<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 9:27 PM, GZ <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gzornetzer.lists@gmail.com" target="_blank">gzornetzer.lists@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im">On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Fred Watt <<a href="mailto:fredwattmythtv@gmail.com">fredwattmythtv@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Thank you both for your thoughts, all progressive. What I am looking for is<br>
> a low powered kepler card. When the slave is recording without anyone<br>
> viewing the frontend it would lovely if the gpu idled as low as was<br>
> possible. Likewise when myth frontend is in use, a low draw would help with<br>
> the efficiency of the slave.<br>
<br>
</div>Just to add a bit of background on the Nvidia GT 600-series cards -<br>
note that even though they are designated 6xx, they are not all<br>
Keplers..<br>
<br>
The 610 is a rebadged GT 520 (Fermi architecture). It will actually<br>
be the card with the lowest power draw, but has some drawbacks. Using<br>
VDPAU, it cannot deinterlace 1080i using the advanced 2x profile,<br>
which gives the quality. It is generally agreed that you must step<br>
down to a lesser deinterlacer.<br>
<br>
The 620 is a rebadged GT 430 (Fermi). This card has higher power<br>
consumption but can generally deinterlace 1080i using advanced 2x.<br>
Some people in the USA (60 fps) have reported problems, but this<br>
shouldn't be an issue for the UK (50 fps).<br>
<br>
The 630 is a rebadged GT 440 (Fermi). This card is a 430 with a<br>
higher clock rate and faster memory. Its power draw is similar to the<br>
620, and should work fine in a frontend.<br>
<br>
The GT 640 is the lowest end card that's actually a Kepler. You're<br>
going to pay a bit more money for this card. A review at tomshardware<br>
(<a href="http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gt-640-review,3214-10.html" target="_blank">http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gt-640-review,3214-10.html</a>)<br>
shows this card uses 20W less power than the 440 under load, but only<br>
a 1W difference at idle. You'll get better gaming performance, but<br>
you won't really notice it if you're just using the system for video<br>
playback. If having the latest card is important to you, feel free to<br>
get it, but it will likely not result in significant power savings on<br>
your frontend.<br>
<br>
The GTX 650 is an interesting choice. It's the same as the GT 640,<br>
but the GPU is clocked slightly faster and uses faster GDDR5 memory.<br>
It has better gaming performance (but you won't notice this unless<br>
your frontend performs double duty). However, according to the tests<br>
at tomshardware<br>
(<a href="http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-660-geforce-gtx-650-benchmark,3297.html" target="_blank">http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-660-geforce-gtx-650-benchmark,3297.html</a>)<br>
it idles 8W lower than the GT 640, but is the same under load. In the<br>
US, these are running about $20-$30 more than the 640.<br>
How much is the reduced power consumption with Kepler worth to you?<br>
Or do you prefer Kepler to future-proof your rig?<br>
I hope this is helpful.<br></blockquote><div><br>No matter whether it is helpful to the OP, it is a great summary and will be helpful to many! Cheers. <br></div></div><br>