LinuxMCE Forums

General => Users => Topic started by: jgaffney on January 23, 2008, 06:54:12 pm

Title: Minimum Processor?
Post by: jgaffney on January 23, 2008, 06:54:12 pm
Hello,

Apparently my Athlon XP 1.2 GHz processor doesn't have enough juice to watch digital TV smoothly.   Can some of you list your processor speeds that are successfully playing HD TV.  I'd like to get a feel on what is actually required for smooth performance. Not sure if it matters but I'm using HDHomeRun for my TV source.

I can cheaply upgrade my processor to 2 Ghz Athlon XP,  does anyone know if that would be sufficient?  or am I looking at a new PC purchase  :'(

Thank you.

Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: jgaffney on January 24, 2008, 12:20:31 am
28 Views and nobody had TV working smoothly?  Strange....
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: golgoj4 on January 24, 2008, 12:34:38 am
have you searched the forums? Im pretty sure its been covered.
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: tom_say on January 24, 2008, 03:39:07 am
here you go bro look at the cpu section but for hd you at least need a 2.8 p4 at the very least

http://wiki.linuxmce.org/index.php/Hardware
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: jgaffney on January 24, 2008, 04:26:16 pm
Thanx Tom, that's what I was looking for.

Golgoj4,  why post if you have nothing useful to contribute?   There seems to be quite a bit of people out here that do nothing but tell people to "search the forums".   The forums are to help people, not tell them to do what they already did.  The facts are the Wiki is not well organized or 100% accurate.  Searching the forums does not always return results, especially when people have a different sense of terminology or don't know exactly what they are asking for.  So instead of wasting yours and everyone else's time in the forums why don't you contribute to the Wiki so there are less repetitive questions that are so painful for you to help out with.
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: Loki008 on January 24, 2008, 04:37:54 pm
Thanx Tom, that's what I was looking for.

Golgoj4,  why post if you have nothing useful to contribute?   There seems to be quite a bit of people out here that do nothing but tell people to "search the forums".   The forums are to help people, not tell them to do what they already did.  The facts are the Wiki is not well organized or 100% accurate.  Searching the forums does not always return results, especially when people have a different sense of terminology or don't know exactly what they are asking for.  So instead of wasting yours and everyone else's time in the forums why don't you contribute to the Wiki so there are less repetitive questions that are so painful for you to help out with.

On that point, is there something wrong with the wiki that makes it non searchable, or was i just missing somehing when i tried?
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: rrambo on January 24, 2008, 05:40:25 pm
Thanx Tom, that's what I was looking for.

Golgoj4,  why post if you have nothing useful to contribute?   There seems to be quite a bit of people out here that do nothing but tell people to "search the forums".   The forums are to help people, not tell them to do what they already did.  The facts are the Wiki is not well organized or 100% accurate.  Searching the forums does not always return results, especially when people have a different sense of terminology or don't know exactly what they are asking for.  So instead of wasting yours and everyone else's time in the forums why don't you contribute to the Wiki so there are less repetitive questions that are so painful for you to help out with.

On that point, is there something wrong with the wiki that makes it non searchable, or was i just missing somehing when i tried?

You missed something...
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: Zaerc on January 24, 2008, 05:47:18 pm
...
Golgoj4,  why post if you have nothing useful to contribute?   There seems to be quite a bit of people out here that do nothing but tell people to "search the forums".   The forums are to help people, not tell them to do what they already did.  The facts are the Wiki is not well organized or 100% accurate.  Searching the forums does not always return results, especially when people have a different sense of terminology or don't know exactly what they are asking for.  So instead of wasting yours and everyone else's time in the forums why don't you contribute to the Wiki so there are less repetitive questions that are so painful for you to help out with.

Your question was already answered in the wiki, had you bothered to look around you would have found it.  Which is exactly why people tell you to search before asking.  You (and people like you) are the ones wasting everyone's time by not looking properly before asking.  So why don't you "contribute" yourself by looking into something before asking and stop acting like a customer.

Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: jgaffney on January 24, 2008, 06:09:31 pm
So your one of those guys  ::)

The Wiki does not have the info to answer my question.  Tom gave me the answer I was looking for.  There is no reference to the minimum processor needed to smoothly display High Def.  There is no reference to High Def at all for that matter that I can see.

Maybe you should do some searching yourself before playing tough guy.
It's people like you that turn others away.
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: Loki008 on January 24, 2008, 06:21:40 pm
Thanx Tom, that's what I was looking for.

Golgoj4,  why post if you have nothing useful to contribute?   There seems to be quite a bit of people out here that do nothing but tell people to "search the forums".   The forums are to help people, not tell them to do what they already did.  The facts are the Wiki is not well organized or 100% accurate.  Searching the forums does not always return results, especially when people have a different sense of terminology or don't know exactly what they are asking for.  So instead of wasting yours and everyone else's time in the forums why don't you contribute to the Wiki so there are less repetitive questions that are so painful for you to help out with.


On that point, is there something wrong with the wiki that makes it non searchable, or was i just missing somehing when i tried?

You missed something...


Yeah, but something is off with the wiki search, the reason i was thinking it didnt work was i tried to search for n770 or 770 to find the directions for building the n770 orbiter. However the Wiki search doesnt get hits for either of those searches, which lead me to belive that the search was not functional because i knew both of those terms should have resulted in hits.
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: Zaerc on January 24, 2008, 06:24:52 pm
So your one of those guys  ::)

The Wiki does not have the info to answer my question.  Tom gave me the answer I was looking for.  There is no reference to the minimum processor needed to smoothly display High Def.  There is no reference to High Def at all for that matter that I can see.

Maybe you should do some searching yourself before playing tough guy.
It's people like you that turn others away.
I guess that's because nobody that has HD working could be bothered to contribute, now let's see if you will add this missing crucial piece of info... somehow I doubt it.
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: Loki008 on January 24, 2008, 06:38:56 pm
So your one of those guys  ::)

The Wiki does not have the info to answer my question.  Tom gave me the answer I was looking for.  There is no reference to the minimum processor needed to smoothly display High Def.  There is no reference to High Def at all for that matter that I can see.

Maybe you should do some searching yourself before playing tough guy.
It's people like you that turn others away.

I have to agree with this, If the forums get under your skin so much, maybe you should step back a bit and take a deep breath, you do not need to personally respond to every thread. Your negitive responses are not adding anything to the project and if anything are driving people away that may otherwise add some sort of valuable input or promotion to the project. I recall a thread reciently in regards to foldering that you participated in that i think hit the nail on the head. The quote i am refering to is from ChrisBirkinshaw in http://forum.linuxmce.org/index.php?topic=1842.30 (http://forum.linuxmce.org/index.php?topic=1842.30) about media organization.

Quote
I've worked in a consulting role on a number of UI projects within the multimedia and broadcast industry, and have found some of the responses in this thread alarming and to be honest a bit worrying. I'm really concerned that LMCE is going to remain stuck in the same place because a few people are being stubborn about certain issues.

Joe Bloggs says "I find it really tedious to wash all these dishes".
Everyone else says "Stop being lazy, it isn't that hard!"
Joe Bloggs is an edge case.

...

If someone says media is too hard to navigate, then perhaps they have a point. They might be wrong on the detail, they might be stupid, they might not have read the manual, it might piss us off that they ask before thinking it out properly, but you have still have to take their experience of the product into account. They are the general public, and the general public should be able to use LMCE - right? Or do we want it to remain a geek-tool hidden away from the mainstream? This isn't what the simple DVD install suggests.

You and i have already had this converation once in the past in the thread that i posted when i was looking for help when i first came here. And on some level you are right, more people need to document their experiances, but by broaching the subject in the way you are with these threads you are driving valuable members away from participating and providing their experiances in this forum and possably from linuxMCE all together.
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: Zaerc on January 24, 2008, 06:49:06 pm
Yeah excuse me for getting annoyed because somebody throws a fit when asked if they looked around, which they obviously haven't...
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: jgaffney on January 24, 2008, 07:19:06 pm
Yeah excuse me for getting annoyed because somebody throws a fit when asked if they looked around, which they obviously haven't...

