• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Best CPU for HTPC

  • Thread starter Thread starter Imy
  • Start date Start date

Imy

Imy

Soldato
Joined
21 Nov 2005
Posts
2,773
Location
Warwickshire, UK
Hi all,

I need some recommendations for a CPU to put into a HTPC I'm planning to build around the Thermaltake DH103 case.


The HTPC will be connected to a 1080p TV through an A/V receiver and used for the following activities:
  • 1080p mkv and bluray playback
  • 1080p gaming but only certain types of games. FPS/RTS games I will continue to play on my normal PC but I would like to play some racing games and other games that would typically suit being played on a joypad.
  • Multiple TV cards viewing/recording
  • Web browsing
  • Internet radio
A few other things to consider:
  • I don't mind if it's Intel or AMD
  • I'm open to overclocking/underclocking
  • I'm going to be pairing it with a high-end cooler
  • Budget: < £250 (not inc. cooler)
Most important of all

I want a CPU which provides plenty of raw power but is going to be a breeze to cool (pardon the pun). Essentially I want the most powerful cpu I can get away with while still having as quiet as setup as possible.
 
AMD lists it as a 65W part. I noticed they also list similar parts but 45W (e variants).

I'm not necessarily after a budget chip. I want something fast too that's gonna last 5 years. I'm looking for the highest-end part available with a low thermal envelope - not just the minimum to meet my uses as they are now.

I don't mind paying a premium for something that runs quick but requires little cooling.
 
Well I have a Q9650 in a shuttle and I find that very easy to cool, idles at 35-38 degrees with the cpu fan at half speed and overclocked to 3.5Ghz.
Better value for money would be to buy a Q9550 though and maybe even the Q9550s which is 65w instead of 95w. You would be looking at an extra £80 or so for the 's' version I think. The Q9550 has £5 off in the 'this week only' sale and is £165.
Here
 
It's a tough one to build I started with your requirments and have just ended up buying i7 parts :D

Have you considered buying second hand? If you want cheap and an available upgrade path then AMD is your only route.
 
Not bothered about cheap - putting it through my company so I won't be paying corp tax, vat or income tax.

At the same time I'm not gonna pay £hundreds more for something marginally better.

The Q9550S does look very nice.

And I know what you mean about i7's niggvg but I've got 4 other PCs and 2 of which I can focus more on performance.

My focus for this PC has to be noise as I have a brilliant off-the-shelf jobby at the moment which uses laptop parts to stay silent (Philips LX3000). I want to up the size and performance so I can play games but I don't want to up the noise.

I rarely ever upgrade anything other than graphics cards. When I fancy something better I like to build something from scratch again and demote old kit to other specific tasks - or give them away.

As mentioned before I noticed AMD do "e" variant chips. The most sensible of which looks to be the E version of the CPU cmnd_andi recommended. How would that chip compare to the Q9550S? Obviously one is quad and the other dual (bonus for CoreAVC) but the AMD is 45W vs 65W of the Q9550S.
 
I wouldn't worry too much about TDP unless your wanting an efficient machine. The difference between 45W and 65W is minimal. The q9550s does look good but the premium isn't worth it IMO. Spending money on a good/quiet cooler is more important. It's hard to get an unbiased opinion on AMD/Intel but personally I'd stay away from a s775 machine now, especially if your paying for new components. So either AM3/1156/1366 <-- each of these option's increases in price (and power).
 
If you plan to run stuff like BBC iPlayer HD make sure your CPU will be up to it. My Athlon 64 dual core +4400 managed fine with Bluray and mkv's but was running at 80-90% and stuttering badly on the iPlayer and other streamed 720p. That said, Flash 10.1 will be out soon and with the latest Geforce drivers will shove most of the work onto the GPU. But looks like 64-bit version may not be available for some time.
 
My assumption was that the higher the TDP, the more difficult (relatively) it is to cool the chip. Is that not the case?

I will be using a decent cooler regardless (but don't want it to go above low fan speed setting). I've got a TRUE in one machine and a Noctua in another. Will probably get another Noctua for this - there's less messing around involved.

I don't mind Socket 775. Like I said I don't upgrade, I replace. Plus DDR2 RAM is dirt cheap - or at least it was a while back.
 
I've just put together a system using the 240e and a 785G board. The two together make a perfect base for a cheap, cool, quiet and efficient HTPC setup. It'll cope with all your requirements with ease, although gaming performance is obviously going to be at the lower end.

