Other Potential Uses

We've already mentioned the fact that this system is rather limited in terms of expansion opportunities. However, that doesn't mean that you can't expand it at all. If you're looking for gaming support, there's really not much that you can do, since the integrated graphics are far from adequate - unless your idea of gaming is Solitaire and Minesweeper, in which case, the MiniPC will work great! (3D games from 5 or so years back also run fine, if you want to replay some classics.) So, what else can you do to improve this device?

One area that seems like a good fit would be to use it as an HTPC. The CPU is generally fast enough, the DVI port works well with HDTVs that have DVI connections - and component output is available for any other HDTVs - but there are a couple of areas that are lacking. First, there's no way to capture video with the basic configuration, and second, the audio output is limited to stereo speakers. Both of those shortcomings limit the HTPC potential, but can you work around them? The answer is "yes", but it will of course cost some money.

First, we'll start with the audio aspect. There are quite a few USB audio devices on the market today, including a couple Audigy 2 products from Creative. In a rather odd twist, you may find that the external USB audio devices are almost as large as the MiniPC! So, if you demand more than stereo audio, you'll need to get a USB audio device. As we said earlier, it would have been nice for AOpen to add one more audio port on the rear, enabling the already present 5.1 audio support, but they didn't. S/PDIF would have been useful for connecting to a home theater sound system as well. Anyway, external USB audio is actually not a terrible way to go, as placing the audio logic outside of your computer can avoid a lot of interference and noise problems. There are audiophiles that use USB audio for just that reason, and while gaming performance isn't terribly good for USB devices (due to the latency and jitter associated with the USB bus), the sound quality for audio and movies will usually match most PCI card solutions. Besides, gaming shouldn't be a concern with the MiniPC.

Now, let's look at video capture. You can find a decent number of USB based TV tuners now, so as long as you get a USB port replicator, you should be fine. AOpen even recommends a couple of USB TV Tuner cards in their manual, though the listed brand (NewSoft) wasn't one that I recognized and seemed to be intended more for OEMs than end users. HDTV capture is going to be more difficult, as there aren't many products on the market that will do HDTV capture over USB. However, you may not even need to worry about a TV capture device.

The MiniPC does come with a Firewire port, so if you have a cable or satellite box with a Firewire port, you can jump through some hoops to get that configured as a video capture device. When we say "jump through some hoops", though, we really mean that. Getting Firewire video capture to work with my Comcast cable box (a Motorola 6200) took only a small amount of effort, as following several of the online guides that cover the topic worked. Others with similar hardware have not been so lucky, and the cable/satellite provider as well as their chosen set-top box (STB) is going to determine, to a large extent, whether or not you succeed with Firewire TV capture.

For my part, I just went with the instructions in this thread at the AV Science Forum, and it worked like a charm. Using CAPDVHS, recordings can be scheduled, though you can only record the channel to which the STB is tuned. (You may have to search for additional software to get your PC to tune your STB - I haven't tried that yet, as I haven't really had a need.)

(Note: If you use that link, please be courteous and do some research before posting questions. Chances are good that someone has already posted a similar thread, and forum etiquette is that you should at least spend some time searching and reading before starting a new "HELP ME!" thread. But I digress...)

If the Firewire option works out, the capture quality is very good - it looks just like what your set-top box would output to the TV, since it's simply capturing a digital AV stream. You don't get encrypted channels, but that's how things are supposed to work from the content provider perspective. You may also miss out on analog channels, though that appears to vary by STB (it worked for me, though there were small hiccups in the audio and video at times). Given that you can get all this for the price of a Firewire cable - about $20 online for a 6 foot cable - it's definitely something to look into. Unfortunately, your experience may vary as not every STB works well, and not all content providers fully support what you need. Besides, you're spending $10 a month for the STB already, so you can't eliminate the rental fees like you can with a regular TV tuner solution.

As for the MiniPC, live output of 1080i and 720p content using VLC (download here) used about 60% of the CPU power, as did playback of recorded HDTV content. The only issue was with interlacing present on 1080i content, which can be solved in a couple of ways.

VLC has several options for deinterlacing, with the "X" algorithm being the best. Unfortunately, the X algorithm (diagonal averaging) struggles on the MiniPC, maxing out the CPU and still dropping about half of the frames. Linear mean was similar in CPU demands. Most of the other algorithms offered work at 80% or lower CPU usage, including the traditional Bob, Weave, and Blend modes. The "average" algorithm produced a generally pleasing result, though it's certainly not as good as some of the more refined algorithms. Media Player Classic also has support for the basic deinterlacing algorithms (Bob, Weave, and Blend).

Another option is to use the NVIDIA PureVideo decoder - and despite the name and source, it works with the Intel IGPs as well as ATI cards. CPU load is once again around 80%, and you have to pay $20 if you want to use it past the 30-day trial period.

Note that HDTV files get rather large, averaging 7GB per hour of HD content. On the other hand, watching the 2006 Winter Olympics using only the MiniPC (with a networked PC providing additional storage space) was far more pleasurable than trying to watch it "live". One other note is that CAPDVHS files were rather choosy in how they would run; some would play in VLC, while others wouldn't; those that wouldn't would usually play in Media Player Classic, but not always; the final option was to try Media Player 10, and between those three programs, every CAPDVHS file worked fine. It may have simply been a codec issue, but it's something to keep in mind if you try Firewire capture and have issues.