You just acknowledged there is no HD info in the wiki,  and come back with this comment?

Your a real piece of work Zaerc.  There is no use for trolls here.   
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: shortydigital on January 24, 2008, 08:07:03 pm
jgaffney is your 1.2 ghz a core, a MD or a hybrid. I think it should do hd fine if its a MD, but for a core or hybrid every thing read leads towards ups 2's or a 3 ghz. You didn't mention how much ram, but it seems that for HD you need 1 gig in a core and 512 mb in a MD. A hybrid would probably benefit from more but mds and core don't seem to show an improvement from any more ram then listed even for HD. Not that they need an improvement they seem fine with the above. I'll be testing this out in a couple weeks with the same tuner that u have, trying a 3.0ghz for a core only and 1.1 ghz for a md, both intel and using the ram listed above.

Shaun

Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: rrambo on January 24, 2008, 08:35:13 pm
jgaffney is your 1.2 ghz a core, a MD or a hybrid. I think it should do hd fine if its a MD, but for a core or hybrid every thing read leads towards ups 2's or a 3 ghz. You didn't mention how much ram, but it seems that for HD you need 1 gig in a core and 512 mb in a MD. A hybrid would probably benefit from more but mds and core don't seem to show an improvement from any more ram then listed even for HD. Not that they need an improvement they seem fine with the above. I'll be testing this out in a couple weeks with the same tuner that u have, trying a 3.0ghz for a core only and 1.1 ghz for a md, both intel and using the ram listed above.

Shaun



I want to disagree..  however, without being able to back it up....  I don't think 1.2 ghz in a MD will handle HD...  problem is, I haven't had anything to test with...  I just got a 720p version of Matrix that I will try on my 1.6 ghz MD with 784 RAM and get back with my results....
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: jgaffney on January 24, 2008, 09:44:59 pm
jgaffney is your 1.2 ghz a core, a MD or a hybrid. I think it should do hd fine if its a MD, but for a core or hybrid every thing read leads towards ups 2's or a 3 ghz. You didn't mention how much ram, but it seems that for HD you need 1 gig in a core and 512 mb in a MD. A hybrid would probably benefit from more but mds and core don't seem to show an improvement from any more ram then listed even for HD. Not that they need an improvement they seem fine with the above. I'll be testing this out in a couple weeks with the same tuner that u have, trying a 3.0ghz for a core only and 1.1 ghz for a md, both intel and using the ram listed above.

Shaun



I am using a core with 1 Gig of ram.
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: golgoj4 on January 25, 2008, 12:40:40 am
Thanx Tom, that's what I was looking for.

Golgoj4,  why post if you have nothing useful to contribute?   There seems to be quite a bit of people out here that do nothing but tell people to "search the forums".   The forums are to help people, not tell them to do what they already did.  The facts are the Wiki is not well organized or 100% accurate.  Searching the forums does not always return results, especially when people have a different sense of terminology or don't know exactly what they are asking for.  So instead of wasting yours and everyone else's time in the forums why don't you contribute to the Wiki so there are less repetitive questions that are so painful for you to help out with.

Hey calm down there kid. We dont need people asking the same questions here because there were too fracking lazy to look. Another user handed it to you, why the hell are you complaining? A little reading / research goes a long way.

If you cant properly format a search query, not my problem. Considering i've had to only ask questions that went beyond the normal scope, maybe its you wasting the time of people who actually come here to help others.

BTW, i have added stuff to the wiki, dont be an ass about it.

K thx and have a nice day.
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: jgaffney on January 25, 2008, 02:46:28 am
Geez, what's with you two.  You complain about not reading or researching when you can't even read the thread you are complaining about.   Again.... the info I asked for is not in the wiki or anywhere else to found,  unbelievable.  ::)
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: Zaerc on January 25, 2008, 03:56:06 am
Yeah excuse me for getting annoyed because somebody throws a fit when asked if they looked around, which they obviously haven't...