Built inside a Silverstone GD04 with stock HS and fans, idle temps are coming back barely above room temperature. Currently watching BBC iPlayer HD with CPU usage topping out at 60% and a temp high of 25C. With results like these I'll be looking for a passive HS solution in the future.

I haven't tested BD performance as yet but with the right software and codecs, results should be good.
 
That's excellent ham_mcfist. Are you using CoreTemp to measure temps?

Re: Big.Wayne

Yeah I know.... but as I'm spending nearly £200 on the case alone (I really like it) I might as well go the whole hog, but at the same time the 240E might be exactly what I need, cost regardless.

I'll look further into the performance difference between it and the Q9550S and the i7 860 tomorrow.

It's going to come down to a decision on how serious I want the gaming aspect of it to be I think.

Thanks for ALL the replies so far, much appreciated.
 
I also feel that the AMD Athlon II is the best choice for you. However no one has mentioned the Athlon II X4 Quad Core E variant CPU's which only use 45w also and might be preferred given the gaming requirement, unfortunately OCUK don't have any listed but the same is also true for the Dual Core ones...

Here are the details of the two quads:

AD600EHDGIBOX - AMD Athlon II X4 600e Energy Efficient Quad Core, S AM3, 2.2GHz, 2MB Cache, 45W, Retail

AD605EHDGIBOX - AMD Athlon II X4 605e Energy Efficient Quad Core, S AM3, 2.3GHz, 2MB Cache, 45W, Retail


Pair one of these with a 785G Chipset based motherboard using either DDR2 Or DDR3 memory as thee CPU will support both and the motherboards are also available in both with the 785G chipset.
 
Yeah I know.... but as I'm spending nearly £200 on the case alone (I really like it) I might as well go the whole hog
I can understand spending a lot of money on a good chassis although £200 is probably a bit OTT . . I assume its gold plated with a built in LCD touchscreen for that kinds money! :p

Does look good though! :)

It's going to come down to a decision on how serious I want the gaming aspect of it to be I think.
Are you building a HTPC or are you building another gaming PC for your lounge, you really don't need to spend big money on anything apart from a nice chassis (which u got specced already) and a nice graphics card that runs cool but is powerful enough to drive a 1920x1080 gaming session . . . that's the only challenge you have really and that's where the bulk of your money will be spent if your wanting some serious fps

Lastly I'm not convinced the *e* versions of the Athlon II are worth a Premium as the regular Athlon II's seem to undervolt pretty well (assuming you choose a motherboard with vCore adjustments).

It's exciting to spec and build an expensive machine but things are moving so fast now that as an investment it doesn't make sense to spend big bucks on hardware today that will be outmoded and outpriced by the new tech coming through in 2010, your money spend it as you wish but there really is no need as the budget kit for sale doesn't perform like budget kit anymore, it's high end! :cool:
 
Buy a cheap dual core now if its good for your current tasks. If you ever need more CPU power you can upgrade to Quad/Hex core. AM3 is supposed to last quite some time :)

For gaming the Phenom II 550 is a great CPU. There is always the chance that it could unlock to a Quad too!
 
That's excellent ham_mcfist. Are you using CoreTemp to measure temps

Yes, using CoreTemp. It's still early days but I'm impressed by just how cool this system runs.

As suggested, the quad core variants may suit you better if gaming is a priority, along with a dedicated GPU.
 
Athlon II X4 605e if you want quad core, or an Athlon II X2 240e if you can get away with Dual.
 
I also feel that the AMD Athlon II is the best choice for you. However no one has mentioned the Athlon II X4 Quad Core E variant CPU's which only use 45w also and might be preferred given the gaming requirement, unfortunately OCUK don't have any listed but the same is also true for the Dual Core ones...

Here are the details of the two quads:

AD600EHDGIBOX - AMD Athlon II X4 600e Energy Efficient Quad Core, S AM3, 2.2GHz, 2MB Cache, 45W, Retail
AD605EHDGIBOX - AMD Athlon II X4 605e Energy Efficient Quad Core, S AM3, 2.3GHz, 2MB Cache, 45W, Retail
They are definitely worth a mention. I did glance at them but I'm somewhat concerned at their single-thread app performance.

I can understand spending a lot of money on a good chassis although £200 is probably a bit OTT . . I assume its gold plated with a built in LCD touchscreen for that kinds money!
Does look good though!
Can probably get it for £170-ish but will likely cost more to get from a preferred supplier. My other cases consist of: Lian Li PC-A77, it's little brother Lian Li PC-A17, Coolermaster Cosmos (v1) and a mini pc (Philips LX3000). I see all my cases as pieces of furniture so I like them to look as good 5 years down the line as they do now.

