[mythtv-users] Super Micro X7SLA Atom server board for backend

[Justyn Butler]

2009/5/12 Herman Gerritsen <lfsmailing at gmail.com>:
> On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Justyn Butler
> <justynbutler at googlemail.com> wrote:
>> I would have thought an Atom backend would be fine for the recording
>> and streaming jobs, but it would be extremely slow for
>> transcoding/advert detection etc.
> I figured streaming(for the transcoding) would be processor intensive.
> But the transcoding is seperate from the streaming clearly than.
> Than again, if advert detection is processor intensive
> the use of an Atom in a Backend seems less interresting than.

Sorry, perhaps I misunderstood what you meant by streaming. On my
setup, the backend sends the recorded digital television to the
frontend, and this is not processor intensive. Neither is recording.
It's all digital and decoding only happens on the frontend.
Transcoding and advert detection do happen on my backend though.

I suspect an Atom could still do the advert detection, it would just
be slower. But on my system it does advert detection at night anyway
so I don't think that would matter.

>>Atom chip, and the GMA 950 chipset. It plays mythfrontend
>>*beautifully*, nearly as well as my Core Duo machine. Thats SD content
>>though, we don't get HD at the moment.
> An Atom in a frontend seems more logical because of its low power useage.
> Less power, less heat, less cooling, less noise ;)
> Though you say that it plays "nearly" as well, I would have thought
> it would play one stream without any problem.
> Is the processor the bottleneck in this case?

Sorry, to clarify, it plays perfectly. There is essentially no
difference between the frontend on each system, except that
mythfrontend takes longer to load on the Atom netbook. Also when you
click "play" on a recording, it takes maybe half a second longer to
get going. That kind of thing. Playback itself isn't effected.

I'm personally not as concerned about power usage on a frontend as on
a backend because the backend is on literally all the time. Every
extra 15 watts of power on the backend is an extra 11kWh/month. My
frontend on the other hand is suspended when not being watched.