You just acknowledged there is no HD info in the wiki,  and come back with this comment?

Your a real piece of work Zaerc.  There is no use for trolls here.   
And now you've just acknowledged that you didn't search at all, cry me a river.
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: golgoj4 on January 25, 2008, 04:30:41 am
Geez, what's with you two.  You complain about not reading or researching when you can't even read the thread you are complaining about.   Again.... the info I asked for is not in the wiki or anywhere else to found,  unbelievable.  ::)

which is why i said search the forum. and if you HAD you would have found the post that tom posted. which is the point. search. look around. put in some effort.

I did read the thread. And thats the reply it got purely because it took little to no effort to find what you were seeking. Should things be better organized? Yes. Are they now? No. Will searching still solve the problem in most cases? Yes. So, im sorry you feel so personally offended or whatever it is that made you commence personal attacks because nothing was served to you. But linux by nature is a bit DIY so it shouldn't be a surprise that research is required.

Please, in the future, search for the topic and save us the snappy attitude when what your looking for is in front of you. Many conversations get heated around here but we don't need to start calling people who are far more helpfull than you 'trolls'

Once again. Search. or this topic will be broached again...
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: golgoj4 on January 25, 2008, 07:38:56 am
ok, now that this bug is in my head.... i set about looking for this information and lo and behold it isnt easy to glean by any means that I could tell.

So i started making a list, then realized the answer is already in the mythWiki it seems

http://www.mythtv.org/wiki/index.php/HD_Playback_Reports#User_Reported_Data.


Which brings up another question. Theres a script on that page that people can use to generate a report on their system playback details. Is there anyway we could integrate this into lmce...maybe something in the initial install that reports it back to a database? Over my head @ the moment seeing as how im still learning c, but just an idea. Maybe one of the devs could look into that one.

Also, i have no idea what the lmce requirements would be 'on top' of the requirements to play Hi def content? im not talking on a media director, but a core/hybrid situation.

jgaffney:
sorry we got off on the wrong foot, and your point about the information being hard to find is taken. i still stand by my 'use the search!' statement but i can see how endlessly going through threads for clues isnt the best way to organize info. Hopefully the myth page i linked above will help you make your decision.

Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: Hagen on January 25, 2008, 09:58:56 am
Your a real piece of work Zaerc.  There is no use for trolls here.   
You are absolutely correct, there is no use for trolls here.
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: rrambo on January 25, 2008, 02:51:14 pm
jgaffney is your 1.2 ghz a core, a MD or a hybrid. I think it should do hd fine if its a MD, but for a core or hybrid every thing read leads towards ups 2's or a 3 ghz. You didn't mention how much ram, but it seems that for HD you need 1 gig in a core and 512 mb in a MD. A hybrid would probably benefit from more but mds and core don't seem to show an improvement from any more ram then listed even for HD. Not that they need an improvement they seem fine with the above. I'll be testing this out in a couple weeks with the same tuner that u have, trying a 3.0ghz for a core only and 1.1 ghz for a md, both intel and using the ram listed above.

Shaun



I want to disagree..  however, without being able to back it up....  I don't think 1.2 ghz in a MD will handle HD...  problem is, I haven't had anything to test with...  I just got a 720p version of Matrix that I will try on my 1.6 ghz MD with 784 RAM and get back with my results....

Ok..  I successfully played a 720p version of The Matrix on my MD with 1.6ghz sempron and 784mb ram..  no stuttering, no dropping..  everything seemed fine....  what I need is some 1080i or 1080p test clips to try out...  I'll download some trailers and see what happens...
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: jgaffney on January 25, 2008, 04:31:16 pm
Yeah excuse me for getting annoyed because somebody throws a fit when asked if they looked around, which they obviously haven't...

You just acknowledged there is no HD info in the wiki,  and come back with this comment?

