HTPC Upgrade Best CPU & MB for highest performace lowest cost.

[biggy]

Greetings!

I would like to upgrade my HTPC system lowest cost and get highest
performance and use as many components from my present system. Note I
am only look at upgrading my MB and CPU. Hopefully to tie me over for
total new system including Quad core blue ray etc. when the prices come
down in the future.

My present HTPC: Note: I am only using one CPU fan so my system is
nice and quiet and running cool. BTW. the MB and CPU combination is
max out.

CPU Type AMD Athlon XP,
2133 MHz (16 x 133) 2800+
Motherboard Name ECS 741(GX)-M
(3 PCI, 1 AGP, 1 CNR, 2 DDR DIMM, Audio, Video, LAN)
Motherboard Chipset SiS 741
System Memory 1024 MB
(PC3200 DDR SDRAM)

Duo Display:
Video Adapter ALL-IN-WONDER
9600 SERIES - Secondary (256 MB)
Video Adapter ALL-IN-WONDER
9600 SERIES (256 MB)
3D Accelerator ATI Radeon 9600
(RV350)

HDTV Wonder PCI

Here is the motherboard I was considering, ASRock 775Dual-Vsta Socket
775, VIA PT880 Pro/Ultra Chipset w/ PCI Express x16 & 8x AGP (ATX)

I selected this motherboard because it supports AGP, unfortunately this
board is not a real good OC. I would also like to use my PC3200 (400
Mhz.) Ram which would limit my OC potential.

What CPU would you select to get best performance at lowest overall
cost? I don't mind paying more money if I really can get the true
performance out of the 2 Duo core E6400 but something tell me that my
old components won't let it happen and it would be waste of $$?

2 Duo core
E4400 FSB 800MZ 9X mult, E6300 $215.
E6400 FSB1032 mult 8x $260
or E6600 $380

Pentium® 4 -524, 3.0-GHz @ 533Mhz w/ 1Mb EM64T (Socket 775) $99
Pentium® 4 -541, x64, 3.2-GHz @ 800Mhz w/ 1Mb (Socket 775) $125

Any other suggestions maybe there other options I overlooked?

Thanks!

 

[Bob Fry]

big> Greetings! I would like to upgrade my HTPC system lowest
big> cost and get highest performance and use as many components
big> from my present system.
.. . .

big> What CPU would you select to get best performance at lowest
big> overall cost? I don't mind paying more money if I really can
big> get the true performance out of the 2 Duo core E6400

Hmmm...I can't answer your direct question. But I am curious and have
a question for you: what Home Theater functionality do you want that
your current system is not giving you? Something deficient with the
audio or video?

 

[nobody]

Hmmm...I can't answer your direct question. But I am curious and have
a question for you: what Home Theater functionality do you want that
your current system is not giving you? Something deficient with the
audio or video?

You'll probably find what you want here:

www.avsforum.com

 

[CJT]

big> Greetings! I would like to upgrade my HTPC system lowest
big> cost and get highest performance and use as many components
big> from my present system.
. . .

big> What CPU would you select to get best performance at lowest
big> overall cost? I don't mind paying more money if I really can
big> get the true performance out of the 2 Duo core E6400

Hmmm...I can't answer your direct question. But I am curious and have
a question for you: what Home Theater functionality do you want that
your current system is not giving you? Something deficient with the
audio or video?

In my experience, PC people tend not to think that way. It's more a
question of bragging rights -- "My PC will run an artificial benchmark
faster than yours ... "

 

[Bob Fry]

CJT> In my experience, PC people tend not to think that way. It's
CJT> more a question of bragging rights -- "My PC will run an
CJT> artificial benchmark faster than yours ... "

Good! You saw the implicit statement in my question, that I think the
OP just might be focused on a tree or two and not seeing the forest.

 

[biggy]

Hi Bob,

Thanks for your quick reply!

To answer your question yes indeed I am having problems and here are a
couple
examples, playing back of some HD file formats WMV media player system
stalls or I get lots of drop frames. Extremely long processing times
for convert mpeg files for HDTV (PVR) recordings to standard DVD.

