Off the shelf PC for MP clients (1 Viewer)

[Tesla]

In the past, we (my brother and I) have been using old PCs for MediaPortal clients. We end up doing just small upgrades to them because most of them are old demoted “gaming class” towers/desktops. I have found this is a good suggested minimum:
Pentium-4 2.4ghz (or AMD equivalent)
128mb DX9 compatible nVidia 5200, ATI 9800, AMD 3200
1024mb RAM
Wired 100mb ethernet (to these "client" rooms)
Win-XP and MediaPortal 1.x

Main MP systems in Living Room have:
Above minimum hardware or better
1000 (gigabit) ethernet networking to main switch
Windows XP, Vista, or Win-7 computer
MediaPortal 1.x

What we are playing (steaming from main MP “server” to clients by simple Windows file sharing):
Full quality DVD 4gb-8gb rips - VIDEO_TS folders with full DD 5.1 sound (and chapters, sub-titles, etc.)
MP4, AVI, and Xvid (compressed videos)
MP3 and .WAV music

But now, we need more client PCs (to do more rooms) and we have run out of old PCs.

My question is … is just about any new Dell or HP off-the-shelf PC capable of running MP (and faster than any old 4 year + computer)? I guess the question is really about the integrated graphics. Does MP need anything more than basic 2D and 3D graphics? Is there something I should look for (or something that disqualifies a PC)? Can the WEI scores help?

Instead of buying old used computers (that might die at any second) can we just use a new one … even if it’s not an expensive “gaming class” PC. We don’t mind towers because we have plenty of space, and they can be easily worked on and expanded. The newer machines are even quiet as well.

If the $100 Windows-7 license is subtracted from the $350 cost, that means this computer is only $250. I’m not sure I can even buy a dual-core computer in pieces from NewEgg for $250.

What about a Dell Inspirion 570? ($350 at BestBuy or Dell.com)

AMD Athlon II X2 Processor 245 (2.9ghz Dual Core)
4GB Memory
ATI Radeon HD 4200 graphics (pretty sure it uses shared memory)
Spare PCIe 16x graphics slot (for later expansion … like maybe for HD … years from now)
500GB Hard Drive
Windows-7 Home Premium

I know “shared memory” works because my main MP box works with an on-board ATI 3200 with shared 256mb (so I pulled out the dedicated nVidia 8600). Plus, I see people here talking about using Atom machines. Seems like with the above machine and a Media Center compatible RC-6 Rx/Tx IR Remote Control set … we are all set … for now and the future.

 

[mm1352000]

Hi Tesla

The requirements for the CPU/GPU are not hard and fast, except that the GPU hardware must support DX9 (can't be software emulation). Almost all GPUs produced in the last 3 (???) years would support that requirement. Low end integrated graphics solutions such as the 3200 and 4200 can work in many scenarios, although you may find that trying to get such solutions to handle hardware accelerated playback of 1080i with high definition (1080p+) displays will be too taxing. In such scenarios, you can reduce the load on the GPU by dropping the output resolution (for example, go from 1080p -> 720p). Alternatively, you could get the CPU instead of the GPU to do the video decoding and use codecs such as FFDShow to do the deinterlacing. Of course, in that case you may need a more powerful CPU. To give you some idea, my first gen Core2 e6600 2.4 GHz can handle the video decoding and deinterlacing for 1080i streams without too much trouble, although it can take between 50 and 80% of the processing power. In other words, expecting an Atom + integrated graphics to handle 1080i + high definition output would possibly be a little too much, but with a few adjustments you would at least get a working system...

mm

 

[Tesla]

Thanks for the reply.

I have been using FFDShow (Goose's old Codec Setup doc) mainly, but the last time I used SAF 5.x (on an AMD dual core) and it works fine ... so I'll probably use it again. I think they work about the same. So, since we mainly play SD (and only the occasional 720p AVI) we should be ok with an old dual core and something like ATI 4200 IGP. I know shared system memory is slower than dedicated VRAM, but I guess it's fast enough now-days.

I usually prefer 480p or 720p. The Onkyo amp. and/or 1080p plasma upscale to 1080p nicely from there.

Funny you mention Intel Conroe e6600. That's a really nice dualie. In fact, we have one and have concidered building a NewEgg machine around it. About $300 without OS, best I can tell.

 

[Tesla]

Hi Tesla

The requirements for the CPU/GPU are not hard and fast, except that the GPU hardware must support DX9 (can't be software emulation). Almost all GPUs produced in the last 3 (???) years would support that requirement.

If any of the new IGP or dedicated solutions fail this requirement, it would be good to know. Maybe there could be a list in the Requirements section. Not all the ones that DO work, but just the ones that DON'T. The ATI/AMD and nVidia stuff is not too hard to figure out (because they are usually based on GPUs used on dedicated boards) but I really wonder about all the low-end Intel stuff released in the past 5 years.

 

[mm1352000]

There's none that I know of. According to this, all Intel integrated graphics including 9xx series motherboards support at least DX9.

 

[Tesla]

What about: Intel 82865 (Extreme Graphics 2) onboard graphics ?

It says it can use up to 96mb shared memory (and I don't see a setting to make it go higher)

DxDiag is reporting 9.0c and "no errors" ... However, on the Display tab ...

DirectDraw Acceleration: Enabled (and tests run ok)
Direct3D Acceleration: Enabled (and test run ok)
AGP Texture Acceleration: Not Available

Is the lack of "AGP Texture Acceleration" a deal breaker? Also, does that have anything to do with the "GPU hardware must support DX9 (can't be software emulation)" ?

This graphics circuit is paired with:
Intel MB - D865GLC - Intel i865pe chipset - SATA-I @ only ATA-133
AGP 3.0 8x slot (free) - Intel 82865 Extreme Graphics 2 onboard graphics
Pentium 4 - 3 GHz (HT) CPU - Northwood - 800mhz FSB - Socket 478
1024mb DDR RAM (In Dual-Channel mode) 4 sockets total (0 free)

 

[mm1352000]

Hmmm, 865...

Well, I'm not sure if it would run well, but if it supports DirectX 9c (which it seems to) then it should at least be installable and runnable. Of course I wouldn't be running out to my local second hand computer dealer to find such a board, but if you have one lying around then no harm in giving it a try. Of course you'd definitely have to use the CPU for video decoding and deinterlacing, and video output resolution may need to be reduced to SD (720x480 or 720x576) to get smooth video output. It would be interesting to know if it would work...

mm

 

[Tesla]

Of course you'd definitely have to use the CPU for video decoding and deinterlacing,

Thanks.

You have mentioned that a couple of times. Where is the "switch" or option for this?

 

[mm1352000]

For video decoding acceleration it is about the codecs that you choose and the settings for each codec. For a start, not all codecs support hardware acceleration. For those that do: the settings can sometimes be changed in MP configuration. For example, for the Cyberlink codec you'd turn off hardware acceleration (see -->here<--).

For deinterlacing, you'd disable deinterlacing in your video card control software (Catalyst for ATI etc.), and enable it in your codec settings.

I'd probably recommend FFDShow if you were using an 865 mobo...

 

[Owlsroost]

Personally I wouldn't consider any Intel integrated graphics earlier than the X4500HD series - the equivalent vintage ATi/AMD (or nVidia 8200/9200) integrated graphics are much more powerful, if you are looking for old machinery.

GPU performance is much more critical for MP than CPU (unless it's really slow, but almost any dual-core CPU will be fine - I run an old C2D E4500 (2.2GHz) in my HTPC and that can cope with 1920 x 1080 @ 50Hz H264 decode in software (ffmpeg-mt)).

Tony