My upcoming Windows Build
#1
For the past four weeks I've been backing up all my DVDs and Blu Rays on a 3TB drive. I've been using my Laptop for playback with mixed success. I've decided to built a dedicated HTPC capable of 3D playback. Below is the hardware I've settled on and ordered.



Hardware:
LIAN LI PC-V354B - Case

GIGABYTE GA-F2A85XM-D3H FM2 AMD A85X - Micro ATX with 8 SATA ports

Seasonic SS-460FL 460W fan less PSU

AMD A8-5500 Trinity 3.2GHz Quad Core - Built in GPU

Intel 330 Series 120GB Solid State - OS and Programs

CORSAIR DOMINATOR 4GB (4 x 2GB) - Old RAM from my Video Editing machine.



Software:
-AnyDVD-HD - Ripping DVDs and Blu Rays
-TMT5 - for 3D Blu Ray ISO playback
-Flex Raid - I currently have 3 3TB drives. One will be used for Parity and the other 2 will hold the media. I currently only have media on one drive but quickly filling it up now that I've finished with my DVD and now burning Blu Rays.

OS:
I have both Windows 7 Premium and WHS2011 available. I have been searching around to see if all the software above will work with WHS. I would prefer using WHS because its not as bloated as W7. If anyone has any insight on WHS as the HTPC OS I would greatly appreciate your knowlage.

Reply
#2
1866mhz ram would significantly increase that builds performance Smile
btw. why a8 and not a6?
Reply
#3
Quad Core + Slightly better GPU. GPU is more important than Processing power (So I've read). I also figured since the box will be serving its own files a quad core could handle the extra task.
All in all the entire system is overkill so 1600mhz vs 1866mhz shouldn't be noticeable with the load it will be given. Plus it owned equipment which lowers the build cost.
Reply
#4
+ the A8 can do 3D whereas the jury seems to still be out on if the A6 can actually do it or not
Reply
#5
That's nice to know. I've been playing my 3D (Side by Side) full res ISOs on my 2 year old laptop without issues. Its hard to believe any processors now would have issues with it. The issues I do have are with DVDs and Audio syncing plus an occasional jitter.
Reply
#6
Well if your laptop is an intel core i3, i5, etc. I could understand why thats been ok for you. I think the "will it do 3D or not?" distinction that you see around here mostly applies to the AMD APUs. General rule of thumb is that A8 and higher will do it. There are mixed reports on here if the A6-5400k will do 3D or not. I don't have a 3D television so it wasn't a concern for me in my build, but would still be nice to know it can do it if I ever do get one... Though I think manufacturers will be focusing on 4k and 8k sets and not 3D, at which point we'll all need new builds Wink
Reply
#7
8K set!!! I sure hope not.

It's a pain editing 4K and 5K material as it is. The only 8K stuff I work on is Time Lapse at 21MegaPixels a frame. The only reason I keep it that large is for flexibility later in post. 10 minute clip uncompressed is 400+GB.

I think 4K + Oled will be the future past 4K T.V. beyond that I doubt our eyes could see the difference. Unless for some reason the future trend is to sit 3-4 feet from out 100" screen TVs.

This is a good read:
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-575...s-oled-tv/
Reply
#8
I saw one of the 4K Sony TV's on display a couple months ago and it was really incredible. But like you said, you really are only noticing the difference when you're standing close. It just has such an ultra-realistic look to it and you can see such detail even at a super close viewing distance. Pretty awesome but I think it will be a tough sell getting the public to upgrade so quickly after HD finally became mainstream.
Reply
#9
(2013-01-28, 22:37)Zigmo Wrote: 8K set!!! I sure hope not.

It's a pain editing 4K and 5K material as it is. The only 8K stuff I work on is Time Lapse at 21MegaPixels a frame. The only reason I keep it that large is for flexibility later in post. 10 minute clip uncompressed is 400+GB.

I think 4K + Oled will be the future past 4K T.V. beyond that I doubt our eyes could see the difference. Unless for some reason the future trend is to sit 3-4 feet from out 100" screen TVs.

