New to Sage & HD-PVR & Building an HTPC

[SWKerr]

Tom's Hardware has charts of CPU performance on a lot of CPUs. Even if the one you want is not on the list you can probably see where it will fit in the list. The link is for Xvid encoding which I think is a good guide based on how you will be using it. The charts give you an idea of the true real world difference between processors. Some of the tests will not use all cores so you can get an idea of how an application might run if it was single threaded as well.

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/charts...1-1-3,831.html

** The low power Intel's are pricey because they just cam out.

** They have not added any of the new AMD X4 since they also just came out but they do have an article about how they compare as well.
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/phenom...iew-31485.html

[TorontoSage]

Thanks. I did check those charts and a number of other articles on Tom's Hardware but it did really help in determining bang for the buck.

Quad cores appear to outperform dual cores but only incases where the software is multi-threaded. And even though it might be multi-threaded, it still might not take advantage of all of the cores. And, even if it takes advantage of all of the cores it might not max them out. The transcoding software on SageTV appears to take advantage of all of the cores, but does not max them out but makes better use of them, according to the software release notes on release 6.5.7.

The amount of L2 cache also appears to be a not-insignificant factor in performance. The clock speed of the CPU (once you get past 2+ GHz or so)appears to take a back seat to cache in terms of overall performance.

So, what is the best combination of cache, clock speed and cores in terms of bang for the buck? I am really not sure, but I am leaning towards a quad core simply because the transcoder software does appear to take advantage of more than 2 cores. And, I think I will tend towards getting a quad core chip with a higher level of cache that the 4M available in the most junior model.

If anything, quad core may future-proof me against future improvements in software that take full advantage of the chip.

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by TorontoSage

If anything, quad core may future-proof me against future improvements in software that take full advantage of the chip.

Exactly why I'd take a slightly slower quad over a slightly faster dual and why more L2 is important.

As far as telling you which to get, you want the best one you can afford at the time. If that's an i7 920 get that, it might be overkilll now but maybe not in a few years. If it's a Q9450, a Q6600 or an E6600, get that. Only you can decide what's in your budget.

[TorontoSage]

Originally Posted by S_M_E

Exactly why I'd take a slightly slower quad over a slightly faster dual and why more L2 is important.

As far as telling you which to get, you want the best one you can afford at the time. If that's an i7 920 get that, it might be overkilll now but maybe not in a few years. If it's a Q9450, a Q6600 or an E6600, get that. Only you can decide what's in your budget.

I think I am going to choose the Q9550 for $257 USD with free shipping to NYC (where a business associate will bring it back to Toronto for me, which will save me the usurious UPS brokerage fee, GST & PST fees and shipping to Canada). I don't want to go with the i7 CPU family because of the fact it uses much expensive DDR3 memory and requires a more expensive motherboard and I am already allocating more $ to the CPU than I wanted to.

I decided on quad core instead of dual core, as I will be doing a lot of transcoding and commercial skip detection and the SageTV transcoding software has recently been optimized, albeit only partially, for all of the cores. The commercial skip detection takes advantage of multiple cores, but I am not sure how many. Also, although I will be running 5 - HD200's off a headless server and I heard a comment on the forums that money is better spent on HD200's than a more powerful server chip, this will future proof me against future software improvements that take advantage of quad core CPUs. And, also, in the scheme of things, HD200's are about $200 whereas I could have saved only about $100 by buying a much less powerful server chip, so the impact of the savings on the whole project cost is not much (and, yes, I know, everything adds up, but you have to make your own value matrix decisions...)

I also wanted to go with the maximum cache I could afford, given that the level of cache appears to make a big difference in performance for SageTV. Of the four 12M L2 cache Quad Core Intel CPUs (all of which have a 1333 MHz front side bus and 45nm production process) here are the specs and the approximate pricing (which seem change by the hour) of the CPUs I had to choose from:

Q9450 - $315, 2.66 GHz, 95w TDP, discontinued, hard to find & more expensive than the Q9550;
Q9550 - $257, 2.83 GHz, 95w TDP, readily available in both C1 and EO steppings (not really too sure about what this means but the latter is a more recent version, and about 5% more expensive);
Q9550s - $390, 2.83 GHz, 65w (low-power version of Q9550), harder to find and way more expensive than even the Q9650; and
Q9650 - $332, 3 GHz, 95w, but 30% or $75 more than the Q9550 for the same 12M L2 cache, same power requirements. Not worth the premium when the only difference over the Q9450 is 0.170 Ghz higher clock speed.