Window HD WMV format playback requirements are:

Minimum Configuration
(to play 720p video)

... Windows XP
... Windows Media Player 9 Series
... 2.4 GHz processor or equivalent
... 384 MB of RAM
... 64 MB video card
... 1024 x 768 screen resolution
... 16-bit sound card
... Speakers

Optimum Configuration
(to play 1080p video with 5.1 surround sound)

... Windows XP
... Windows Media Player 10
... DirectX 9.0
... 3.0 GHz processor or equivalent
... 512 MB of RAM
... 128 MB video card
... 1920 x 1440 screen resolution
... 24-bit 96 kHz multichannel sound card
... 5.1 surround sound speaker system

As you can see HD windows media files (WMV) playback minimum
requirements are 2.4 Ghz processor. The preferred system is 3ghz or
more. I am sure that duo core processor will help with multi tasking,
but as you note the processing speed even with the E6600 is only 2.4
Ghz. That is why I was thinking of going to the single processor
Pentium® 4 -541, x64, 3.2-GHz @ 800Mhz w/ 1Mb (Socket 775). I could go
on & on but I think I have answer your question and I haven't even
started talking about Blue Ray. That's for super computer I hope to
build when the prices drop maybe next year when the quad processors are
online.

Sure wish I could brag about my poor little 2.1 Ghz xp2800 system.
Windows task manage is running out 100 % most of the time and between
frames dropping out and audio out of sync during play back and system
crashes. I am eager to get some good suggestions for my small upgrade!

Thanks again for your response!

 

[Paul]

Hi Bob,

Thanks for your quick reply!

To answer your question yes indeed I am having problems and here are a
couple
examples, playing back of some HD file formats WMV media player system
stalls or I get lots of drop frames. Extremely long processing times
for convert mpeg files for HDTV (PVR) recordings to standard DVD.

Window HD WMV format playback requirements are:

Minimum Configuration
(to play 720p video)

.. Windows XP
.. Windows Media Player 9 Series
.. 2.4 GHz processor or equivalent
.. 384 MB of RAM
.. 64 MB video card
.. 1024 x 768 screen resolution
.. 16-bit sound card
.. Speakers

Optimum Configuration
(to play 1080p video with 5.1 surround sound)

.. Windows XP
.. Windows Media Player 10
.. DirectX 9.0
.. 3.0 GHz processor or equivalent
.. 512 MB of RAM
.. 128 MB video card
.. 1920 x 1440 screen resolution
.. 24-bit 96 kHz multichannel sound card
.. 5.1 surround sound speaker system

As you can see HD windows media files (WMV) playback minimum
requirements are 2.4 Ghz processor. The preferred system is 3ghz or
more. I am sure that duo core processor will help with multi tasking,
but as you note the processing speed even with the E6600 is only 2.4
Ghz. That is why I was thinking of going to the single processor
Pentium® 4 -541, x64, 3.2-GHz @ 800Mhz w/ 1Mb (Socket 775). I could go
on & on but I think I have answer your question and I haven't even
started talking about Blue Ray. That's for super computer I hope to
build when the prices drop maybe next year when the quad processors are
online.

Sure wish I could brag about my poor little 2.1 Ghz xp2800 system.
Windows task manage is running out 100 % most of the time and between
frames dropping out and audio out of sync during play back and system
crashes. I am eager to get some good suggestions for my small upgrade!

Thanks again for your response!

The Core2 Duo clock rate, should be multiplied by at least 1.5x, to get
a better representation of its effective clock rate. So a 2.4GHz Core2 Duo,
is more like 3.6Ghz. And rather than take my word for it, look at some
benchmarks, compared to some P4 processors.

First of all, with this benchmark, the Pentium D 840 Dual core 3.2GHz, has
the same benchmark results as a Pentium 4 540 (or a 640 for that matter).
The two red bars highlight the selected processors.
So this benchmark seems to only use one core, and allows comparing in
a limited way, the performance of one core of the two cores on a dual
processor. (Many of the benchmarks here, were selected to make dual cores
look good, so it is hard to compare single core performance.)

