<div id="_htmlarea_default_style_" style="font:10pt arial,helvetica,sans-serif">Mike, great email.<br><br>My question is
on small form factor - to have a tiny machine as a FE, what is your rec if not an Atom?<br><br><br>On Tue, 24 Aug 2010
16:02:25 -0400<br> "Michael T. Dean" <mtdean@thirdcontact.com> wrote:<br>> On 08/24/2010 02:51 PM, Mark
wrote:<br>>> Mark Hutchinson wrote:<br>>>> Good point yes.<br>>>> What might some good options
be for small frontend <br>>>>machines be that <br>>>> can be turned off and on easily? I plan to have
the <br>>>>frontends all in <br>>>> the basement as I have 3 CAT 6 cables run to each TV. 2
<br>>>>cat6 for <br>>>> HDMI and the 3rd for a remote or kb/mouse.<br>>>> Does suspend work
for this? How would they be woken up?<br>>>><br>>>> Thanks for the thoughts.<br>>> have you
considered mini-ITX atom boards for local <br>>>frontends? They <br>>> are very small and make no
noise.<br>>><br>>> Remote pc's and long wires are a pain, in case you <br>>>have'nt played with
<br>>> that yet...<br>> <br>> OK, I'm not going to recommend any specific system. <br>> Normally, I
wouldn't even reply, but I'd just like to <br>>inject a bit of non-marketing reality into the thread.<br>>
<br>> Note, also, in the interest of full disclosure, I am a <br>>/confirmed/ Atom-hater. I have a huge and deep
bias <br>>against Atom. (For some reason, I feel a computer should <br>>be able to compute.)<br>> <br>>
That said, low-power doesn't have to mean a toy. See <br>>what proper design of a real computer system can do
<br>>(whether you do it or Apple does):<br>> <br>> http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html<br>>
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3468<br>> <br>> (10W idle and 85W max power consumption) and if you <br>>figure
you'd be using VDPAU for decoding /when VDPAU <br>>works with the stream you're decoding/, you'd be running
<br>>at close to that idle 10W even when decoding, for <br>>example, h.264 video. The big difference, however, is
<br>>that you actually have computing power in reserve when <br>>you need it (for Flash or video that doesn't meet
the <br>>codec, profile, bitrate, and deinterlacing limitations of <br>>VDPAU or whatever other proprietary
problems we can't <br>>solve).<br>> <br>> Now, even if an ION system ran at 0W, and we assume the <br>>Mac
Mini is running at close to idle when using VDPAU <br>>decode, that's a typical savings of only about 10W. And,
<br>>if you're shutting down your frontend when not in use, <br>>the difference between an Atom-based toy and a
real <br>>computer in power usage is not a lot. The difference in <br>>performance/limitations,
however...<br>> <br>> To put some numbers to it, let's use the preposterous <br>>assumption that an ION system
runs at 0W under full load <br>>and the Mac Mini (or a system designed like it) runs at <br>>the full 85W all the
time (under load or idle). Further, <br>>let's say you shut down your frontends when not in use <br>>(as
recommended above) and you use them for about <br>>2hrs/day. That means that the Mini is using 85W * 2hr (=
<br>>170Wh) per day. That's 5100Wh/mo = 5.1kWh/mo. Assume a <br>>national average retail price of $0.12/kWh (
<br>>http://www.eia.doe.gov/electricity/epm/table5_6_a.html ), <br>>that's $0.612 per month to run the Mac
Mini/$0.612 saved <br>>by running an Atom system. Now, when you factor in the <br>>actual power usage (which will
nearly always be less <br>>than--and likely /significantly/ less than--the 85W max), <br>>the Atom-based systems
may not make much sense. <br>> Basically, it comes down to some price between <br>>$0.0012/hr (at 10W consumption)
to $0.0102/hr (at 85W <br>>consumption) to run the Mini--meaning the maximum savings <br>>you could get from
running an Atom-based system is a <br>>penny an hour.<br>> <br>> Basically, the saving from dropping your
computer power <br>>usage from 170W to 85W is /much/ more important than the <br>>savings from dropping your
computer power usage from 85W <br>>to 42.5W (even though in both cases, the power usage was <br>>halved). When
you get down to dropping from, say, 20W to <br>>10W, there's not much savings involved. (It's the same <br>>as
fuel efficiency--trading your 10mpg vehicle for a <br>>20mpg vehicle is much more beneficial than trading your
<br>>20mpg vehicle for a 40mpg vehicle.)<br>> <br>> See, also, these (old) articles:<br>>
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/25w-performance-pc,2551.html<br>> http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-e7200-g31,2039.html<br>>
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-atom-efficiency,2069.html<br>> <br>> I'm sure that there are newer
articles using newer <br>>chips/architectures that do even better. IMHO, Atom is a <br>>marketing ploy that
allows Intel to charge significantly <br>>more while providing no advantages and only <br>>disadvantages.<br>>
<br>> OK, sorry. I'm stepping down off my soap box, now. I <br>>won't reply to this thread as I'm not trying to
start a <br>>big war with Atom fans. So, if some Atom fanatic needs <br>>to get the last word, feel free to
reply, and I won't <br>>dispute anything you say. If this post doesn't stand on <br>>its own, maybe it will at
least get some people to think <br>>a little deeper about the issues--dig down beneath the <br>>marketing.<br>>
<br>> Good luck with your new setup, and I hope you find a way <br>>to reduce power consumption without losing
capability. <br>> And I'll reiterate that the /best/ way to do so is to <br>>shut down systems when not in
use.<br>> <br>> Mike<br>> _______________________________________________<br>> mythtv-users mailing
list<br>> mythtv-users@mythtv.org<br>> http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users<br>>
<br><br></div>