AMD or Intel for HTPC

[mmarsh]

I am putting together a first HTPC.

I am having trouble on a integrated CPU/GPU either AMD series A or a Intel i3/i5

1. This is mainly for playing/ripping DVD/BLU-RAY, Youtube, VOD, and other video on demand (like hulu etc)..

2. Gaming is nice. but secondary I already have a dedicated gamer PC.

3. Price is important, on a budget.

4. Noise and power consumption also count I dont want somethign too noisy or explodes my power bill.

Basically I get that Intel's are more expensive but is better for CPU inferior GPU, but consumes more power. AMD is a superior GPU inferior CPU, cheaper but consumes more power.

Which is right for me?

 

[YeuEmMaiMai]

for what you are doing GPU performance is irrelevant for the most part. Go for the faster CPU option as both will use the GPU for hardware assist

 

[Stoly]

for what you are doing GPU performance is irrelevant for the most part. Go for the faster CPU option as both will use the GPU for hardware assist

If GPU is doing the decoding why would he need a fast CPU?

 

[Stoly]

budget?

 

[tikiman2012]

Intel i3-3225 undervolted. I run mine @ .90 volts. My son also plays emulators on it just fine. It handles bluerays & recording 4 channels at once while steaming hd content to a couple of wired & wireless computers. I think it's the best choice out there for HTPC use. It also uses Intel's HD 4000 graphics. It's the only i3 that does.

 

[mmarsh]

I'd say 500 EUROS max ($650)

 

[YeuEmMaiMai]

If GPU is doing the decoding why would he need a fast CPU?

No not really I got a I7 with a AMD 7650 that is no faster than a Core 2 duo with a 4870 when using GPU assist. BOTH GPU add about 30fps decode speed to the process when enabled The core 2 runs at 3.6 (both cores) and the i76 2640 runs at max of 3.5 (single core in use) The GPU decode with Intel assist yeilds slightly slower results on the i7

 

[Deleted member 88227]

Please answer the sticky questions in this forum.

 

[Archer75]

I'm use using an old core2duo in my HTPC. Maybe clocked around 2.8ghz. Doesn't matter as it's almost all GPU and the CPU doesn't do much.

I'm using a Radeon 5570. Handles all my bluray rips without issue.

 

[beyonddc]

I built a HTPC for my parents using AMD A6-5400K. It's perfectly capable.

 

[PolygonGTC]

I don't see any reason to spend the extra cash on an Intel for an HTPC unless you're using the HTPC to encode your media as well as other tasks. If all you're doing is using it to watch/listen to your media, save the money and go with an AMD.

 

[Deleted member 88227]

My HTPC is Intel based, but I intend to game on it with a discrete graphics card in the very near future. My NAS is an AMD 5800K setup. I needed the cheapest way to get up to 8 SATA ports and the AMD APU lineup was the best, I then went with a quad core for in case I do post processing of the video files directly on the NAS.

 

[valve1138]

Get a Core I3-3225 and be done with it. The included gpu is great for an HTPC.

 

[The Gonz]

I am putting together a first HTPC.

I am having trouble on a integrated CPU/GPU either AMD series A or a Intel i3/i5

1. This is mainly for playing/ripping DVD/BLU-RAY, Youtube, VOD, and other video on demand (like hulu etc)..

2. Gaming is nice. but secondary I already have a dedicated gamer PC.

3. Price is important, on a budget.

4. Noise and power consumption also count I dont want somethign too noisy or explodes my power bill.

Basically I get that Intel's are more expensive but is better for CPU inferior GPU, but consumes more power. AMD is a superior GPU inferior CPU, cheaper but consumes more power.

Which is right for me?

I use an AMD E-350 with 6 HDDs, 1 SSD and 1 Blu-Ray.

I leave it running 24/7 and it uses about 30watts throughout the day.

I watch my 1080p blu-ray MKVs with ease. Some of them are upwards of 35 Mb/s bitrate.

Noise is non-existent because of the low power. Low power = low heat. Low heat = less cooling required.

I've used this setup for a few years now and am incredibly pleased by it. The SSD for the OS was a big help in giving my system a very snappy feel to it.

I think you would like this setup since it matches all of your needs and can be very configurable.

I forgot to mention I added a SATA expander card for more ports since I used all of them on the board. Even so my power usage is ridiculously low.

 

[YeuEmMaiMai]

op said he wanted to rip Blu-ray / dvd and intel wins hands down

 

[Deleted member 88227]

op said he wanted to rip Blu-ray / dvd and intel wins hands down

You can put your hand back up.