This is a good read:
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-575...s-oled-tv/

I the gaming room I have about 4feet to the 60" and cant see any pixels so I see no point of 4k...
Went for that size since in perfectly covers the field of sight so 3d gets awesome Smile
Reply
#10
(2013-01-29, 00:25)RaggSokk3n Wrote:
(2013-01-28, 22:37)Zigmo Wrote: 8K set!!! I sure hope not.

It's a pain editing 4K and 5K material as it is. The only 8K stuff I work on is Time Lapse at 21MegaPixels a frame. The only reason I keep it that large is for flexibility later in post. 10 minute clip uncompressed is 400+GB.

I think 4K + Oled will be the future past 4K T.V. beyond that I doubt our eyes could see the difference. Unless for some reason the future trend is to sit 3-4 feet from out 100" screen TVs.

This is a good read:
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-575...s-oled-tv/

I the gaming room I have about 4feet to the 60" and cant see any pixels so I see no point of 4k...
Went for that size since in perfectly covers the field of sight so 3d gets awesome Smile

Does your TV use active shutter or polarized glasses? I went Active shutter since it doesn't waste any resolution but would love the lighter polarized glasses if the method didn't cut the resolution in half. 4K would make that acceptable. I'm currently sitting 5 feet away from my 55" and although I don't see pixels I think at that distance 4K would be noticeably sharper.

I'm also interested to see if a format change could be adopted in the future. The Hobbit was filmed at 48FPS and despite not having a higher resolution than other films the details we so much sharper. If you had the opportunity to watch it in one of the theaters showing it in that frame rate it was awesome. It was a little disorienting at first but like 3D you get used to it.

Here is a good read:

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2403746,00.asp



Reply
#11
(2013-01-28, 22:37)Zigmo Wrote: 8K set!!! I sure hope not.

It's a pain editing 4K and 5K material as it is. The only 8K stuff I work on is Time Lapse at 21MegaPixels a frame. The only reason I keep it that large is for flexibility later in post. 10 minute clip uncompressed is 400+GB.

I think 4K + Oled will be the future past 4K T.V. beyond that I doubt our eyes could see the difference. Unless for some reason the future trend is to sit 3-4 feet from out 100" screen TVs.

This is a good read:
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-575...s-oled-tv/

Yep - try editing 16 x DVC Pro HD 100Mbs streams... (I think that's what the NHK guys are doing to record/replay and do live slowmo for 8k SHV...)

I've seen quite a few demos of SuperHiVision 8k over the last couple of years. The BBC / NHK coverage of the London 2012 Olympic Opening Ceremony was amazing, and I went to see some live swimming from the aquatic centre and that was a totally different experience. This was on a large-ish projection screen (using two projectors). Watching the same material at IBC on a direct-view display was breathtaking. You start exploring the picture rather than looking at it as a whole. But the TV production kit for 8k is still really basic - something like a 5:1 zoom compared to a 100:1+ sport lens used for HD production, and focus is done remotely in the truck on a large monitor as a viewfinder doesn't have the resolution required. There were only 4 NHK 8k live cameras available for London 2012... (3 in-use and a spare I think)

4k makes some sense in the home, but I'm not sure, in the mid-term, that 8k does? You can shoot live 4k now if you really want to - on something like a Sony F65.

I know that Sky in the UK are testing 4k sport coverage, and one major Outside Broadcast facilities provider here (Telegenic) who do a lot of Sky's sport coverage are building a 4k-capable live truck. The Japanese are apparently planning 4k coverage for the 2014 Football World Cup. Now H265 has been ratified - I think it's when not if for 4k - particularly as 3D hasn't taken off. (Though ironically, 4k displays make excellent 1080p 3D displays, as you can use polarised passive glasses at full 3D 1080p resolution, and avoid the flicker - and expensive glasses - of active shutter, which previously were required for full 3D 1080p resolution on a 1080p display).

Reply

Logout Mark Read Team Forum Stats Members Help
My upcoming Windows Build1