Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="BennieBoy" data-source="post: 299528" data-attributes="member: 12527">Hi,I love to use both MP as XBMC, but I think it has two different audiences.As already said, XBMC works out of the box and gives simple direct access to your Multimedia content.Where MP is a bit more difficult to install, but gives the user a lot of room to fiddle with settings to get things the way you like them.What I noticed:<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">XBMC has an incredible fast response, even when I use a network drive</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">XBMC uses quite a lot of power when doing nothing (when looking at the main screen, power usage is 20Watt higher in respect to MP</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">HD content in XBMC is looking good, but in respect to MP it seems to have a bit less performance. Athlon X64 939 3000+ can handle 1080i quite nicely while XBMC is just not fast enough to give the same bitrate.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">MP Can start from a network drive. XBMC crashes (probably there is a work around).</li>
</ul>Greetz,Ben</blockquote>

[QUOTE="BennieBoy, post: 299528, member: 12527"] Hi, I love to use both MP as XBMC, but I think it has two different audiences. As already said, XBMC works out of the box and gives simple direct access to your Multimedia content. Where MP is a bit more difficult to install, but gives the user a lot of room to fiddle with settings to get things the way you like them. What I noticed: [LIST] [*]XBMC has an incredible fast response, even when I use a network drive [*]XBMC uses quite a lot of power when doing nothing (when looking at the main screen, power usage is 20Watt higher in respect to MP [*]HD content in XBMC is looking good, but in respect to MP it seems to have a bit less performance. Athlon X64 939 3000+ can handle 1080i quite nicely while XBMC is just not fast enough to give the same bitrate. [*]MP Can start from a network drive. XBMC crashes (probably there is a work around). [/LIST] Greetz, Ben [/QUOTE]

Verification