HDTV Min Requirements (1 Viewer)

[JimMorrison]

I have a client/server setup and my server is my main desktop PC and it has about 2.2ghz, 2gb ram, 1tb HD. It can view HD and switch channels at a good pace. However, my client struggles with viewing HD channels and switching channels and just seems to stall and freeze up more frequently. That machine is an old junker with a 1.2ghz AMD, 512mb ram, 20gb HD. The system is pretty bare, I wiped it out and just added XP and MP. I am not too familiar with overclocking or any of that. Any suggestions or thoughts are greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance.

 

[etheesdad]

GeneralRequirements - MediaPortal Manual Documentation

 

[dcwp]

Thanks for the link etheesad. I've been tinkering with HD on and off for a while kind of half-heartedly. I've never been serious about it since I figured my system wasn't capable, and from your link I think my video card may not be up to snuff (GeForce FX 5200).

BUT

I downloaded some of the test videos from the website that is listed in the wiki and they play beautifully in MP. So now I'm wondering if I may be able to get HDTV by tweaking settings a bit. I wonder if you or anyone else can offer advice about whether it's worth pursuing or I should just count HDTV out until I can upgrade my video card.

Here's my situation:
HD video apparently plays fine from my hard drive
My HDTV channels will play, but with a small stutter once or twice per second. Audio is fine, picture is beautiful, just stuttery.
I am currently using the CoreAVC trial download to see if it's worth investing, this is the one giving the stuttery but clear picture.
I have tried one or two other HD codecs and also got picture, but more stutter.

Thanks for any thoughts.

 

[Shivian]

From memory I believe the CoreAVC site has some benchmarks and recommendations on min specs for high def content. In your case, the FX5200 wouldn't be doing much so CoreAVC would run all the content thru your CPU. The min for HD according to CoreAVC in that situation is a P4 2.8GHz or better. That is for 1080p anyway so that's a good spot to aim for.

Ref: CoreAVC requirements page.

 

[dcwp]

Thanks Shivian! I can't believe I didn't check CoreAVC's requirements list first.

Looking at that, I don't think I should have much trouble. I'm running a Celeron D 3.2GHz processor. That's plenty of power according to the Core, but I know the Celeron doesn't have a reputation for power and the FSB is nothing impressive so it may be just barely enough. Anyway, I can play 720p just fine (haven't tried 1080 since my display is only 720p) without even noticeably taxing the processor, so I guess my system is plenty.

I suppose this is the weekend for me to start experimenting with h.264 in a serious way.

 

[JimMorrison]

Are the min requirements the same if you just want to display HD on your client?

 

[Shivian]

From personal experiences lately, I have found that you need faster than a P4 3.2GHz to play 1080p smoothly (e.g. Terminator 2) with CoreAVC. It seems to run at > 80% CPU usage which chunks a bit (audio sync and framerate problems start happening etc).

That is for a client just playing the video. You would have to up those specs again if you were running a client/server on a single box.

 

[dcwp]

I don't know much about CoreAVC, only experimented with the trial version a little bit. Is it necessary for Core to route through the CPU, or can it use a GPU if you have hardware accelerated vid card?

 

[Shivian]

I don't know much about CoreAVC, only experimented with the trial version a little bit. Is it necessary for Core to route through the CPU, or can it use a GPU if you have hardware accelerated vid card?

As far as I am aware, CoreAVC is CPU only unless you have 1.9.0.0 or better and an nvidia GPU that supports CUDA.

 

[dcwp]

hm... more research to be done. Thanks for the info.