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=461&model2=446&chart=181

Now, highlight a E6400 2.13GHz dual core and the Pentium 4 570 3.8GHz single core.
The ratio of 3.8/2.13 is 1.78, so you get more than 1.5x the effective clock
rate. And this is comparing a single core to a single core.

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=458&model2=433&chart=181

In the next pair, first I start by comparing the E6400, to the Pentium D 960.
Both are dual cores, the E6400 is 2.13GHz dual and the D 960 is 3.6GHz dual.
The E6400 is ahead by a little this time, because there is no Pentium D family
dual core at 3.8GHz to compare to.

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=436&model2=433&chart=181

Keeping the same E6400 and Pentium D 960 processors, and then switching to a
dual core benchmark (in this case, synthetic comparison of integer and floating
point, where both cores are used). This compares dual core to dual core
performance, and on integer the E6400 (2.13GHz) is ahead of the D 960 (3.6GHz).
On float, they are pretty close to one another.

(Integer)
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=436&model2=433&chart=158
(Float)
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=436&model2=433&chart=159

The Pentium D 960 comes in 130W and a 95W version. The Core2 Duo family are
all rated at 65W.

For a motherboard, I'd be looking for a motherboard that properly supported
any power management features on the processor. At least, for an HTPC, you
want cooler operation when the processor is not busy. EIST and C1E are listed
here. It would take a lot more research though, to determine what is needed to
get it to actually work.

http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SL9S9

# Dual Core
# Enhanced Halt State (C1E) <--- C1E
# Enhanced Intel Speedstep® Technology <--- EIST
# Execute Disable Bit 1
# Intel® EM64T 2
# Intel® Thermal Monitor 2
# Intel® Virtualization Technology

This utility allows making some changes, but I don't know if this program alone
is enough to make it work.

http://cpu.rightmark.org/products/rmclock.shtml

So a Core2 Duo at "only 2.4GHz", is a lot of processor.

(Note: I had to set the Followup: field above, because the USENET server I use
demands it.)

Paul

 

[biggy]

Hi Paul,

Wow, great response just what I was looking for. I also went to Tom’s
website but I wasn’t able to interpret the tests properly. Thanks to
you I understand it better

As I have not used Intel processors for very long time (486DX2) and
only been using AMD single processors, I find it difficult enough task
comparing manufactures apples and oranges and with so many models of
processors (Dou, Qua and more) and new ones coming out it can be mind
boggling. Example the new Intel® Core™2 Duo E4300, 1.80-GHz @ 800Mhz
w/ 2Mb Cache (Socket 775) which I am considering along with the Asrock
MB. To make things worse getting the right balance between older
components and new can be very challenging. With main objective of
increasing the overall performance at minimal $$.

I check the Asrock MB and it looks like it does support (Enhanced Halt
State (C1E) and Enhanced Intel Speedstep® Technology

From the information you have provided to me it looks like I am on the

right track. Here is some options I leaning towards.

Motherboard:

ASRock 775Dual-Vsta Socket 775, VIA PT880 Pro/Ultra Chipset w/ PCI
Express x16 & 8x AGP (ATX) $79 CAN

… Intel® Core™2 Duo E4300, 1.80-GHz @ 800Mhz w/ 2Mb Cache (Socket
775) $215
I have to wait to see if the MB supports this CPU, but I am pretty sure
it will. Looks like a good overclocker. Then again OClocking could be
a problem I want could keep the stock cooling fan and keep the overall
noise level low as possible.

… Intel® Core™2 Duo E6300, 1.86-GHz @ 1066Mhz w/ 2Mb Cache (Socket
775) $215

… Intel® Core™2 Duo E6600, 2.40-GHz @ 1066Mhz w/ 4Mb Cache (Socket
775) $380
I am not sure if this worth it and can my older DDR PC3200 make use of
the extra 2megs of cashe.

