is on the low end, so you may still see higher CPU usage than tests show (under 30% on more modern chipsets). Keep in mind you'll still need PowerDVD to utilize the GPU decoding.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2008 14:03
|
|
|
NuclearFusi0n posted:Is a GeForce 8400GS sufficient to play 1080p x264 content on a Pentium D 3.0Ghz? It plays 720p fine right now with a crappy no-acceleration video card, but 1080p is not possible. I'm not sure about this brand, but you could try this card that comes with a decent looking rebate http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814162004 Edit: Though now that I look at it, it's not quite low profile.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2008 19:46
|
|
|
SirLoin posted:I'm not sure about this brand, but you could try this card that comes with a decent looking rebate http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814162004 Not quite, but it can be. The low profile brackets are included (see the last pic) and the VGA out is not hard mounted. It'll be just fine.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2008 02:19
|
|
|
I can't get my Nvidia Geforce 8400M GS to set up a custom resolution so I can get my HDTV's native resolution of 1366 x 768. The drivers are the latest that HP has supplied with (I'm on laptop.) It's really frustrating because at 1280 x 720 I would think it would display fine on the TV (Vizio VX32L) but only some of the screen shows up (can't see some of the taskbar/etc). I'm hooking it up via HDMI from my laptop. I'm wondering if a VGA cable would solve the problem but I doubt it since it has to do with Nvidia's control panel. Anyone have any ideas?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2008 22:22
|
|
|
Peacebone posted:I can't get my Nvidia Geforce 8400M GS to set up a custom resolution so I can get my HDTV's native resolution of 1366 x 768. The drivers are the latest that HP has supplied with (I'm on laptop.) It's really frustrating because at 1280 x 720 I would think it would display fine on the TV (Vizio VX32L) but only some of the screen shows up (can't see some of the taskbar/etc). I'm hooking it up via HDMI from my laptop. I'm wondering if a VGA cable would solve the problem but I doubt it since it has to do with Nvidia's control panel. Anyone have any ideas? Most TVs have natural overscan, which is completely normal. The video processor in the TV can probably only accept 720p (most don't accept odd variants of resolutions like computers can), which it then internally scales to 768p. A VGA cable is not likely to have any effect. Your best option is to find the overscan correction settings in the nvidia control panel and play with them. After that you can try custom resolutions using powerstrip, but frankly it's not worth the hassle for most people.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2008 22:30
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:Most TVs have natural overscan, which is completely normal. The video processor in the TV can probably only accept 720p (most don't accept odd variants of resolutions like computers can), which it then internally scales to 768p. So if I can't find an overscan setting on my Nvidia control panel then I am essentially doomed? I mean I guess there is powerstrip but I'd rather not try to use it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2008 23:57
|
|
|
The VGA cable might actually have an effect. The 3 flat panel screens I've dealt with in my HTPC life have all had overscan on DVI/Component/HDMI, and none on VGA, because it's the "PC" Input. At the very least, the VGA/PC input should have a section in the TV menu to adjust the overscan (even my ancient Samsung 23" LCD has this.) I had issues with the overscan correction part of the nVidia drivers dissappearing randomly about a year ago, no clue what was going on, but I feel your pain.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2008 05:08
|
|
|
Kreez posted:Ok, so if G35 doesn't provide any hardware acceleration worth mentionning, and it can still handle anything thrown at it with any core 2 duo, what's the point in recommending that people buy a video card on top of that? In either case you will need a good CPU, but a cheap mobo + cheap vidcard is cheaper than an expensive mobo with HDMI output, or atleast it was when I put my HTPC together. The gap is closer now, but seperating things also provides more expansion options later (if you go a mobo with HDMI-equipped onboard now, you will be tied down to upgrading both mobo and video at the same time, and paying the price premium for the expensive motherboards). Also, for those that care about overclocking (which I do with an E2200) using onboard video limits this. Understand, I'm coming from a point of view where I don't give two fucks about HW acceleration of video content, because I really don't want to be restricted to a tiny set of software and go through all the loving around involved. By the time it becomes simple (like HW acceleration of 3D games is, but wasn't at the start), even low end CPU's will be more than capable of crunching all the video likely to be played, and no-one will give a poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2008 05:39