Anand did some similar tests back when he looked at the Mac Mini, and his results were quite a bit different. Capturing content seemed to be a bit easier (though likely that's simply a matter of finding the right software for the task). However, playing back the recorded MPEG-2 transport was too much for the Mac Mini at the time. He noted, " The end result is that anything above a 13Mbps stream ends up dropping frames on the 1.25GHz Mac mini, meaning that basically all HD streams are unplayable on the mini even though they record fine. " That's definitely an advantage that the AOpen MiniPC holds over the Mac Mini, though with the recent launch of the Intel-based Mac Minis, that advantage is going to be short-lived.

There are naturally other ways to use such a small box. You could mount it in a wall next to a plasma or LCD display, with only the front panel visible. One use that some people are already taking advantage of is the ability to use the MiniPC as a car A/V unit, and considering the power and flexibility available it will definitely work well in that role. You can also find other peripherals to help out. Basically, anything that can be done with USB ports (i.e. connecting a printer) is possible. Realistically, though, you probably won't be looking to add a ton of external devices. What's the point of getting a super small PC if you're just going to connect a bunch of other bulky peripherals?

[Thanks to nvmarino for pointing out a few of the relevant links for getting Firewire recording from a Cable STB to work!]

Power Usage and Noise Levels Price, Availability, and Alternatives
Comments Locked

54 Comments

View All Comments

  • plinden - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link

    Yeah, when are we getting the ability to edit our posts?
  • siliconthoughts - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link

    When a genuine mac mini costs less, is more upgradeable (dual core, 2 DDR slots, digital audio, WiFi, Bluetooth, 4 USB ports, faster graphics) comes with a nifty secure OS and includes a whole suite of apps, why would anyone buy this? XP just isn't that great that I'd spend a $300 premium for it on an inferior box.
  • Googer - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link

    These are nice, but It is my suspicion that a Turon in an Mini PC would be the faster choice.
  • NegativeEntropy - Saturday, March 4, 2006 - link

    Agreed -- a Turion "version" would be interesting. That said, I think this statement from the review could use a bit of modifying:"...if you really want low power, you can go with one of the Pentium M platforms. End of discussion. "

    Tech Report recently found that the Turion can compete pretty well with the PM on power consumption http://techreport.com/reviews/2006q1/pentiumm-vs-t...">http://techreport.com/reviews/2006q1/pentiumm-vs-t...
  • JarredWalton - Saturday, March 4, 2006 - link

    This isn't meant as a far-reaching statement. What I'm talking about is small form factors, or systems that will compete with the MiniPC. Turion support on socket 754 platforms is lacking, meaning that there are boards that support it but there are definitely boards that won't support it. Most of the socket 754 small form factors are pretty old, so I don't know how many of them would support Turion.

    The article at Tech Report is interesting, but idle power draw is only half of the question. 94 W at full load really isn't that much better than the rest of the Athlon 64 line. I mean, the HP DX5150 with an old ClawHammer core running at 2.4 GHz is only about 20 W higher. If you were to use a 90 nm Athlon 64, that would cut off 10 W or so right there.

    Basically, the Athlon 64 design is really good, and it doesn't require all that much power. However, it still can't really compete with the Pentium M. when you shift to laptops, the whole system probably doesn't consume more than 45 W, so 20 W more for the processor is a major deal. Using desktop systems to try and determine laptop suitability is definitely not the best way to go about it. Ideally, you would want identical laptops, with the only difference being motherboard, chipset, and memory. But that's a story for another day.
  • Googer - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link

    I would love to see this Aopen MINI PC rebench marked with a Pentium M 733 or 753 Ultra Low Voltage Processor that has a Maximum of 5W TDP! I would love to see it compaired against the higher 27W TDP Pentium M 740 in both Power Consumtion and Application benchmarks.

    I bet that at full load the power usage on full load will drop from 38W (with 740) down to 16w and even lower at IDLE! (10W maybe?) With a processor like that this would be the perfect pc for those guys who like to intergrate computers with their cars. Bye bye VIA C3! (C3 Will have http://www.metku.net/index.html?sect=view&n=1&...">other uses though)

  • JarredWalton - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link

    Actually, with the HDD and other components, the system is probably using around 18W for the system and 7 to 20W for the CPU. It might even be 20-22W for the system. Still, 38W at maximum load (i.e. HDD activity along with 100% CPU) is hardly going to tax a car, I don't think. (But I'm not a car A/V guy, so maybe I'm wrong.)
  • michael2k - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link

    You would think, with AOpen's resources, that the AOpen MiniPC would be cheaper than the more powerful and featureful Mac mini.

    What is AOpen doing that is making it more expensive? It's got an older chipset, slower CPU, less USB ports, no rewritable optical drive, no bluetooth, and no wireless networking.

    It's an odd day when buying a Mac is cheaper AND more powerful.
  • Questar - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link

    AOpen isn't isn't a computer manufacturer, they are a board maker. What could they do to bring down the price of a system?
  • jconan - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link

    It's the economy of scale! Apple definitely has this contract manufacturing capacity considering its hardware/software business as well as its distribution channels. AOpen is just a manufacturing firm and is not in the software business to install an in house OS and plus it doesn't have sufficient sales offices out in the distribution side to push its wares. They have to rely on major OEMs to buy in bulk quantity to leverage prices with them.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now