Anymore comments would be appreciated.

I like to thank everyone for their comments and a special thanks to
Paul for his very informative reply.

Jay

 

[CJT]

Paul wrote:

The Core2 Duo clock rate, should be multiplied by at least 1.5x, to get
a better representation of its effective clock rate. So a 2.4GHz Core2 Duo,
is more like 3.6Ghz. And rather than take my word for it, look at some
benchmarks, compared to some P4 processors.

First of all, with this benchmark, the Pentium D 840 Dual core 3.2GHz, has
the same benchmark results as a Pentium 4 540 (or a 640 for that matter).
The two red bars highlight the selected processors.
So this benchmark seems to only use one core, and allows comparing in
a limited way, the performance of one core of the two cores on a dual
processor. (Many of the benchmarks here, were selected to make dual cores
look good, so it is hard to compare single core performance.)

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=461&model2=446&chart=181

<snip>

What I find interesting about that chart is that ALL of the processors
on it are within a factor of two in speed (i.e. hardly different at all
in my book, since most tasks that use huge amounts of computational
power can be divided up to use multiple processors). But the cheapest
is MUCH cheaper than the most expensive. It seems about time to extend
the RAID concept to processors -- perhaps RAIP? ;-)

 

[Paul]

Paul wrote:


<snip>

What I find interesting about that chart is that ALL of the processors
on it are within a factor of two in speed (i.e. hardly different at all
in my book, since most tasks that use huge amounts of computational
power can be divided up to use multiple processors). But the cheapest
is MUCH cheaper than the most expensive. It seems about time to extend
the RAID concept to processors -- perhaps RAIP? ;-)

But there are processors that support that. Opterons and Xeons.
Stuff with a server/workstation rating here, is likely to work in
dual (or more) socket boards.

http://www.intel.com/intel/finance/pricelist/processor_price_list.pdf

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_609,00.html?redir=CPT301

*******
The Opteron interconnect is via Hypertransport. Rather than a single
bus, there are links between processors. An Opteron has three links,
and the max buildout is eight processors. The following picture shows
the wiring pattern for 4-way NUMA. When a processor tries to reach
"distant" memory, the access time is longer. Thus, memory access is
"non-uniform". When you buy an Opteron of the right type, you are
paying extra for the "coherent" links provided on the chip. Cache
coherency, means that all the processors have consistent info stored
in their local caches.

http://www.ixbt.com/cpu/rmma/numa/numa4.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypertransport

"Multiprocessor interconnect

Another use for HyperTransport is as an interconnect for NUMA
multiprocessor computers. AMD uses HyperTransport with a
proprietary cache coherency extension as part of their
Direct Connect Architecture in their Opteron and Athlon64 line
of processors."

*******
The Xeon uses a common bus, and processing is symmetric, as each
processor has equal access speed to memory. But the common bus
can also be a choke point, and a potential reason to bump up
the cache on the Xeon. (I suspect this figure is now too simplistic,
and doesn't represent what is happening in the latest chips. This
figure is probably most accurate for older single core Xeons.)

http://www.ixbt.com/cpu/rmma/numa/smp.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xeon

"...except for the addition of SMP support, which lets Dempsey
operate in dual-processor systems"

*******
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symmetric_multiprocessing (Xeon)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Uniform_Memory_Access (Opteron)

Both of which might be considered "tightly coupled cluster computing".
Only certain classes of problems can be sliced up into a large number
of equal pieces. The last benchmark article I saw for the latest Xeons,
the guys doing the benchmarks had trouble finding enough applications
that could actually scale to use all the cores on their fancy system.
Which is why, at the present time, buying more than a dual core may
be bad economics, for desktop users. It can take a while, for the
software to catch up with the hardware.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_computing

Paul

 

[Paul]

Hi Paul,

Wow, great response just what I was looking for. I also went to Tom’s
website but I wasn’t able to interpret the tests properly. Thanks to
you I understand it better

As I have not used Intel processors for very long time (486DX2) and
only been using AMD single processors, I find it difficult enough task
comparing manufactures apples and oranges and with so many models of
processors (Dou, Qua and more) and new ones coming out it can be mind
boggling. Example the new Intel® Core™2 Duo E4300, 1.80-GHz @ 800Mhz
w/ 2Mb Cache (Socket 775) which I am considering along with the Asrock
MB. To make things worse getting the right balance between older
components and new can be very challenging. With main objective of
increasing the overall performance at minimal $$.