I know that I could get a dual Core E series Intel CPU for about 1/2 the price or an AMD chip for maybe even less. Also, by way of comparison, I could have chosen the very popular, most junior in terms of performance, but aging Quad Core Q6600 (2.4 GHz, 8M L2 cache, 1066 MHz front side bus, 65nm, 95w) for $65 less. Or I could get the popular Dual Core E8400 (3 GHz, 6M L2 cache, 1333 MHz front side bus, 45nm, 65w) for $165 or $90 cheaper, but with respect to the former, I thought that the extra 600 MHz clock speed, 33% more cache, cooler running temperature and faster front side bus (although reports I read say that a step up in bus speed doesn't really affect performance) was worth the 30% premium. And even though the E8400 is $90 cheaper, it is only dual core and only has 1/2 the cache that the Q9550 does.

I toyed with the idea of getting the lower power 65w Q9550s, which is exactly the same as the 95w Q9550, but the price premium over the Q9550 meant it would take me more than 5 years to recoup the extra electricity charges (with the server on 24/7) and I'll likely upgrade the HTPC by then.

I know that some might think I am going into a lot of likely unnecessary detail here about my choices, but given I've done all of this research I figure it's a good thing to post it all as it may assist others in their decision-making process. And I do appreciate the help others are giving me.

And now on to the motherboard decision!

[SWKerr]

Well I have to say that the research you did and put into this thread is likely to help a lot of people make up their own minds.

The chips you are looking at have this but in case some one else is thinking of one of the lower end Intel quad cores make sure you get one that supports Virtualization. I think it would be worth the extra cash to step up to one that does. That is a technology that will be pretty useful and common in the next few years.

[S_M_E]

The money you save by not going with the more expensive options can be put towards more hard drives. WHS+Sage likes hard drives.

[wayner]

re: Firewire - the SA boxes have two firewire ports and you can daisy chain the SA boxes if needed. This is what I have done and then you only need one firewire port although most mobos seem to come with two - one is often attached to a front port. But you might want to load up on 6 pin - 6 pin firewire cables the next time you order from monoprice.com.

[TorontoSage]

Motherboard ('Mobo') Decision

I've decided to go with a Gigabyte mobo as they have been getting great reviews lately. Asus was a close second. I've heard both good and bad things about quality though for both brands, so I just have to bite the bullet. Also, someone else on these forums that they recently did a build with the same Gigabyte mobo I've decided to use and they had great success. And, given this is my first build, I want to be extra careful. Plus, the difference in price among mobo's does not appear to be that great. I am sure there are many other great mobo manufacturers out there too, but I am starting to get weary doing all of this research!

Wayner suggested that I get a board with 8 Sata ports (for lots of hard drives), PCI lots (for tuners, modems, etc), and firewire (for quicker channel changing on the HD-PVR than using the built-in IR-blaster) Of course, I also had to get a board compatible with the Intel Quad Core Q9550 chip that I chose and that meant a Intel P45 Express Chipset, support for DDR2 memory and 1333 FSB support,

The well laid out and graphically rich Gigabyte website really helped me to understand what these mobo's are all about. Even though I come from the tech industry, I am way behind on understanding how to put a PC together. I narrowed it down to the highest performance P45 mobo's, which were the Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3P and the Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3R. I read this on another forum website: 'the only difference between those 2 boards appears to be that 'the ud3r is a single x16 pci-x slot, and the ud3p is a dual pci-x slot, with one at x16 and the second at x8 which is really a non issue these days'. But, actually, when I went to Gigabytes website and looked at the comparison chart, there were more differences (so it pays to do a bit of extra research). The 3P also has 2 GbE Lan, Crossfire, SLI and Dolby Home Theatre support and so that sealed the deal for me. I wanted Dolby Home Theatre audio support, just in case, even though I won't be using it fo now, but I am starting to think I should maybe put a Blu-Ray drive in this HTPC and use it for my home theatre. As for those extra features, the 2GbE LAN is nice to have (1 GbE is enough) and the Crossfire and SLI (some type of ATI and Nvidia video support) were just added bonuses that I have no need for.