|
|
|
Fuzz1111 posted:In either case you will need a good CPU, but a cheap mobo + cheap vidcard is cheaper than an expensive mobo with HDMI output, or atleast it was when I put my HTPC together. The gap is closer now, but seperating things also provides more expansion options later (if you go a mobo with HDMI-equipped onboard now, you will be tied down to upgrading both mobo and video at the same time, and paying the price premium for the expensive motherboards). I'm not really sure what you're talking about as far as motherboards. I just bought a an HDMI motherboard for $70, which is far less expensive then a motherboard(~$50) and video card that can do encoding(~$100-120). And that motherboard supports all C2D processors, so the fact of not having a video card is pointless. An E2200(I have an E2180 not overclocked) can do HD content without overclocking, and if you do overclock then it just makes it all the simpler. The motherboard also has a PCIe slot for a video card if I want to go that route later. As you said, things used to be different and more expensive but as of right now it would be cheaper to get a motherboard with HDMI if thats what they want. edit: Look here for all the motherboards with PCIe and HDMI The first option is from a reputable brand(XFX) and is only $80. Wood for Sheep fucked around with this message at 06:29 on Jun 19, 2008 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2008 06:21
|
|
|
Fuzz1111 posted:stuff What makes the Intel based P5E-VM worth $55 more than the nVidia based P5N-EM (who names this poo poo?) for someone like me, who wants nothing more than the following out of a mATX HTPC motherboard: -A couple USB ports, ethernet port, a SATA plug or two, a PATA plug for my DVD drive, and a fan header that isn't located in the worst possible place. -Will let me build my computer in 5 minutes, drop the CPU and RAM in, never have to think about it again. I don't need to overclock or anything, again, I'll just spend the extra money on the processor and not have to deal with buggy BIOSs, higher temps, etc. in a cramped little case. edit: not really belonging in this thread, but are the Nehalem chips next winter going to be LGA775? Any chance they'll work with today's motherboards? Or does a new architechture imply completely new chipset/socket? Kreez fucked around with this message at 06:49 on Jun 19, 2008 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2008 06:46
|
|
|
Kreez posted:Sounds reasonable. I think I'm just going to ignore hardware acceleration, it doesn't seem worth the $120 I could save by not needing to buy a top of the line processor. The P5E-VM charges such a premium because it's one of the only G35 board with onboard HDMI, and it can also output full lossless audio over the interface. There's nothing wrong with the nVidia solution, although if you're going for brute force playback the Core 2 chips have an edge on raw horsepower. Also, the 630i chipset is rather old. The 780g nVidia have motherboard with the onboard video cards that can do HWA, should you desire it. And Nehalem is a new socket design.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2008 13:12
|
|
|
Wood for Sheep posted:I'm not really sure what you're talking about as far as motherboards. I just bought a an HDMI motherboard for $70, which is far less expensive then a motherboard(~$50) and video card that can do encoding(~$100-120). I will admit though, you seem to have more choices and better prices in the US... I'm in Australia, glancing at a couple of catalogues for computer stores I go to, cheapest HDMI board I can find is the Asus P5E-VM HDMI for $170. Compare that with a Gigabyte GA-945GCM-S2L for $50 and a 8400gs for $45 and you might get why I went the direction I did. And yeah, I know the HDMI board is superior in other ways but nothing I care about. By the way, I overclocked the CPU from 2.2 to 2.933ghz yesterday, no voltage needed, didn't have to go turning off a bunch of CPU management stuff either. I did have to use BSEL mod to get it there though because I think this boards FSB adjustment is made for small increments and not big leaps from 200-266. Kreez posted:Sounds reasonable. I think I'm just going to ignore hardware acceleration, it doesn't seem worth the $120 I could save by not needing to buy a top of the line processor. A board that will fit your requirements, and be cheap, is actually the same board I got (Gigabyte GA-945GCM-S2L) but you wont be able to put a 333/1333fsb cpu in it (IE: Intel E6x50 or higher). You neednt have to though, the E22xx chips are plenty fast for HTPC usage even at stock speed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2008 03:47