The A10 5800K does transcoding/encoding better than the i3-3220.

And if you happen to use programs that make use of the GPU on either chip, the A10 is much better than the i3 in that regard.

So if you're strictly running an HTPC that will do it's own encoding/transcoding and you do not intend to get a discrete graphics card, then the A10 is the better choice.

If you intend to game on this HTPC and you do NOT intend to go with a discrete graphics card, AT is the better choice.

However, if you intend to go with a discrete graphics card and use software that does GPU accelerating, or you intend to game on a discrete graphics card, then go Intel.

With that being said, my HTPC is rocking Pentium G860 w/ intentions of getting a GPU soon and my NAS/File Server is rocking an A10-5800K; but I do not intend to do transcoding/encoding directly on the HTPC, but I do intend to game on it.

 

[YeuEmMaiMai]

^ might want to visit tom's hardware for another look at the i3 vs a10 lol

 

[Deleted member 88227]

I don't use Toms hardware. You might want to check other, better sources.

 

[mmarsh]

Thanks for all the replies.

The AMD was appealing because of the power/price ratio, however let me add a new rinkle that might change my perspective.

I mentioned I have a gaming PC, it has a MSI 570 GTX installed with a mini HDMI adaptor. I am thinking could put that card inside my HTPC (to boost up the gaming possibilities).

Doing this would be a lot more expensive but I might if the performance gain was justifiable.

If I do this what kind CPU should I get? Is it better to switch to INTEL? If so which CPU is best? Maybe a i5? Could I get away with a i3? Stick with AMD?

 

[Deleted member 88227]

If you intend to use a discrete graphics card, such as the 570 for your HTPC then you should go with an Intel i3 setup. You could go with an i5, but it will generate more heat/noise than an i3 setup however the 570 isn't exactly a quiet card either, so I suppose noise isn't of any concern for your HTPC setup.

 

[PolygonGTC]

If it were just for gaming, I would agree that the i7 is too expensive. However, for encoding, a 2600k is worth it IMO.

 

[mmarsh]

If you intend to use a discrete graphics card, such as the 570 for your HTPC then you should go with an Intel i3 setup. You could go with an i5, but it will generate more heat/noise than an i3 setup however the 570 isn't exactly a quiet card either, so I suppose noise isn't of any concern for your HTPC setup.

Noise is important, but I am thinking I can try it if its too noisy I can just take it out and buy a cheap quiet card. There is no real downside to trying this way first.

Do you think i5 would offer anything than the i3 couldnt? 4 Cores perhaps?

 

[Deleted member 88227]

Well it will have 4 cores and it really depends on what games you intend to play on the HTPC, however for majority of the games I don't think an i3 will bottleneck a 570 GTX. They would probably be a great match together. If it does bottle neck it, it wont be a huge bottle neck (Well technically a smaller bottle neck would be worse, since the bigger the bottle neck the more stuff can come out the bottle at once)

 

[YeuEmMaiMai]

I don't use Toms hardware. You might want to check other, better sources.

oh, since they don't agree with what you said, you discount them? There is a sizeable performance advantage in favor of the current i3 cpus vs the a10 when it comes to the specific tasks mentioned....

Noise is important, but I am thinking I can try it if its too noisy I can just take it out and buy a cheap quiet card. There is no real downside to trying this way first.

Do you think i5 would offer anything than the i3 couldnt? 4 Cores perhaps?

The ability to use turbo boost and hyper threading (pre sandy bridge CPUs)

 

[Prav]

here is a sizeable performance advantage in favor of the current i3 cpus vs the a10 when it comes to the specific tasks mentioned....

1. This is mainly for playing/ripping DVD/BLU-RAY, Youtube, VOD, and other video on demand (like hulu etc)..

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/a10-5800k-trinity-efficiency,3315-9.html

really?

Since the implementation of OpenCL to Handbrake last year, there has been a sizable performance advantage, but it is in favor of AMD not Intel. That is why Intel annouced last month they were working with Handbrake to include Quick Sync optimizations.

If you are transcoding on an HTPC the question isnt whether you are better off with an i3 3225 or an A10, since the A10 clearly wins unless you are doing low quality encodes with the current version of QuickSync. The real issue is should you consider a Sandy Bridge Celeron with a discrete AMD GPU for the best of both worlds.

 

[Deleted member 88227]

oh, since they don't agree with what you said, you discount them? There is a sizeable performance advantage in favor of the current i3 cpus vs the a10 when it comes to the specific tasks mentioned....

No, I just don't use them period and judging by what the poster after you just posted, it seems that they DO agree with what I've been saying.