[mythtv-users] First Stab at a Shopping List
David Frascone
dave at frascone.com
Fri Apr 13 15:11:42 UTC 2007
Rod Smith wrote:
> A few things spring to mind:
> 1) Your existing 80GB disk might be OK for modest SD recording but will be
> inadequate for recording more than about 10 hours of HD content (less,
> actually, since you'll have to devote some space to software installation).
> Of course, you can expand this in the future; however, if you want to add
> disk space you'll need to either use Linux's LVM facility or the new
> ability, in the MythTV SVN branch, to use multiple recording directories.
> If you replace the disk you'll have to copy everything.
>
Yeah -- I know about the disk -- this is more of a Proof of Concept.
> 2) The 2GHz CPU will most likely be inadequate for HD playback. I've got a
> 3.06GHz Celeron-D that's barely adequate -- it can play back an HD stream
> (to an NTSC set; I haven't yet gotten an HD TV set), but it produces brief
> pauses if the computer is doing just about anything else. If your
> motherboard can accept faster CPUs, you could upgrade your CPU later with
> relative ease, but if not you'll need to replace the motherboard (and
> perhaps, therefore, the RAM and video card) to get a working HD setup.
>
I thought the Video card (GS 7300) offloaded a lot of the playback
issues? That's why I was going with that particular one. If not -- is
there another video card that will work better for FrontEnds?
> 3) I've got a pair of pcHDTV HD3000s, and my opinion of them is very low.
> Their QAM reception (needed for recording unencrypted digital cable) is
> very poor for me; in fact, they produce unwatchable video, containing
> ~1/2-second bursts of audio and clear picture alternating with
> unintelligible pixellation and silence. This is a known problem with this
> card and QAM, although it seems to interact with other hardware -- some
> people have found "magical" combinations that work well, but so far I
> haven't. NTSC reception is better, but still bad compared to other NTSC
> tuners I've got. The NTSC tuner is a framegrabber design, which imposes a
> hefty CPU load on NTSC encoding. This last isn't necessarily 100% bad,
> since you've also got more control and can encode directly to the more
> compact MPEG-4 format; but with your 2GHz CPU it'll absolutely squash any
> modest hope you might have had of watching HD content while recording SD
> content. All this said, the pcHDTV 5500 may be improved, although I believe
> it's still got a framegrabber NTSC tuner. I'd recommend you consider an
> HDHomerun (an external dual-tuner Ethernet device) or AVerMedia AVerTVHD
> A180 (an internal PCI device) instead. Neither has a built-in NTSC tuner,
> so you'll need to supplement these with something like a Hauppauge PVR-150
> or PVR-250. These particular Hauppauge models have hardware MPEG-2
> encoders, so they'll impose little CPU load. FWIW, I've got an AVerMedia
> AVerTVHD A180 and its QAM reception is fine.
>
>
Well -- Since this is a PoC, I think I'm going to stick with the HD-5500
for now. I want to at least scan my cable again, and confirm the
channels I'm getting. When I move on to a true Backend, I think I'll
take your advice and go with the HDHomeRun. When I do that, though,
should I look for PVR-150s or 250s?
-Dave
--
David Frascone
I think, therefor I am... I think?
More information about the mythtv-users
mailing list