Dear all,
I know this is a often asked question, but this is more than what it
says on the title.
Oh?
I have got two mini multimedia pc in mind (MSI MEGA PC 180 and MSI
MEGA PC 865)
Consider that you don't need maximum performance because
it's not required for a mini multimedia PC. What some might
want is an adequate performance level with hopes to have
lowest heat/power/noise possible. If it weren't for the
crappy integrated video w/PC133, that'd be a Tualatin
Celeron.
But, all is is a side-note, you already have two boxes in
mind.
If I were to buy the 180, which is competible with Althons, then I
would buy:
Athlon 3000+
1G RAM
The board comes with built-in nForce2
Definitely excessive for multimedia.
Otherwise, for 865:
Pentium 4 3.0G HyperThread
512Mb RAM
The board comes with built-in Intel Extreme Graphics 2
Also excessive though less so, because the Intel Graphics
are significantly slower and there's less memory. You
didn't mention a need for gaming so it may not matter. The
P4 IS going to be faster at video encoding with modern
P4-optimized codec, but you didn't meniton that... if you're
using a hardware encoder card then again it won't matter...
with a hardware encoder card it'd run from a Celeron 500
system. A few years back I had one running from a Celeron
300 @ 450 with a Matrox G200TV card. No remote though, and
MJPEG wasn't the most compatible format even though the
quality is better than MPEG2, the filesize is much larger.
My question is that, which system would perform better?
At what?
Does it matter? I mean, would it really matter if you were
recording a show at 30 FPS and using 12% CPU rather than
16%?
I am sure that Pentium 4 will be faster than the Athlon, because of
the HyperThreading and the large cache size.
? You'd be wrong, a P4 is often a weaker processor and has
been benefiting from CPU specific optimizations to pull it
through modern benchmarks. However, when it has these
optimizations and at specific tasks, it's quite good at what
it does. There is a vast disparity in the types of things
each is good at. The P4 is more of a target-oriented CPU,
_IF_ you have a specific app that is very linear in nature
and has optimized SSE3 routines, the P4 is the right chip.
Otherwise the Athlon is. Again it's mostly trivia for a
multimedia PC unless you have a target (usually
commercialized) codec in mind that you will use for CPU
soft-encoding.
But if I buy Athlon, I will have more money to buy double the RAM...
What do you plan to do with this system?
One of my multimedia PCs has less than 128MB in use while
recording, a few unneeded services disabled but hardware
monitors and antivirus, etc, still running. You seem
confused about what it takes to run a multimedia PC... it is
NOT a very demanding job except if/when the CPU is encoding
video, and in which case the memory matters not nearly so
much as the CPU, BUT having a powerhouse CPU in a small box
with limited power and at minimal noise levels is also
potentially problematic in the longer-term.
Most people prefer to offload that job to a hardware encoder
card. Problem is if you don't want MPEG2, maybe Divx, then
you still need soft encoding unless there's some new
Divx-encoder card on the market that I'm not aware of.
Actually I've heard of one but the details escape me ATM,
except that it was a few hundred $$$, beyond the price-point
of most HTPC builders.
How about the Integrated Graphics Card? nForce2 better? would the P4
compensate the performance lost?
Back up a few steps and rethink the question.
Even if the two CPUs were identical in performance, CPU
performance doesn't offset video performance. Now back to
relevance- 2D @ 30FPS is not a problem for any video,
integrated or not, made in the last half-decade.
Do you want to game? If so, neither video is even close to
fast enough for modern games.
Which system would be hotter? Would Athlon runs hotter?
Are you a troll? I"m not pointing fingers yet but I ask
because this post is all about the same urban legands and
FUD, being repeated together.
No, P4 has ran hotter at full throttle ever since AMD moved
away from the Palomino. If you're not considering full
throttle, which you might not need, then the whole issue of
performance between the two alternatives is again less
relevant. On the other hand, "some" Athlon boards don't
have the HALT cooling implemented, such that they'd idle
hotter. You can re-enable HALT cooling if that's important,
since neither box would be near full load ever, unless you
had captured video and then later were recompressing it as a
linear job rather than a realtime-based task like viewing or
recording, etc. In that specific scenario, AND with a newer
codec, the P4 is the clear choice, else looking for an A64
based HTPC instead of the two you're currenty considering.
Sorry for so many questions, but it would be very very appreciated if
anyone could help me to make this decision, thx
Don't get either box, not as configured.
Consider less memory, slower CPU, put some $ towards your
favorite video capture card... or two. That will largely
cancel any difference. If either alternative you mentioned
allows underclocking, buy the lowest CPU offered and
underclock it.