|
|
|
Fuzz1111 posted:A board that will fit your requirements, and be cheap, is actually the same board I got (Gigabyte GA-945GCM-S2L) but you wont be able to put a 333/1333fsb cpu in it (IE: Intel E6x50 or higher). You neednt have to though, the E22xx chips are plenty fast for HTPC usage even at stock speed. The e21/2200 series are good chips, but at stock speeds they're not going to be able to handle high bitrate HD material. e4500s are faster and can still struggle on the higher end of the 1080p scale. Sure you can overclock, but then you're dealing with O/C on (primarily) mATX boards, and the added heat and noise in HTPC cases becomes a concern. There's been a lot of improvement on the software decoding side, but we're probably still a generation of hardware away from no-hassle HD decoding, especially if you factor in lossless audio. It doesn't help either that 1080p video is encoded in so many varying bitrates - it makes straight comparisons really hard to get.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2008 14:56
|
|
|
Are those Shuttle SFF cases good for HTPC functions? Would any of the current models work for a HTPC on their own or would I have to get a separate video card too? Would the cards that can handle 1080p work fit in the case? They're a bit cramped as it is and I suspect you can't put in a double-width card in a case like that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2008 19:18
|
|
|
TyChan posted:Are those Shuttle SFF cases good for HTPC functions? Would any of the current models work for a HTPC on their own or would I have to get a separate video card too? Would the cards that can handle 1080p work fit in the case? They're a bit cramped as it is and I suspect you can't put in a double-width card in a case like that. Depends on what you want from your HTPC. You could theoretically get a shuttle that supports a high end cpu (e8400), and do HD processing through brute force, which eliminates the need for a video card. Past that most people put a TV tuner in, although those aren't so big that you can't fit them in a shuttle case. It's doable but you don't have a lot of flexibility that even a mATX case can provide.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2008 19:48
|
|
|
TyChan posted:Are those Shuttle SFF cases good for HTPC functions? Would any of the current models work for a HTPC on their own or would I have to get a separate video card too? Would the cards that can handle 1080p work fit in the case? They're a bit cramped as it is and I suspect you can't put in a double-width card in a case like that. There are plenty of ATI and NVidia cards capable of doing hardware accelerated video which only take one slot. However be aware that the fans on some of these are quite loud due to their small size. I think alot of people on this thread get a bit carried away with buying high end cards and/or processors for their HTPC; when the fact of the matter is that the cards which support these features aren't running full tilt when they do the decoding. A 80-100 dollar ATI card with a decently quiet factory (or after market heatsink) will pretty much handle any video you can throw at it. Heck cyberlink has even started to offer their accelerated directshow filters unbundled from powerdvd, so if you were so inclined you could just buy the filters and the card and have the exact same playback quality as guys who are dumping 200+ bucks on video cards and you'll certainly have better video quality than the guys buying fast multicore procs and doing the decoding in software. I think anybody making these decision should REALLY honestly evaluate what they are going to be using the system for before making their decisions. If your intent is to watch 1080p video from legal legitimate sources (I.E. hd-dvd or bluray) and 1080i/720p/480i from a tuner you'd be very hard pressed to find a solution better than the cyberlink filters outputting over something like an ATI hd2600. You're gonna need to buy an HD optical drive anyways, so go with the LG model which is bundled with powerdvd (read: all the commercial filters you need). The cyberlink filters along with the ATI card will also get you some very nice looking deinterlacing for 1080i or other interlaced content (upscaling DVDs etc) and it supports some of the pull