Your a real piece of work Zaerc.  There is no use for trolls here.   
And now you've just acknowledged that you didn't search at all, cry me a river.

You're posts make no sense at all.  You're not only hypocritical with your advice but just plain ridiculous with your logic.
If you can help someone help them,  if not, move on.
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: jgaffney on January 25, 2008, 04:33:43 pm
jgaffney is your 1.2 ghz a core, a MD or a hybrid. I think it should do hd fine if its a MD, but for a core or hybrid every thing read leads towards ups 2's or a 3 ghz. You didn't mention how much ram, but it seems that for HD you need 1 gig in a core and 512 mb in a MD. A hybrid would probably benefit from more but mds and core don't seem to show an improvement from any more ram then listed even for HD. Not that they need an improvement they seem fine with the above. I'll be testing this out in a couple weeks with the same tuner that u have, trying a 3.0ghz for a core only and 1.1 ghz for a md, both intel and using the ram listed above.

Shaun



I want to disagree..  however, without being able to back it up....  I don't think 1.2 ghz in a MD will handle HD...  problem is, I haven't had anything to test with...  I just got a 720p version of Matrix that I will try on my 1.6 ghz MD with 784 RAM and get back with my results....

Ok..  I successfully played a 720p version of The Matrix on my MD with 1.6ghz sempron and 784mb ram..  no stuttering, no dropping..  everything seemed fine....  what I need is some 1080i or 1080p test clips to try out...  I'll download some trailers and see what happens...

Where are getting the video clips from?  I've gotten some from here http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/musicandvideo/hdvideo/contentshowcase.aspx
But can't seem to get them to play.
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: jgaffney on January 25, 2008, 04:45:27 pm
jgaffney:
sorry we got off on the wrong foot, and your point about the information being hard to find is taken. i still stand by my 'use the search!' statement but i can see how endlessly going through threads for clues isnt the best way to organize info. Hopefully the myth page i linked above will help you make your decision.



I agree with "use the search",  I did use the search, I searched the Wiki, I searched the forums, and couldn't find what I needed.  I don't think my question was that simple of a question that everyone should just know or easily find. It certainly didn't warrant the blasting I got for asking it or the many other similar ones I see quite often in other posts that look to be very valid questions.
Anyways, thanx for the link.  No hard feelings.
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: rrambo on January 25, 2008, 05:08:24 pm
jgaffney is your 1.2 ghz a core, a MD or a hybrid. I think it should do hd fine if its a MD, but for a core or hybrid every thing read leads towards ups 2's or a 3 ghz. You didn't mention how much ram, but it seems that for HD you need 1 gig in a core and 512 mb in a MD. A hybrid would probably benefit from more but mds and core don't seem to show an improvement from any more ram then listed even for HD. Not that they need an improvement they seem fine with the above. I'll be testing this out in a couple weeks with the same tuner that u have, trying a 3.0ghz for a core only and 1.1 ghz for a md, both intel and using the ram listed above.

Shaun



I want to disagree..  however, without being able to back it up....  I don't think 1.2 ghz in a MD will handle HD...  problem is, I haven't had anything to test with...  I just got a 720p version of Matrix that I will try on my 1.6 ghz MD with 784 RAM and get back with my results....

Ok..  I successfully played a 720p version of The Matrix on my MD with 1.6ghz sempron and 784mb ram..  no stuttering, no dropping..  everything seemed fine....  what I need is some 1080i or 1080p test clips to try out...  I'll download some trailers and see what happens...

Where are getting the video clips from?  I've gotten some from here http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/musicandvideo/hdvideo/contentshowcase.aspx
But can't seem to get them to play.

Well, my 720p Matrix I won't comment on or my 720p version of 300...  I can say though the real test would be a dedicated HD source like a ripped bluray or hd-dvd.... since I don't have a bluray or hd-dvd player I feel I can't really test it adequately...  you can download HD trailers from apple.trailers.com...  although they are in .mov QT format and I can't remember if lmce will play .mov files or not...  I'm going to download a few and see if I can convert to .avi or .mp4
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: jgaffney on January 25, 2008, 05:08:34 pm
Here is one issue I'm having.