Are you building a HTPC or are you building another gaming PC for your lounge, you really don't need to spend big money on anything apart from a nice chassis (which u got specced already) and a nice graphics card that runs cool but is powerful enough to drive a 1920x1080 gaming session . . . that's the only challenge you have really and that's where the bulk of your money will be spent if your wanting some serious fps
I don't like consoles much so I would like it to also be my gaming centre for the lounge. Obviously gaming on a large TV is a different experience to keyboard+mouse in front of a relatively much smaller monitor. I'm positive the Athlon II 240E will serve all my needs now, and in the future, except I don't know for gaming. When playing games at 1080p with say an ATI 5850, what will be the bottleneck, CPU or GPU?

Lastly I'm not convinced the *e* versions of the Athlon II are worth a Premium as the regular Athlon II's seem to undervolt pretty well (assuming you choose a motherboard with vCore adjustments).
£13 difference at one supplier (~£43 vs ~£56) - I'll just have to go lighter on the accelerator pedal for a couple of weeks :D but seriously that kind of money not many people will lose sleep over - hardly what I'd call a premium.

It's exciting to spec and build an expensive machine but things are moving so fast now that as an investment it doesn't make sense to spend big bucks on hardware today that will be outmoded and outpriced by the new tech coming through in 2010, your money spend it as you wish but there really is no need as the budget kit for sale doesn't perform like budget kit anymore, it's high end!
That's always been the case and it's good advice but if you followed that advice ALL the time then you'd never have anything --nice--. Sometimes impulse buys can be good! I understand though when you give advice to people that's what you have to say everytime as you don't want to be responsible for people spending more than they need to - and yes budget kit these days is comparatively faster than budget kit of a few years back - hence why I've not ruled it out.

PC equipment depreciates VERY quickly. That's why businesses can write off PC equipment as having no value after just 3 years (50% depreciation in first year then 25% + 25% for years 2/3). That's unlikely to change anytime soon so the choice is simple. Buy what seems like good value kit then upgrade every few years or spend a bit more and buy what you like and it will last longer SO LONG AS you forget about how much quicker new kit is. Example: I bought a P4 3GHz chip on launch day along with the original Raptor HDD which had also just launched. That PC lasted me well for 5-6 years of heavy use and in fact is in my Cosmos case now still running - but history sees that chip as pretty poor because of the standards we're used to now. A couple years ago it was replaced by a PC based on the Q6600 GO @3.2GHz. It is still serving all my needs as well as it did on day 1 because my I'm still running the same applications. I can't see myself replacing it for quite a while yet.

Buy a cheap dual core now if its good for your current tasks. If you ever need more CPU power you can upgrade to Quad/Hex core. AM3 is supposed to last quite some time
One of the reasons I hate upgrading CPUs is because it either means you're throwing away a perfectly good CPU or you have to buy a new motherboard + ram as well and then you have to find a home for the old kit.

For gaming the Phenom II 550 is a great CPU. There is always the chance that it could unlock to a Quad too!
80W... a little high just for a dual-core - baring in mind the Q9550S comes in at 65W. I'm sure it's a great bang for buck CPU if low noise isn't the top priority (and price/value is).
 
Last edited:
i7-920 vs Q9550S

I've just finished reading an interesting article on Anandtech which compares the i7-920 and the Q9550S (amongst other CPUs).

The i7-920 is a 2.66GHz 130W part and the Q9550S a 2.83GHz 45W part. Based on those figures you'd expect the Q9550S to be the most energy efficient out of the 2. Apparently not...

Anandtech said:
Over the past few pages of performance, power and efficiency graphs we’ve proved that the Q9550S offers lower power, but also lower efficiency than other Intel CPUs. In particular, the Core i7 is a far more power efficient processor thanks to its significant performance advantage.

So why choose the Q9550S over the i7-920?

Anandtech said:
The answer lies in the thermals. I took a few of the chips and used CoreTemp64 to record temperature data while running Prime95. I ran Prime95 for 10 minutes and averaged the temperatures of all four cores.

18097.png

I don't know about you but 50c under full stress conditions seems very impressive to me.

Of course you'll never see that kind of load under normal use but it should mean it's a lot easier to cool and thus the system should be quieter with a Q9550S than a i7-920 (assuming lower fan speeds required for the former).

That said, the 240E might manage the same trick at even lower temps. The question is would it be quieter? After all if you could (I don't actually know for sure) cool a Q9550S with fan speed set to low, then even if the 240E had lower temps, the system wouldn't be any quieter.

Source: http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3505
 
Back
Top Bottom