Noobie HD H/W question

The point I meant to make is that we are trying to build cheap, quiet, and power-efficient HTPC boxes dedicated to running XBMC, and we don't want to have to use a C2D or Quad-core processor in order to decode HD video that has already been out for 2 years, and we don't want to wait 2 more years for processors to catch up, either.

Here's hoping these acceleration technologies receive widespread adoption, and soon.



-Wes

I'd like to see the technology for hardware acceleration on Linux happen too. However to say that the fastest dual and quads cannot decode this video NOW is incorrect.

I have a 65nm C2D 2.66Ghz CPU cranked to 3Ghz and the bird scene does not drop frames for me. I cannot recall what the CPU utilization was when it was last tested but it was NOT pushing 100% like it used to - the code has improved and I posted about it when I noticed it. This CPU is FAR from being one of the fastest around - the 45nm E8400 in my desktop hits 4Ghz, the 65nm Q6600 in another machine runs 3.1Ghz and beats the E8400 on multithreaded tasks.

These aren't cheap CPUs but they also aren't $300 CPUs and their price is falling. The new 45nm C2D run a good 10C cooler at full load and use a good bit less energy too. If the vendors of the accelerated hardware won't release specs and help driver development that's fine - the CPU vendors seem to be taking care of the issue. <shrug>

Well, that's great to hear about your C2D... I thought I read that even overclocked to 3GHz you had dropped frames on the bird scene, but that may have been a post from a few weeks ago.

I have to admit I haven't kept up with CPUs the way I used to. I have an Opteron Dual Core at 2.6 GHz with 1MB cache per core, but I guess that's aging now. I haven't looked at CPUs since I bought that one. I haven't read good things about Phenom so far, though. They say the "revision B" should ramp better than the first gen, though. Guess C2D is the way to go right now.

Anyway, maybe in the next few months we will be able to get a sub-$100 CPU that is low power and gets the 1080p job done.

BLKMGK Wrote:If the vendors of the accelerated hardware won't release specs and help driver development that's fine - the CPU vendors seem to be taking care of the issue. <shrug>

I think that's the key. Some day these vendors (of all tech products, not just GPUs, accelerators, and such) will realize they need to get their heads out of their collective arses and embrace open source, or they'll become irrelevant. At the very least, they should release specs and programming interfaces.

Here's hoping they see the light.

-Wes

It WAS indeed skipping still when I first pushed to that speed - even in my own encodes of that clip but almost nothing else. However the code has improved and my last test played smoothly. I honestly do not run that clip often but came across it while playing trailers and was pleasantly surprised. I ran it multiple times to be sure.

I actually have an AMD specc'd pretty close to your's. When I built this machine the choice was clear - Intel. The difference in speed was breathtaking. Even the fastest AMD can barely keep up with the slowest of the new Intel CPUs. If you build a new machine look very closely at the crop of 45nm Intel CPUs and hope for AMD to get back on their feet again soon...

Edit: I ought to be most clear. The CPU in my XBMC machine is an older C2D, my desktop has an E8400 and is the one I'm most impressed with. For the difference in price go with the newer tech if you can.