I don't mean to be lazy BUT
#16
installing a Solide-State-Drive (SSD) is super easy!!
Its like plug and play!
Dont have fear about it....

Now you know the benefit of using an SSD...
Gets your system to boot and operate fast!!
but its really up to you and your wallet here...

Look at this one here --> OCZ Onyx 32 GB 2.5" Price: £56.78

installation videos for SSD's in general --> Here!
Reply
#17
Here is a little bigger SSD (and WAY faster) for Windows 7:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.as...-_-Product

With that SSD the Asrock will be the best HTPC possible.

Reply
#18
+1

Now on offer at eBuyer.com
Reply
#19
Like i said, whatever you feel like affording...
Reply
#20
How big advantage do you get from SSD when you only suspend/resume XBMC, and update your library once in a while? Save you 1 or 2 seconds maybe?

The only reason I can see is that your system is a few degrees cooler, and IF your 2.5" drive spins at a lower noise level than your fan, it is a bit quieter. I live happy with my 1TB 2.5" WD drive that I got for $80, or what a 32GB SSD drive cost, and it does not use any more power either.

In my mind it is wiser to add a bit more RAM and drop disk swapping altogether, XBMC is running from RAM, and RAM is at 5000-6000 mb/s while SSD is 100-200mb/s.
Reply
#21
but the ASROCK 3D Vision already comes with 4GB of RAM (2 x 2GB DDR3 1066MHz)...
Reply
#22
Torroa Wrote:How big advantage do you get from SSD when you only suspend/resume XBMC, and update your library once in a while? Save you 1 or 2 seconds maybe?

In my mind it is wiser to add a bit more RAM and drop disk swapping altogether, XBMC is running from RAM, and RAM is at 5000-6000 mb/s while SSD is 100-200mb/s.

I completely shut it down. It only take 12 seconds to boot, faster than the TV can switch on. Sleeping uses too much power whereas hibernating 4GB RAM will take ages.

XBMC may be running from RAM but all thumbnails and artwork are still cached on the hard drive and the SSD can access them a lot quicker. Is the access time where SSD really makes the difference. 0.1ms(ssd) compared to 10-15ms(hdd). The SSD can access data 100 time faster than a HDD.

Updating library is slowed down by the network access. HDD have little effect here.

In movie time, a few seconds are insignificant and if you haven't experienced SSD speeds before, you can get over it very easily. But once you get to feel how a system can respond by eliminating the biggest bottleneck, everything will fell slow.
Reply
#23
Torroa Wrote:How big advantage do you get from SSD when you only suspend/resume XBMC, and update your library once in a while? Save you 1 or 2 seconds maybe?

A SSD:

1. Makes the interface faster- its super low seek times means that your XBMC database and fanart rip off the drive faster than old HDs can muster.

2. Boot as fast as many systems resume.

3. No heat.

Quote:In my mind it is wiser to add a bit more RAM and drop disk swapping altogether, XBMC is running from RAM, and RAM is at 5000-6000 mb/s while SSD is 100-200mb/s.

You need to store your XBMC thumbnails somewhere, and on a large library it can easily be gigabytes (mine is like 6 or 7GB). Can't get enough RAM for that cheaply.

Reply
#24
maxinc beat me to it! Smile

Reply
#25
Hmm, the HTPC might be using 5w at worst in standby, and would add about $1 a week to the electrical bill.

Resume from standby takes 2 seconds. Heck, it takes 10 second just to post the Bios when coldstart. If you're booting in 12 seconds, you sure have a fast drive to be up and running in just 2 seconds Tongue

My library is not that big, 470 movies, 400 music albums with fanart, about 1000 TV-episodes, and some 2000 or 3000 pictures. On my Macbook Air, the library is about 6500 files and 550MB. I really can not see any difference when browsing my library using my Macbook with SSD or the ION2 with a 5400RPM.

If I wanted to justify the ridiculous high price of the MacBook, I probably could find a 10ms difference somewhere, but in my eyes, the XBMC experience is just as fine with an old drive.

Edit: According to Review Asus Eee PC 901 Netbook it consumes 0.6w when standby and 0.4w when turned off. My PicoPSU might not be as effective, but the AT5iont mobo I got, should not be too different. if I say 1w usage when standby, it does cost $1 a month standby and 50 cent turned off...
Reply
#26
Torroa Wrote:Resume from standby takes 2 seconds. Heck, it takes 10 second just to post the Bios when coldstart. If you're booting in 12 seconds, you sure have a fast drive to be up and running in just 2 seconds Tongue

On Zotac's Zbox POST is about 3-4 seconds. And if Mac OS X can boot in 13s on a MBP (including POST), loading Live is insignificant by comparison.
Reply
#27
maxinc Wrote:On Zotac's Zbox POST is about 3-4 seconds. And if Mac OS X can boot in 13s on a MBP (including POST), loading Live is insignificant by comparison.

The OSx are using EFI and not classical BIOS. A comparency can be seen here: FI BIOS boot (POST) time VS Classic BIOS boot When using S3 or S4 standby, you skip the BIOS post.
Reply
#28
I'm sure you got the idea. Not everyone needs an SSD but if you happen to invest in one, you won't be disappointed.
Reply
#29
I thought I would just but my head in here and recommend the 2010 Mac Mini. I have it connected to my 46" TV with XBMC running and have been loving every minute of it. The built in wireless streams 1080p MKV files like butter. It comes with a built in IR receiver (remote sold separately) and takes only a few minutes to get XBMC going on it from the first time you turn it on.

The ASRock looks great as well, just thought I would share my experience.
Reply
#30
Yes, I would also use a SSD, or a 32GB compact flash to save some bucks, if I had all the data stored on a NAS, but I have everything in just one box. It has wake-on-lan, torrent client etc, and can work as a NAS if needed.
Reply

Logout Mark Read Team Forum Stats Members Help
I don't mean to be lazy BUT0