Blu-ray Media Center

[engineersruntheworld]

Hey, I'm in the process of building a media center center that handles blu-ray and HD-DVD movies. I'm curious, is the decoding of blu-ray movies more processor dependent or video card dependent? For example, if I get a super powerful video card and paired it with a moderate P4, what kind of performance am I going to get? If anyone who has already done something similar could reply with their hardware setup (video card, processor, ram, and operating system) along with an overview of how well it performs when watching HD movies, I would greatly appreciate it.

Thanks

[un4gvn94538]

ive read on the nvidia site that the card handles some of the processing. check out the site

[Obiit]

Depends on your budget but it's best to mix and match. A decent card will offload the video processing leaving the CPU to do the rest.

I've run a P4 2.6 with an ATI 2400Pro and that played Blu-ray fine (but only in stereo). Note:- that card has problems with MPEG2 but is fine with the rest of the Video codecs

I have both an ATI 2600XT and an ATI 3450 and they play blu-ray fine on either an Athlon 64 3800+ or an Intel Core2Duo 2.2 (both using 2 gig of ram) while decoding all HD audio codecs.

It's up to you in the end but read up on the cards as un4gvn94538 said. I can recommend the ATI's.

Oh and if it's for a living room installation it may be worth looking at quiet or silent components.

HTH

P.S.

If you want to use Vista (spawn of the devil) then you will need more RAM than XP.

[engineersruntheworld]

I agree about Vista being the spawn of the devil and will stay away from it at all costs. A Linux based solution would be ideal, but right now if I'm not mistaken it has really shoddy Blu-Ray and HD-DVD support. I have an extra XP install I'll probably end up resorting to that for now.

[dpomp]

go to woot.com

[engineersruntheworld]

Wow, thats an amazing deal.

[Wreck]

yeah they do one day deals .... thats crazy that deal was up today when u posted this topic and he was able to reply with that lol.

[Barnum]

Originally Posted by engineersruntheworld

I agree about Vista being the spawn of the devil and will stay away from it at all costs. A Linux based solution would be ideal, but right now if I'm not mistaken it has really shoddy Blu-Ray and HD-DVD support. I have an extra XP install I'll probably end up resorting to that for now.

Here we go again with the I hate Vista crap. Vista is an excellent OS when run on the proper hardware. Running it on your celeron with 512 meg of ram no wonder there is a problem.

You can use either XP or Vista with media center extension and all will be good. If you really want to save some bucks look into the newest offerings from AMD. Their new 780 chipset is designed with media center PCs in mind. The 790 chipset is a step up but twice the cost. I would also go with nothing less then a dual core running at 2.4 gig or higher. Like I said the 780 chipset with a better CPU will not need an upgraded video card the one onboard is designed for HD.

Buy with caution the one on Woot today. Gateway has not made a quality pc in years. Not to mention its a refurb.

[dpomp]

just to add on to bigBLUballz comment, this deal only lasts for 1 day so unfortunately if you can't buy this today, you won't be able to get it.

the good thing is it's only $5 shipping.

[maxmcleod]

look at my setup, i have a moderate processor and a simple video card
mobo, processor and video card total cost was 200 bucks...
and it plays blurays perfectly...

i wouldn't drop to a p4, i would stick with dual core at least

[Obiit]

Originally Posted by Barnum

Vista is an excellent OS when run on the proper hardware.

That is correct BUT the vast majority of people DON'T have the proper hardware (and i mean anything before Vista was released isn't the proper hardware) hence their dislike for the OS. Even Steve Ballmer says it is a work in progress - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04...ta_incomplete/ .

Oh and a celeron with 512 meg of RAM is within specification for Vista http://www.microsoft.com/windows/pro...uirements.mspx .

Anyhow back to the matter in hand - engineersruntheworld you are correct as there is no Linux blu-ray solution. They do not have the licenses to decode the encryption methods used in HD. So you are stuck with Windows - either XP or Vista. If your getting a brand new PC then Vista will work fine but make sure you have extra ram budgeted in the spec. If your getting an older PC XP is the best bet.

[trshaw]

Originally Posted by engineersruntheworld

Hey, I'm in the process of building a media center center that handles blu-ray and HD-DVD movies. I'm curious, is the decoding of blu-ray movies more processor dependent or video card dependent? For example, if I get a super powerful video card and paired it with a moderate P4, what kind of performance am I going to get? If anyone who has already done something similar could reply with their hardware setup (video card, processor, ram, and operating system) along with an overview of how well it performs when watching HD movies, I would greatly appreciate it.

Thanks

Depends, from my limited experience AVC/MPG4 movies are VERY processor intensive, VC-1 require very little processor power.

I'm running a p4 3Ghz OC to about 20%, with a LG-GGC -H20L Daul BD/HD drive on a vista 32 system with max ram (4gig seen as 3.5 or so) and a 8500gts vid card.

I can play VC-1 effortlessly no noticeable stutters/stalls or blotches in either HD or BD format.

Playing MPG4 however, is a different story, some movies will run 8-10 minutes before picture becomes distorted and unwatchable, others will stutter and make it difficult to watch (again either format).

