Currently my HTPC has a Intel G4400.
I added a GeoForce 1030 for hardware decoding because the G4400 can't handle 'heavy' formats.
All works fine now but the battle against noise goes on :-)
The G4400 has TDP of 65Watt, the GPU TDP is unknown to me.
Anyway my plan is to replace the G4400 with a more powerful CPU and ditch the GPU.
Obviously then all the decoding has to be done by the CPU.
Obviously it's not hard to find a better performing CPU than the G4000.
So I made a short list of socket 1151 CPUs with a 35w TDP.
Intel Core i5-9500T - 6 cores /6 threads - 2.2 - 3.7 GHz ($281)
Intel Core i7-8700T - 6 cores /12 threads - 2.4 - 4.0 GHz ($370)
Intel Core i3-8100T - 4 cores / 4 threads - 3.1 - 3.1 GHz ($186)
All have Intel UHD Graphics 630
I only watch movies on that PC. So no gaming etc.
Does Kodi benefit from:
- More cores?
- More MHz?
- More cache?
I guess more MHz is always a good thing, but how do extra cores add to this equasion?
Due to cost I would like to avoid the i7 if possible.
Nobody can look into the future but I want it to be a little future proof. So 264 and 265 codecs is a demand.
I have a 1080 TV and have no plans for 4k, 8k, 3D or stuff like that
So:
- How many cores does Kodi use?
- Is there a ideal balance between cores and MHz?
- Anything you think I should know/consider.
I don't know what kind of files you want to play with KODI, but for just playback (no transcoding or anything like that), My NUC8i3BEH, which uses a 15W Core i3-8109U, averages about 8~10% CPU utilization while playing back 2160P files. Occasionally, the CPU load goes up to about 50% for a few seconds, but then it's back down. The fan inside the NUC is all but inaudible.
any one of the CPUs you mention would do the job, but the i7 and the i5 are overkill
More info:
I also played the same file on my workstation, and I can tell you that by default it's set to use all available cores, albeit on my 18 Core / 36 thread Xeon CPU, utilization is about 1%, so I can't tell which cores are doing more work than others.
On the NUC8, I also tried playing a 4K 3D file, and the CPU goes up to 17%. The GPU (Intel Iris Plus 655) is also being used to decode, and that's running at 75%.
I also have a NUC 6 which uses a core i3-6100U w/ Intel HD Graphics 520. It's connected to a 1080P 3D TV, and while I can play 4K files on it, they're reduced to 1080p, so I don't think it's processing them as 4K. Nevertheless, the CPU utilization averages 25%, and the GPU utilization averages 50%
Lots great info in your post!
15Watt should be (semi) passive coolable.
Now trying to find a U model CPU :-)
(2023-01-12, 12:43)MediaGuy Wrote: [ -> ]All works fine now but the battle against noise goes on :-)
There are passively cooled versions of the GT1030, but I guess such separate graphics cards are obsolete by now with the current onboard graphics capabilities of new CPUs.
I'm currently using an Asrock J5040 ITX (Intel Pentium) board with a passively cooled CPU/GPU (UHD 605). Along with a PicoPSU and a SSD it's totally quiet. I also use it as my office PC. It wiggles between 15-25 Watts depending on the tasks.
Of course there are numerous small Android boxes for Kodi usage, but depending on other needs such as 'normal PC usage' you could go for a NUC although their prices can be a tad higher.
I'm using a passively cooled GT1030.
While fanless, it still generates heat which (likely) makes the CPU fan spin faster.
As for nomal PC usage, I have 2 USB disks attached which are used for backups over LAN.
Besides that teh only PC usage is Kodi itself.
I have enough space to hide my ITX build out of sight so no real need for a tiny NUC.
A NUC isn't that much smaller if you take the external PSU into account.
While I'm generally speaking no big fan of external PSUs, I do see it as a bonus that they don't dump their heat in the case like many internal PSUs do.
(2023-01-13, 11:45)MediaGuy Wrote: [ -> ]I'm using a passively cooled GT1030.
While fanless, it still generates heat which (likely) makes the CPU fan spin faster.
I too have one. Of course it produces some heat, but the CPU (fan) shouldn't be affected as the GPU typically does all the hard work during a video decode and the CPU sits virtually idle at 2-3%. Unless the overall airflow of your media pc is crap, there should not be a heating problem.
(2023-01-13, 09:12)MediaGuy Wrote: [ -> ]Lots great info in your post!
15Watt should be (semi) passive coolable.
Now trying to find a U model CPU :-)
Unfortunately, you won't find a "U" (Ultramobile) CPU for sale as a standalone. These are not (LGA/Flip-chip) socketted CPUs, rather they're (BGA Ball-Grid Array), soldered on the motherboard board chips. As such they come with the motherboard. They're not commonly used for DIY projects, and you won't find much from the likes of MSI, ASUS, Gigabyte, etc. If you really want something with a 15W CPU, the simplest thing is to find a small form factor PC, like the Intel NUC or some Dell and HP units. If you want to build your own, look for industrial boards. Ultramobile CPUs are used extensively in the industrial space.
Depending on your budget you might be better off upgrading to a CPU with a new version of Quick Sync, that way most videos can be decoded in hardware and clock speed / # of cores becomes a moot point. Something like the Celeron G6900, or one of the newer embedded chips e.g. Alder Lake-N or Jasper Lake.