The 3P also has 2 PCI X16 & 3 PC X1 slots (not sure what that means but I know I need PCI slots), 8 Sata ports, 2 eSata II, 1 HD Audio, 1 SPDIF In/Out, 3 Firewire (IEE 1394) (I see now that I only need one, but it's good to have more), 12 USB 2.0, 1 COM, 1 PS/2 keyboard/mouse, 2 RJ-45, and 6 audio jacks. No VGA onboard but this is going to be a headless server, which means no keyboard or monitor, so that's fine. I can always buy a cheap video card if I need to. The board also employs energy saving technology.

Anyway, it appears to meet all of my needs and all this for only $115 USD with Newegg mail-in rebate! And it also was awarded the Gold Editors' Choice from Anandtech.com

I'll likely mull around my choices for a couple of weeks given I'll be on vacation soon, and also listen to anyone's comments before I actually buy and start putting this HTPC together.

So, please let me know what you think!

[SWKerr]

You will need a video card if just for the install. The ATI 3450 will do BluRay\HDMI for only about $30. The 4350 is $10 more.

If you are going to use it as an HTPC then you may also need to consider where to put it and also thank about the noise it would make. If it is near the TV you would want to use big fans with something to lower\control their speed.

If it will be a HTPC you can use the remote that comes with the HD-PVR but might also want to consider the USB-UIRT.

MonoPrice.com carries some long HDMI and USB cords at very reasonable prices. That would give you more options on where you could put it.

BluRay's can be ripped and played on the extender without much effort but it is an extra step and $100 for the software. They would play fine on the HTPC with just a HDMI video card and a $00 BluRay player. Just make sure whatever video card you buy is HDCP Ready.

I have two Gigabyte boards and they are nicer than some I have used.

[TorontoSage]

Originally Posted by SWKerr

You will need a video card if just for the install. The ATI 3450 will do BluRay\HDMI for only about $30. The 4350 is $10 more.

Whoops, didn't know that but it makes sense. I'll use a video card from an old PC I have.

I'll be placing the HTPC in a cabinet with a door on the front, which is in the living room. The back of it will be open an unused utility room in the basement (living room is sunken) for now, so heat build-up will likely not be a problem. But, I'll see how that goes and will add a cabinet fan if necessary.

Originally Posted by SWKerr

If it will be a HTPC you can use the remote that comes with the HD-PVR but might also want to consider the USB-UIRT.

THe USB-UIRT is a great idea. I'll use it with a long USB cable so I can place the receiver beside the home theatre plasma.

Originally Posted by SWKerr

BluRay's can be ripped and played on the extender without much effort but it is an extra step and $100 for the software. They would play fine on the HTPC with just a HDMI video card and a $00 BluRay player. Just make sure whatever video card you buy is HDCP Ready.

I will only be playing and only very rarely ripping any BluRay discs. Is the software for the ripping? As, I would imagine that the extender plays any video files on the server. I think I will be getting the BluRay player for the HTPC as I might as well take advantage of all of the processing power there (and I hear that an HTPC plays BluRay discs better than any standalone player). Any suggestions on brand and model?

[S_M_E]

If he's using WHS and extenders (as per his first post); it's really not an HTPC if he's using it headless. He will need a video card for install though.

As for blu-ray, he may be better off putting that in a workstation and ripping his disks, storing them on the WHS. The devs did say something about possible future blu-ray support in extenders.

WHS is not designed to be used as a desktop OS, it's meant to run headless, but some people try anyway.

[TorontoSage]

Ok, I didn't know the terminology.

I don't buy, nor do I want to rip Blu-Rays. I just want to be able to play the ones I rent. So I thought I'd get a BluRay for the server running WHS in order to play the discs.