Vid cards say they have hardware acceleration, but what good is it if none of the software seems to use it. Do yourself a favor, get a Good solid dual core processor and a decent vid card (8500+ or equivalent). Why take chances of having to upgrade/rebuild sooner..

[JadedRaverLA]

Originally Posted by Obiit

That is correct BUT the vast majority of people DON'T have the proper hardware (and i mean anything before Vista was released isn't the proper hardware) hence their dislike for the OS. Even Steve Ballmer says it is a work in progress - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04...ta_incomplete/ .

As a beta tester for Microsoft, let me just make a few points. I have Vista running on 5 computers, 2 of which are from 2003-2004. As long as you have 1 GB RAM, it runs very well. No problems with the hardware on any of the systems. As far as "a work in progress," every OS from Microsoft is a work in progress to one degree or another. It's always a step on the road to the next OS (or at last the next service pack).

Originally Posted by Obiit

Oh and a celeron with 512 meg of RAM is within specification for Vista http://www.microsoft.com/windows/pro...uirements.mspx .

That is true, but VERY unfortunate. Vista was never designed to run on such a system. Late in the beta, Microsoft released their final minimum and recommended specs... and all hell broke loose. Those beta testers who had tried running Vista on systems with only 512MB of RAM knew that it wasn't really functional at that level. Many of us pushed for a hard lock during the install process mandating 1 GB of RAM, but Microsoft said that it could pose issues with systems with 1 GB RAM that used system RAM as graphics memory (resulting in less than 1 GB of actual RAM). In the end, manufacturers, trying to have the cheapest possible systems on the store shelves, were shipping systems (especially notebooks) with only 512 MB of RAM, part of which was taken by the graphics chip. It's a completely unacceptable situation... and Microsoft should definitely prevent this, but they are trying to sell Vista to anyone willing to pay at this point.

Originally Posted by Obiit

Anyhow back to the matter in hand - engineersruntheworld you are correct as there is no Linux blu-ray solution. They do not have the licenses to decode the encryption methods used in HD. So you are stuck with Windows - either XP or Vista. If your getting a brand new PC then Vista will work fine but make sure you have extra ram budgeted in the spec. If your getting an older PC XP is the best bet.

I don't really disagree with your overall recommendation. But, if the system is older but still sufficiently fast (fast single core processor or any dual core processor... and AT LEAST 1 GB of RAM), Vista will run very nicely... and give you an overall better user experience than XP.

Now don't get me wrong... I'm definitely not a Microsoft apologist. In fact, I'm moving to Mac with for my next systems. But, the biggest thing Microsoft did "wrong" was releasing XP SP2 as a Service Pack instead of a new OS. Had they called it a new OS, people wouldn't have the same expectation that Vista would run on any XP-capable hardware as they do now.

[Obiit]

JadedRaverLA i really don't envy you beta testing anything Microsoft

I'm on the user end of the stick so my opinion may be slightly jaded (ok a hell of a lot jaded ). I work in a medium sized college attempting to deploy Vista to 1200 workstations AND sort out lecturers/managers home pc's when they have upgraded/bought a machine using Vista. This means that what i have to support is a wide spectrum of kit and applications that need to work on Vista and a significant portion don't work properly. They have read the specs, taken in the blurb and we get to deal with the fallout There is a large dent in the plaster on the wall behind my desk about 5"8' up where everyday i have to bang my head to negate the stress of yet another problem caused by Vista. This is my experiance so you can understand why i said what i have said

In my experience from all that, you need a minimum of 2gig of RAM and a genuine Intel motherboard/CPU for Vista to get better user experience than XP (but even then we have Intel boards with the ATI Express 200 chipset that won't resume from sleep properly). Don't get me wrong Vista is superior in HD codec playing than XP so it's all pro's and con's of each OS as hardware is never the same thing twice.

Despite hating the damned OS i am installing it on my HTPC as all the kit i've just described is in it (and mentioned previously - ATI cards accelerate HD codecs the best in my opinion) and the picture quality really is superior to XP BUT that is the only task that PC does. Everything else is done on another machine running XP (or my iBook G4).

As most people on this forum seem to want to know a definitive answer to a question - can i play blu-ray on "YYZ" PC spec? Unfortunately the answer will always produce different ones from different people as they all have thier own opinions of thier experiences. It always boils down to one thing - money and have i got enought to buy/experiment with the kit! The most important thing i've discovered is if the graphics card accelerates HD codecs correctly then the software will take advantage of it and you will end up with a great blu experience. Unfortunately only the modern kit seems to do this so money will be needed in most cases.

Any card above an Nvidia 8600 or an ATI HD2600 (excluding the ATI HD2900 which doesn't accelerate HD codecs at all ) will accelerate HD codecs fine, so that partnered with a decent CPU (above 3 gig single or 1.8 dual), 2 gig of RAM (it is cheap nowadays isn't it ), a blu-ray drive and the OS of your choice will get you a machine capable of the georgeous eyecandy that is blu-ray!

Obiit