down detection features normally only found in higher end upscaling DVD players. That said, this setup may not be ideal if you are actually build a box for decoding filezzzz from torrent sites. so lets call a spade a spade and for the sake of clarity can everyone who's intention is watching illegal ripped material please stop misleading those of us who don't have a problem with paying a reasonable price for legal legitimate content. You're downloaded cams may not playback awesomely with the hardware/software combo I've outlined above; but guess what, SA has never been about endorsing illegal downloads... Note: I'm not trying to accuse or point fingers at anyone in particular, I'm just trying to make clear that some of the suggestions I'm seeing on this thread are going to result in less than ideal performance and quality. Anybody who goes with software and sits down to watch an action heavy 1080i scene will quickly understand why hardware deinterlacing and decoding is preferable.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2008 20:07
|
|
|
dfn_doe posted:Note: I'm not trying to accuse or point fingers at anyone in particular, I'm just trying to make clear that some of the suggestions I'm seeing on this thread are going to result in less than ideal performance and quality. Anybody who goes with software and sits down to watch an action heavy 1080i scene will quickly understand why hardware deinterlacing and decoding is preferable. If you're getting your material through legal sources, (ie Bluray discs), the video format on the disc going to be 1080p, so deinterlacing wouldn't be needed. The only thing I can think of that outputs in 1080i is one of the broadcast networks HD feeds. Where else are you going to get a native 1080i signal from that your PC will have to de-interlace? Or am I mis-understanding what you mean by deinterlace? Are you talking about taking 24fps from a video source up to 60fps on a display? And while HD cards are a great thing, there are still a lot of potental problems with utilizing it. I've seen countless thread of people who can't get hardware acceleration enabled for a variety of reasons. Crackbone fucked around with this message at 20:42 on Jun 20, 2008 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2008 20:29
|
|
|
dfn_doe posted:I think anybody making these decision should REALLY honestly evaluate what they are going to be using the system for before making their decisions. If your intent is to watch 1080p video from legal legitimate sources (I.E. hd-dvd or bluray) and 1080i/720p/480i from a tuner you'd be very hard pressed to find a solution better than the cyberlink filters outputting over something like an ATI hd2600. You're gonna need to buy an HD optical drive anyways, so go with the LG model which is bundled with powerdvd (read: all the commercial filters you need). The cyberlink filters along with the ATI card will also get you some very nice looking deinterlacing for 1080i or other interlaced content (upscaling DVDs etc) and it supports some of the pull down detection features normally only found in higher end upscaling DVD players. I don't have the free time or patience for the illegal stuff. I just wanted to build a box that would play music files I've encoded myself and legitimate Blu-Ray discs. I suppose having a cable tuner would be nice too. So does anyone make the equivalent of those old ATi All-in-Wonder cards anymore?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2008 20:43
|
|
|
I built a Shuttle system back when the AMD 64 3500+ was close to top of the line. It was cool, but when it came time to upgrade, it was a complete pain in the rear end, because nothing was reusable for my next PC, including the really expensive and cool looking case.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2008 21:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 16:36 |
|
|
I used a shuttle case for my current HTPC setup. I fit two 500 gig drives into it, threw in a couple of gigs of ram, and a tuner. With a wireless keyboard the thing is perfect. I'm not worried about upgrades, since it's exactly what I want for what it's doing, so I don't really have any reason to upgrade the thing. It does HD fine with a midrange dual core processor, although I haven't done BluRay yet. I'll be buying a drive in the near future for that. I spent the extra tiny bit of money for the case designed to work as an HTPC. It has a front LCD and IR receiver, came with a Media Center remote and has HDMI out. But yeah, I'm very happy with my setup. It's the perfect size, has good internal access for such a small case, and the way they have the fans set up I never hear anything.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2008 23:40
|
|