What are the complexities involved in order to do this? Maybe I should just use a stand-alone Blu-Ray and wait until the extender supports it. But, what does that mean? Does it mean that I could then install the BluRay player in the server, and then watch and control the BluRay disc through the extender (with having to get a monitor or keyboard for the server)? Somehow I don't think it would be that easy.

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by TorontoSage

Ok, I didn't know the terminology.

I don't buy, nor do I want to rip Blu-Rays. I just want to be able to play the ones I rent. So I thought I'd get a BluRay for the server running WHS in order to play the discs.

What are the complexities involved in order to do this? Maybe I should just use a stand-alone Blu-Ray and wait until the extender supports it. But, what does that mean? Does it mean that I could then install the BluRay player in the server, and then watch and control the BluRay disc through the extender (with having to get a monitor or keyboard for the server)? Somehow I don't think it would be that easy.

The HTPC is connected to a TV via the video card for playback. A blu-ray drive, on the WHS server, won't play blu-ray disks unless it uses an external SW player (like powerdvd 8) *and* it's connected to the TV via the video card.

You can use a BR drive to rip BR movies to disk to play on the extenders (needs different SW as SWKerr mentioned and sometimes needs extra processing) or you can use a stand-alone player hooked up to the TV, as you mentioned.

[TorontoSage]

Originally Posted by S_M_E

The HTPC is connected to a TV via the video card for playback. A blu-ray drive, on the WHS server, won't play blu-ray disks unless it uses an external SW player (like powerdvd 8) *and* it's connected to the TV via the video card.

You can use a BR drive to rip BR movies to disk to play on the extenders (needs different SW as SWKerr mentioned and sometimes needs extra processing) or you can use a stand-alone player hooked up to the TV, as you mentioned.

Presently, I have no desire to watch the BluRay media anywhere but in the great room that has the home theatre set-up. And, just so just so I understand this correctly: The BluRay player is installed the WHS Server along with the video card. The video card has component or HDMI outputs which are directly connected the the HDTV (both the server and HDTV will be in the same area so I'll just need a longer cable) and then I run a separate SW application which resides on the WHS server to play the BluRay? If so, can I control the BluRay player using an IR remote through a USB-UIRT?

If that is all not possible on the server, is it worth it to build an HTPC just to play BluRays on my Home Theatre in terms of performance over a stand-alone player?

[S_M_E]

Originally Posted by TorontoSage

Presently, I have no desire to watch the BluRay media anywhere but in the great room that has the home theatre set-up. And, just so just so I understand this correctly: The BluRay player is installed the WHS Server along with the video card. The video card has component or HDMI outputs which are directly connected the the HDTV (both the server and HDTV will be in the same area so I'll just need a longer cable) and then I run a separate SW application which resides on the WHS server to play the BluRay? If so, can I control the BluRay player using an IR remote through a USB-UIRT?

Yes and then it *would* be a HTPC but WHS isn't meant to be used like that, it's designed to run headless as a server not as a desktop connected to a TV. While you can install all of the drivers/codecs/decoders/sw you want on WHS, it's not supported. If "not supported" doesn't bother you, then by all means try it. If you don't like the performance you can always move the BR drive out of WHS, to a workstation, and go back to running WHS headless. You will have to install more SW on the WHS than if you ran it headless but I install most of that on WHS for testing anyway.

Personally, I'd rip the BR movies to the hard drive and run them on the extenders or use a stand-alone player, the picture quality is likely to be better. YMMV...

[TorontoSage]

Originally Posted by S_M_E

If "not supported" doesn't bother you, then by all means try it. ...Personally, I'd rip the BR movies to the hard drive and run them on the extenders or use a stand-alone player, the picture quality is likely to be better. YMMV...

It bothers big time, so I'll stay away from that. I'll just pop them in a stand-alone Blu-Ray player as that's a lot less work (and BluRay players don't cost much these days). And, I am only watching them in one location anyway and won't be distributing them through the extenders.