Been looking for a mobo with on board CPU. Prices often lower than a sepearte CPU.
The reason I didn't buy one is quite simple, I don't know those CPU, so I 'fear' I may buy an underspecced one.
Anything decent among these boards?
The options at the bottom are better... but still a bit older. J4125 and J5040 are Gemini Lake Refresh so not a terrible option, but if you can find something newer, you'll ideally get AV1 hardware decoding.
(2023-01-17, 18:26)MediaGuy Wrote: [ -> ]Been looking for a mobo with on board CPU. Prices often lower than a sepearte CPU.
The reason I didn't buy one is quite simple, I don't know those CPU, so I 'fear' I may buy an underspecced one.
Anything decent among these boards?
I don't really know what you're trying to do with your PC> Are you going to use it for more than just a media player, then don't look at Celerons and such, look for a Core i3 or better yet i5/i7. For if all you're going to use it for is basic computing tasks, web browsing and media playback, then I would suggest one of the newer generation Celeron, like the Elkhart Lake processors, something like a J6412 or J6426.
Here are some examples from ASRock:
https://www.asrockind.com/en-gb/mini-itx...ute=22-138
(2023-01-18, 07:20)PANiCnz Wrote: [ -> ]The options at the bottom are better... but still a bit older. J4125 and J5040 are Gemini Lake Refresh so not a terrible option, but if you can find something newer, you'll ideally get AV1 hardware decoding.
The popularity of AV1 is still debatable, as it doesn't really seem to provide any discernible quality or size advantages over H265. Nevertheless, to get AV1 hardware support, you will need a CPU with Iris Xe Graphics or UHD 750 (11th gen and newer CPUs), and it only supports decoding.
Just to provide some context to my comments regarding AV1 vs H265, the AV1 specifications/advertised performance claims it about 30% more efficient than H265. That would be a great asset to streaming services which could theoretically stream better quality faster and at a lower bandwidth.
Unfortunately, real world tests have shown that, while AV1 is more efficient than H264, and VP9, H265 is still as good as, or sometimes (depending on content) better than AV1. You can read this very good
comparison white paper that was done by the Mutlimedia Signal Processing Group (MMSPG).
Much in the way that H265 was supposedly twice as efficient as H264, which would have meant that at the same visual quality a H265 encoded video would have been 1/2 the size of the H264 equivalent, that didn't exactly turn out like that. Yes, H265/HEVC files are smaller than H264, but only by about 10~15%. The same applies to AV1. for any given video clip, to achieve a similar quality as the H265, it turns out AV1 can only match the file size, and sometimes, the files are larger.
Put this together with the fact that currently there aren't many hardware encoders, and that AV1 software encoding takes up 3 times as much time as H265 software encoding, and you can see why AV1 hasn't yet gained a lot of traction. So at the moment, I wouldn't consider AV1 decoding a must have. Maybe 2-3 years from now, but not now.
I use the HTPC for two things.
a] Watching TV
b] Backups ***
*** Another PC on my LAN writes a backup to a disk attached to the HTPC.
No backup programs run on the HTPC. It's basically dumb NAS.
Found a Intel Core i3-8100T Tray for $80, which I think isn't a bad price.
Considering my G4400 can handle all my tasks with ease, I have no doubt the raw performance of the i3 will be almost overkill.
However as I wrote in my opening post I also use a GT1030 because the G4400 really struggles with 'heavy formats'.
I want to ditch the GT1030 to save some power/heat. So I guess the big question is:
Can the "Intel UHD Graphics 630" in the i3 handle all current video formats?
I must add that the main reason I started this thread is noise. Not really that I want to save a few cents on my utils.
So a super quiet fan may do the trick. Oviously nothing beats passive in terms of noise.
There are just too many parameters I don't know. Maybe it's not my CPU fan that makes the noise, but the PSU.
I'm aware of the external pico PSUs. But then things get so costly I just as well can buy a NUC...
"Found a Intel Core i3-8100T Tray for $80, which I think isn't a bad price.
Considering my G4400 can handle all my tasks with ease, I have no doubt the raw performance of the i3 will be almost overkill."
Just be aware that the i3 CPU is a Coffee Lake (8th Gen) and your G4400 is a Skylake, they are not interchangeable. Even though they use the same socket type, their pinout is different, so you'll need a new motherboard with a 300 series chipset.
I have no problem playing ANY media on a Intel NUC with a i3-8109U, which does have different GPU (Intel Iris Pus 655). The only thing it won't play correctly is 3D MVC, because of the way it's being handled by the newer chipsets, but if you don't do 3D, then it should be just fine.
As a point of reference, the i3-8100T is twice as fast as the G4400 (
CPU Benchmark 5290 vs 2590). Considering you will have to buy a new board and maybe memory (if you're currently using DDR3), the I strongly suggest looking at the Intel NUC8 with i3-8109U. The Iris+ graphics is superior to the UHD 630. You can pick up a used but in great condition NUC8i3 for as little as $100~$120 on ebay
Edit: And as far as noise is concerned, the NUCs are all but inaudible. You'd have to drive it at 100% CPU load continuously, and be right next to it in a very quiet room to hear it. Under normal use (video playback), it's practically silent.