I check the Asrock MB and it looks like it does support (Enhanced Halt
State (C1E) and Enhanced Intel Speedstep® Technology

right track. Here is some options I leaning towards.

Motherboard:

ASRock 775Dual-Vsta Socket 775, VIA PT880 Pro/Ultra Chipset w/ PCI
Express x16 & 8x AGP (ATX) $79 CAN

… Intel® Core™2 Duo E4300, 1.80-GHz @ 800Mhz w/ 2Mb Cache (Socket
775) $215
I have to wait to see if the MB supports this CPU, but I am pretty sure
it will. Looks like a good overclocker. Then again OClocking could be
a problem I want could keep the stock cooling fan and keep the overall
noise level low as possible.

… Intel® Core™2 Duo E6300, 1.86-GHz @ 1066Mhz w/ 2Mb Cache (Socket
775) $215

… Intel® Core™2 Duo E6600, 2.40-GHz @ 1066Mhz w/ 4Mb Cache (Socket
775) $380
I am not sure if this worth it and can my older DDR PC3200 make use of
the extra 2megs of cashe.

Anymore comments would be appreciated.

I like to thank everyone for their comments and a special thanks to
Paul for his very informative reply.

Jay

The E4300 may not be available just yet. And likely the BIOS files
will not be ready on time either.

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36495

There are 196 reviews for the Asrock board here.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/CustratingReview.asp?item=N82E16813157092

One reviewer says:

"Pros: worked like a charm right out the box. forward and backward
compatability, runs e6400 without any modifications or problems.
fast standard shipping, of course

Cons: not a good overclocker, but i'm running 290 fsb on stock
cooler with no issues"

So they can go from 266MHz stock, to 290-300MHz. The board is not a
big overclocker, because the chipset is already overclocked to reach
266MHz. I don't think VIA has anything that is purpose-built for
FSB1066. Intel chipsets or perhaps an Nvidia or ATI recent chipset,
would have a better FSB. And ATI's latest may only be available on
a DFI board, whenever they finish it.

I'm not saying the Asrock board is all bad, it just isn't going to be
a lot of fun as an overclocker. It should be fine at stock speed.

The extra cache works and is not dependent on your memory. And as
for performance, it pays to find benchmarks, rather than rely on
theory. While I would hope a larger cache on a E6600 would help
with a slower memory subsystem, I'd rather see benchmarks for a
system as a whole, to see whether it delivers or not.

Paul

 

[biggy]

Hi Paul,

Wow, great response just what I was looking for. I also went to Tom’s
website but I wasn’t able to interpret the tests properly. Thanksto
you I understand it better

As I have not used Intel processors for very long time (486DX2) and
only been using AMD single processors, I find it difficult enough task
comparing manufactures apples and oranges and with so many models of
processors (Dou, Qua and more) and new ones coming out it can be mind
boggling. Example the new Intel® Core™2 Duo E4300, 1.80-GHz @ 800Mhz
w/ 2Mb Cache (Socket 775) which I am considering along with the Asrock
MB. To make things worse getting the right balance between older
components and new can be very challenging. With main objective of
increasing the overall performance at minimal $$.

I check the Asrock MB and it looks like it does support (Enhanced Halt
State (C1E) and Enhanced Intel Speedstep® Technology

right track. Here is some options I leaning towards.