And so, if one only wants to watch BluRays in the home theatre, one never wants to watch them on the extenders, and one always rents not buys and only watches once, is there any advantage to ripping them (other than you get a copy of the media)? Am I right in saying that in this situation, the only advantage is that when you are in the middle of a movie and you want watch the rest of it in the bedroom, you can watch the rest of it there without moving a disc. With physical media you'd have to take it out of the player and insert it into another player in the bedroom (which means buying another player) and fast forward to find where you left off, unless you had the BluRay input into a matrix switch and distributed throughout the house.

What do most people with SageTV do that want to rip BluRays? Do they have a server and then a workstation to rip BluRays? Or do they run a different OS on the server so that it is easier to rip BluRays on it? It seems a lot of people are ripping BluRays on here but I do not know what their set ups are.

[S_M_E]

A lot (if not all) of my WHS tutorials are unsupported but I'm comfortable with my setups and changes. If it bothers you, don't do it.

The main advantage to ripping is that you DO have the option to watch them on any extender, anywhere, anytime, without having to shuffle a disk into a drive and maybe scratching it. If you only rent and only watch once, there's not much sense in ripping. I *only* buy movies that I plan on watching more than once and I like to rip them so I have them available and it's backed up.

I couldn't tell you what "most" people do but, especially with WHS, I'd suggest using a desktop to rip and WHS to store and serve after. Unless some company makes a WHS version or an add-in at least and I wouldn't count on that in the near future.

EDIT:
That's also my suggestion for CD/DVD rips too.

[TorontoSage]

Originally Posted by S_M_E

A lot (if not all) of my WHS tutorials are unsupported but I'm comfortable with my setups and changes. If it bothers you, don't do it.

The main advantage to ripping is that you DO have the option to watch them on any extender, anywhere, anytime, without having to shuffle a disk into a drive and maybe scratching it. If you only rent and only watch once, there's not much sense in ripping. I *only* buy movies that I plan on watching more than once and I like to rip them so I have them available and it's backed up.

I couldn't tell you what "most" people do but, especially with WHS, I'd suggest using a desktop to rip and WHS to store and serve after. Unless some company makes a WHS version or an add-in at least and I wouldn't count on that in the near future.

EDIT:
That's also my suggestion for CD/DVD rips too.

Thanks. Everything is really clear for me now. I didn't realize you had a tutorial online for implementing a BluRay drive on a WHS SageTV server (but I did catch your 64K block tutorial). Where is the tutorial on the BluRay located? I searched but couldn't find it. That makes me feel better about trying the modification. Maybe when I have this WHS server set up and running properly I'll check out your WHS tutorials. Thanks for putting them online.

[TorontoSage]

Originally Posted by wayner

re: Firewire - the SA boxes have two firewire ports and you can daisy chain the SA boxes if needed. This is what I have done and then you only need one firewire port although most mobos seem to come with two - one is often attached to a front port. But you might want to load up on 6 pin - 6 pin firewire cables the next time you order from monoprice.com.

What does daisy chaining the SA boxes do? I'll have 2 max with each connected to an HD PVR. Can you send different signals from one firewire port to a pair of daisy-chained SA boxes and designate by device ID which one the command is designated for? Speaking of device ID's, can you change the device ID on identical SA boxes so they know which one the firewire (or flasher, if you go that way) is talking to?

[Peter_h]

Originally Posted by TorontoSage

What does daisy chaining the SA boxes do? I'll have 2 max with each connected to an HD PVR. Can you send different signals from one firewire port to a pair of daisy-chained SA boxes and designate by device ID which one the command is designated for? Speaking of device ID's, can you change the device ID on identical SA boxes so they know which one the firewire (or flasher, if you go that way) is talking to?

Daisy chaining is just one of the features of firewire. Firewire will allow you to connect one cable to the computer and if the device has additional ports, daisy chain each additional device. The main benefit to this is that you only need to use one firewire port on the computer. This is also beneficial as most newer boards are only coming with one firewire port and maybe an additional firewire header.

The device ID is assigned to each firewire device as it is connected. No two devices will have the same device ID.

The one problem that can arise is that you are inputting this into the registry and sage.properties file to allow channel changing. If the server is restarted, the device ID's can potentially flip flop based on how the server detects each box.

The way around this is to instead use the "Unique ID". This is essentially the MAC address of the box.