" Video
Most people use nVidia cards to play HDTV, although ATI cards are capable as well. AGP is a minimum as the PCI bus does not have the bandwidth for HDTV unless XvMC is used. Which is a fine option for those looking to make use of an older system, but due to the hassle it can be to getting it working well it is not really recommended. "


I currently have a PCI card,  I don't have an AGP slot but do have a PCI express slot.  I'll see if I can return my PCI card for an PCI express.  Hopefully that will solve my HD issue.
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: Loki008 on January 25, 2008, 05:49:32 pm
ok, now that this bug is in my head.... i set about looking for this information and lo and behold it isnt easy to glean by any means that I could tell.

This is what I was referring to in my post. When I first came here, I did read everything I could find in the wiki and performed several searches in the forum, but there were still a few categories where the info did not seem complete or was contradictory in nature, so I posted a thread about it. And I have to say I did get a similar response along the lines of "don’t bother us and figure it out yourself, and if you cant figure it out yourself then it’s not our fault that other users haven’t properly documented their experiences". The questions I had, and even with the time I have been here still have, mostly regarded the playback of live TV and zwave integration. Both of those in the sample video as well as in the wiki were shown in such a way to seem seamlessly supported, yet in actuality seem to have quite a few issues and are not as supported as they are advertised.

I feel that many of these questions can be easily taken care of with a simple well maintained sticky of the most frequently asked questions right at the top of the user forum.
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: jgaffney on January 25, 2008, 08:32:30 pm
I was unable to find a 6200 PCI-X card so I now have a NVIDIA 8400 GS.

I swapped them and now have driver problems.  I'm about to follow this:
http://wiki.linuxmce.com/index.php/Display_Drivers
To change the drivers for the 8400 GS  but another poster said this driver would be in 710,  I'm running 710B3.
Is this still the right path to go down?
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: golgoj4 on January 25, 2008, 10:21:00 pm
ok, now that this bug is in my head.... i set about looking for this information and lo and behold it isnt easy to glean by any means that I could tell.

This is what I was referring to in my post. When I first came here, I did read everything I could find in the wiki and performed several searches in the forum, but there were still a few categories where the info did not seem complete or was contradictory in nature, so I posted a thread about it. And I have to say I did get a similar response along the lines of "don’t bother us and figure it out yourself, and if you cant figure it out yourself then it’s not our fault that other users haven’t properly documented their experiences". The questions I had, and even with the time I have been here still have, mostly regarded the playback of live TV and zwave integration. Both of those in the sample video as well as in the wiki were shown in such a way to seem seamlessly supported, yet in actuality seem to have quite a few issues and are not as supported as they are advertised.

I feel that many of these questions can be easily taken care of with a simple well maintained sticky of the most frequently asked questions right at the top of the user forum.

I agree that information could be better organized, but its there. Right now the forum admins are working on creating stickies or general FAQs to make it easier to find stuff.

There is a LOT i've had to figure out myself. But then i didn't but linuxMCE, its free and its open source. Which generally means (from my experience) that YOU have to take the initiative to find what you need.

Is it ideal at the moment? No, but until the project matures a little more, its quite DIY. I dont even have HD but I was able to find what jgaffney was looking for rather quickly. I think that sometimes, it feels as if people assume other members are here for tech support at their whim when a little effort would both serve to help them understand how the information is listed (which is all over the place granted) and how to find what they are looking for.