Motherboard:

ASRock 775Dual-Vsta Socket 775, VIA PT880 Pro/Ultra Chipset w/ PCI
Express x16 & 8x AGP (ATX) $79 CAN

… Intel® Core™2 Duo E4300, 1.80-GHz @ 800Mhz w/ 2Mb Cache (Socket
775) $215
I have to wait to see if the MB supports this CPU, but I am pretty sure
it will. Looks like a good overclocker. Then again OClocking could be
a problem I want could keep the stock cooling fan and keep the overall
noise level low as possible.

… Intel® Core™2 Duo E6300, 1.86-GHz @ 1066Mhz w/ 2MbCache (Socket
775) $215

… Intel® Core™2 Duo E6600, 2.40-GHz @ 1066Mhz w/ 4MbCache (Socket
775) $380
I am not sure if this worth it and can my older DDR PC3200 make use of
the extra 2megs of cashe.

Anymore comments would be appreciated.

I like to thank everyone for their comments and a special thanks to
Paul for his very informative reply.

Jay

Paul,

Thanks Again!

Since the Asrock is no such a good overclocker I leaning towards E6600
to hopfully get overall half decent speed at least 2.4Ghz and with some
luck a little more.

Just ran a test on my DDR PC3200

CPU CPU Clock Motherboard Chipset Memory CL-RCD-RP-RAS
AthlonXP 2133 MHz ECS 741(GX)-M SiS741(GX) Ext. PC3200 DDR

SDRAM 3-4-4-9 19 6.8 ns Latency

Definetly not the fastest ram :-( slowwww

At todays list price the min cost for this upgrade:

… E6600 $380
… Asrock MB $79
Tax $64.38

Total $523.38 It could go even higher if the ram has to be
upgraded. I was hope for something around $300.00 total, the E6300 or
the E4300 would be about that

I was having a look at Asrocks website over in Hong Kong, it looks like
they have another new board coming down the tube and I think it looks
pretty good. I have not found anyone selling it yet. It opens the door
for upgrading to Quad core and you can even keep some of your older
parts.

4CoreDual-VSTA

• LGA 775 for Intel® CoreTM 2 Extreme / CoreTM 2 Duo / Pentium® XE
/ Pentium® D / Pentium® 4 / Celeron® D, supporting Quad Core
Kentsfield processors
• VIA® PT880 Ultra Chipset
1. Supports FSB1066/800/533MHz processors and H-T Technology
2. Supports Dual Channel DDRII667 (DDRII x 2 DIMM slots) and DDR400
(DDR x 2 DIMM slots)
3. Untied Overclocking : During Overclocking, FSB enjoys better margin
due to fixed AGP/PCIE/ PCI Buses
4. 1 x PCI Express Graphics slot
5. 1 x AGP 8X slot
6. Hybrid Booster - Safe Overclocking Technology
7. 2 x SerialATA 1.5Gb/s connectors, support RAID 0, 1, JBOD functions
8. HDMI_SPDIF header, providing SPDIF audio output to HDMI VGA card,
allows the system to connect HDMI Digital TV/projector/LCD devices.
9. 7.1 CH Windows® Vista™ Premium Level HD Audio (ALC888 Audio
Codec)
10. Supports all features in Vistaâ„¢ Premium
11. HD 8CH I/O: 4 ready-to-use USB2.0 ports, HD 7.1 channel audio jacks


Interesting eh!

Jay

 

[Sylvain VAN DER WALDE]

Greetings!

I would like to upgrade my HTPC system lowest cost and get highest
performance and use as many components from my present system. Note I
am only look at upgrading my MB and CPU. Hopefully to tie me over for
total new system including Quad core blue ray etc. when the prices come
down in the future.

My present HTPC: Note: I am only using one CPU fan so my system is
nice and quiet and running cool. BTW. the MB and CPU combination is
max out.

CPU Type AMD Athlon XP,
2133 MHz (16 x 133) 2800+
Motherboard Name ECS 741(GX)-M
(3 PCI, 1 AGP, 1 CNR, 2 DDR DIMM, Audio, Video, LAN)
Motherboard Chipset SiS 741
System Memory 1024 MB
(PC3200 DDR SDRAM)

Duo Display:
Video Adapter ALL-IN-WONDER
9600 SERIES - Secondary (256 MB)
Video Adapter ALL-IN-WONDER
9600 SERIES (256 MB)
3D Accelerator ATI Radeon 9600
(RV350)

HDTV Wonder PCI

Here is the motherboard I was considering, ASRock 775Dual-Vsta Socket
775, VIA PT880 Pro/Ultra Chipset w/ PCI Express x16 & 8x AGP (ATX)

I've just bought this board, and am very pleased with it.
It runs happily with an Intel D930 3 GHz Dual Core CPU. I had to get that
board because the Asus P5P800 SE one wouldn't run with it (although Asus say
that they are compatible).

I selected this motherboard because it supports AGP, unfortunately this
board is not a real good OC. I would also like to use my PC3200 (400
Mhz.) Ram which would limit my OC potential.

Why do you want to overclock? Are you a "gamer"? If not, don't bother.
BTW, this board has tremendous overclocking facilities (particularly for the
Ram).
This board uses both DDR and DDR2 RAM (but not both at once).

What CPU would you select to get best performance at lowest overall
cost? I don't mind paying more money if I really can get the true
performance out of the 2 Duo core E6400 but something tell me that my
old components won't let it happen and it would be waste of $$?

That motherboard is Conroe ready: 533-800-1066 FSB.
It is suitable (according to Asrock) for most of the later Intel processors
(Dual Core, etc..).

2 Duo core
E4400 FSB 800MZ 9X mult, E6300 $215.
E6400 FSB1032 mult 8x $260
or E6600 $380

Pentium® 4 -524, 3.0-GHz @ 533Mhz w/ 1Mb EM64T (Socket 775) $99
Pentium® 4 -541, x64, 3.2-GHz @ 800Mhz w/ 1Mb (Socket 775) $125

Any other suggestions maybe there other options I overlooked?

What is an HTPC system? Are you talking about HyperThreading?

Sylvain.

Thanks!

 

[biggy]

It runs happily with an Intel D930 3 GHz Dual Core CPU. I had to get that
board because the Asus P5P800 SE one wouldn't run with it (although Asus say
that they are compatible).


Why do you want to overclock? Are you a "gamer"? If not, don't bother.
BTW, this board has tremendous overclocking facilities (particularly for the
Ram).
This board uses both DDR and DDR2 RAM (but not both at once).

That motherboard is Conroe ready: 533-800-1066 FSB.
It is suitable (according to Asrock) for most of the later Intel processors
(Dual Core, etc..).

Pentium® 4 -524, 3.0-GHz @ 533Mhz w/ 1Mb EM64T (Socket 775) $99
Pentium® 4 -541, x64, 3.2-GHz @ 800Mhz w/ 1Mb (Socket 775) $125


Sylvain.

Thanks!

Hi Sylvain,

A home theater PC, or HTPC for short, is a personal computer connected
to a television. It is often used as a digital photo, music, and video
player, or as a Computer and video games device. Adding a TV tuner card
allows an HTPC to record television as well. They may also be referred
to as media center systems or Media Server units. The general goal in a
HTPC is usually to combine many or all components of a home theater
setup into one box.
There are several "approaches and degrees" to building a HTPC. I
started mind about a year ago and it seems to keep on growing, from
sharing cable satilite OTA HDTV via networking many of PC's, dual
monitors, MS Media HD WMV file, PVR, TIVO, ipod, kareokee, video, photo
editing, gaming over entire network and much more. You can start by
simply connecting your TV to your computer.

Carrying to another level would tie in securritey system lighting etc
to the HTPC, but that's not my objective now.

All I want is a Quiet, Efficient Home Theater PC that suits my needs.
I would prefer not OC, but in order to keep the cost down for this
upgrade and get the Processing speed I need I would.

Jay

 

[Sylvain VAN DER WALDE]

It runs happily with an Intel D930 3 GHz Dual Core CPU. I had to get that
board because the Asus P5P800 SE one wouldn't run with it (although Asus
say
that they are compatible).