BTW, what issues are you having with live tv? I dont use zwave so im sorry to say i cant help with that.
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: Loki008 on January 25, 2008, 11:09:51 pm
BTW, what issues are you having with live tv? I dont use zwave so im sorry to say i cant help with that.

i dont have it up and running yet, but i am just about to start purchasing zwave equipment as well as a few tuners to start doing live tv. what i have seen on the forums is that live tv quality can be quite hit or miss with many people having performance or lock up issues with using live tv.
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: golgoj4 on January 26, 2008, 01:59:24 am
BTW, what issues are you having with live tv? I dont use zwave so im sorry to say i cant help with that.

i dont have it up and running yet, but i am just about to start purchasing zwave equipment as well as a few tuners to start doing live tv. what i have seen on the forums is that live tv quality can be quite hit or miss with many people having performance or lock up issues with using live tv.

I haven't time to upgrade to any of the new betas so I cant speak to if any issues were fixed though I did notice a thread about myth still locking up. Is there a reason in particular that you are choosing zwave? DDamron has done some awesome work with insteon and I think that might be something you look into before you buy the zwave. Not trying to sway you, just pointing out the different options.

As far as the live tv in 0704 - i can watch tv directly by bypassing lmce. myth locks up while watching unless I rewind a few seconds (found that in another thread). I would wait on the tuners until its more stable but then maybe the issues have been fixed since I last read about.

I'll try and find those links and direct you to them.
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: Loki008 on January 26, 2008, 03:06:14 am
BTW, what issues are you having with live tv? I dont use zwave so im sorry to say i cant help with that.

i dont have it up and running yet, but i am just about to start purchasing zwave equipment as well as a few tuners to start doing live tv. what i have seen on the forums is that live tv quality can be quite hit or miss with many people having performance or lock up issues with using live tv.

I haven't time to upgrade to any of the new betas so I cant speak to if any issues were fixed though I did notice a thread about myth still locking up. Is there a reason in particular that you are choosing zwave? DDamron has done some awesome work with insteon and I think that might be something you look into before you buy the zwave. Not trying to sway you, just pointing out the different options.

As far as the live tv in 0704 - i can watch tv directly by bypassing lmce. myth locks up while watching unless I rewind a few seconds (found that in another thread). I would wait on the tuners until its more stable but then maybe the issues have been fixed since I last read about.

I'll try and find those links and direct you to them.

i am going zwave because i can get the switches cheap.
Title: Re: Minimum Processor?
Post by: rrambo on January 26, 2008, 05:34:45 pm
jgaffney is your 1.2 ghz a core, a MD or a hybrid. I think it should do hd fine if its a MD, but for a core or hybrid every thing read leads towards ups 2's or a 3 ghz. You didn't mention how much ram, but it seems that for HD you need 1 gig in a core and 512 mb in a MD. A hybrid would probably benefit from more but mds and core don't seem to show an improvement from any more ram then listed even for HD. Not that they need an improvement they seem fine with the above. I'll be testing this out in a couple weeks with the same tuner that u have, trying a 3.0ghz for a core only and 1.1 ghz for a md, both intel and using the ram listed above.

Shaun



I want to disagree..  however, without being able to back it up....  I don't think 1.2 ghz in a MD will handle HD...  problem is, I haven't had anything to test with...  I just got a 720p version of Matrix that I will try on my 1.6 ghz MD with 784 RAM and get back with my results....

Ok..  I successfully played a 720p version of The Matrix on my MD with 1.6ghz sempron and 784mb ram..  no stuttering, no dropping..  everything seemed fine....  what I need is some 1080i or 1080p test clips to try out...  I'll download some trailers and see what happens...

Where are getting the video clips from?  I've gotten some from here http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/musicandvideo/hdvideo/contentshowcase.aspx
But can't seem to get them to play.

Well, my 720p Matrix I won't comment on or my 720p version of 300...  I can say though the real test would be a dedicated HD source like a ripped bluray or hd-dvd.... since I don't have a bluray or hd-dvd player I feel I can't really test it adequately...  you can download HD trailers from apple.trailers.com...  although they are in .mov QT format and I can't remember if lmce will play .mov files or not...  I'm going to download a few and see if I can convert to .avi or .mp4

No surprise, 1080p will not play with my 1.6ghz cpu..  720p plays fine...  1080p will play for 2-5 seconds before stuttering and then locking up.