Why do you want to overclock? Are you a "gamer"? If not, don't bother.
BTW, this board has tremendous overclocking facilities (particularly for
the
Ram).
This board uses both DDR and DDR2 RAM (but not both at once).

That motherboard is Conroe ready: 533-800-1066 FSB.
It is suitable (according to Asrock) for most of the later Intel
processors
(Dual Core, etc..).

Pentium® 4 -524, 3.0-GHz @ 533Mhz w/ 1Mb EM64T (Socket 775) $99
Pentium® 4 -541, x64, 3.2-GHz @ 800Mhz w/ 1Mb (Socket 775) $125


Sylvain.

Thanks!

Hi Sylvain,

A home theater PC, or HTPC for short, is a personal computer connected
to a television. It is often used as a digital photo, music, and video
player, or as a Computer and video games device. Adding a TV tuner card
allows an HTPC to record television as well. They may also be referred
to as media center systems or Media Server units. The general goal in a
HTPC is usually to combine many or all components of a home theater
setup into one box.
There are several "approaches and degrees" to building a HTPC. I
started mind about a year ago and it seems to keep on growing, from
sharing cable satilite OTA HDTV via networking many of PC's, dual
monitors, MS Media HD WMV file, PVR, TIVO, ipod, kareokee, video, photo
editing, gaming over entire network and much more. You can start by
simply connecting your TV to your computer.

Carrying to another level would tie in securritey system lighting etc
to the HTPC, but that's not my objective now.

All I want is a Quiet, Efficient Home Theater PC that suits my needs.
I would prefer not OC, but in order to keep the cost down for this
upgrade and get the Processing speed I need I would.

Thanks for your nice comprehensive answer. It's nice to come across an
obviously nice person, after that _horribly self-opinionated_ idiot Rod.

Sylvain.

Jay

 

[andrew.gullans]

I see alot of oohing and aahing of Core 2 Duo, but let me play the AMD
fanboy for a moment if I may.

AMD Athlon X2 3800+ EE (65w) Windsor http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103729
$109.99 on NewEgg

Abit NF-M2 nView http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813127013
$92.99 on NewEgg

Together this is an unbeatable HTPC. The Abit board will get you to
400, and it'll run FSB 333 without breaking a sweat 24/7. Clock the
Windsor 9x333 and you have a 3.0 Ghz CPU on stock cooling which barely
gets warm. Load it up with 2 gigs of DDR2-667 for about $120 and
you're running a $333 CPU/Mobo/RAM combo with enough performance to
beat a $450 Intel base.

.....of course, this goes out the window on April 22nd when Intel
reduces the price of an E4300 to a mere $109, stepping on the toes of
AMD's lowest dual-core, which probably means the 3800+ will drop to
about $80. HOWEVER, this brings up an interesting point. Do you need
it RIGHT NOW? If so, buy the AMD. You will only "loose" $29 worth of
savings you would have had if you'd waited (and this is not
guaranteed) versus "loosing" $60 (twice that) regarding the E4300
price drops. ALSO, E4300s are hit-or-miss when it comes to
overclocking.

Currently, this is the Intel setup I'm looking at:

Intel E4300 $169
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819115013
Abit IL-9 PRO $89 ($79 after mail-in-rebate)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813127015
Kingston ValueRam $65/Gig, x2 = $130
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?item=N82E16820134216

Total price = $378 (CPU+mobo+RAM)

UNFORTUNATLY, this system weighs in at $44 more than my AM2+Abit+RAM
combo above, and yet this Intel combo would perform WORSE than the AMD
combo. This is because the IL-9 PRO cannot be effectivly overclocked
AT ALL, as opposed to the NF-M2 nView which can overclock to the moon.

One other thing to be aware of:
The NF-M2 nView with GeForce 6150 chipset can overclock to 400;
the NF-M2S with GeForce 6100 chipset CANNOT overclock AT ALL.