ASRock Vision HT: Ivy Bridge Carries the SFF HTPC Forward
by Ganesh T S on November 12, 2012 3:30 PM EST- Posted in
- Home Theater
- ASRock
- HTPC
- Ivy Bridge
HTPC Decoding and Rendering Benchmarks
In our Ivy Bridge HTPC review, we had covered the CPU / GPU utilization during playback of various types of clips. In the Vision3D 252B review, we had graphs of CPU and GPU loading with various renderers and codecs. Unfortunately, AMD doesn't provide similar data / sensors for use with their APUs. Hence, we had to resort to power consumed at the wall along with GPU loading in the Trinity HTPC review. In order to keep benchmarking consistent across all HTPC reviews, we will be adopting the Trinity HTPC review methodology in our future HTPC articles.
The tables below present the results of running our HTPC rendering benchmark samples through various decoder and renderer combinations. Entries in bold indicate that there were dropped frames which indicate that the unit wasn't up to the task for those types of streams. The recorded values include the GPU loading and power consumed by the system at the wall. An important point to note here is that the system was set to defaults in the BIOS, but Windows power settings were set for maximum performance instead of the default balanced profile.
madVR
madVR was configured with settings similar to what we used for the Ivy Bridge HTPC review. Full screen windowed mode gaved the best performance in terms of avoiding dropped frames. In our first trial, we configured LAV Video Decoder to use avcodec (software decode). As expected, Intel's GPU / memory bandwidth is not enough for madVR processing of some types of content (namely, 720p60 H.264 and 1080p60 H.264).
| LAV Video Decoder Software Fallback + madVR | ||
| Stream | GPU Usage % | Power Consumption |
| 480i60 MPEG-2 | 78 | 35.46 W |
| 576i50 H.264 | 64 | 25.92 W |
| 720p60 H.264** | 98 | 44.52 W |
| 1080i60 H.264 | 86 | 47.40 W |
| 1080i60 MPEG-2 | 84 | 42.55 W |
| 1080i60 VC-1 | 86 | 47.10 W |
| 1080p60 H.264** | 98 | 48.81 W |
madVR takes up more than 80% of GPU resources while processing 1080i60 material. However, the unit is quite power efficient on the whole, consuming less than 50 W for 1080i60 material using software decode. In the next trial, we configured LAV Video Decoder to use hawrdware decoding in the form of Quick Sync. Unfortunately, the results are quite similar to what we obtained with software decode (just that the power consumption is slightly lesser than software decode for the HD streams).
| LAV Video Decoder QuickSync + madVR | ||
| Stream | GPU Usage % | Power Consumption |
| 480i60 MPEG-2 | 79 | 36.16 W |
| 576i50 H.264 | 64 | 27.45 W |
| 720p60 H.264** | 96 | 43.17 W |
| 1080i60 H.264 | 90 | 45.23 W |
| 1080i60 MPEG-2 | 87 | 42.86 W |
| 1080i60 VC-1 | 88 | 44.66 W |
| 1080p60 H.264** | 94 | 46.32 W |
EVR-CP and EVR
With the Enhanced Video Renderer (Custom Presenter) and Enhanced Video Renderer, native DXVA2 acceleration can be used. Here, we are able to process all our test streams without dropped frames. EVR is very efficient in terms of power consumption also.
| LAV Video Decoder DXVA2 Native + EVR-CP | ||
| Stream | GPU Usage % | Power Consumption |
| 480i60 MPEG-2 | 32 | 22.28 W |
| 576i50 H.264 | 29 | 21.74 W |
| 720p60 H.264 | 45 | 26.01 W |
| 1080i60 H.264 | 47 | 26.87 W |
| 1080i60 MPEG-2 | 47 | 25.48 W |
| 1080i60 VC-1 | 43 | 33.46 W |
| 1080p60 H.264 | 62 | 29.42 W |
| LAV Video Decoder Software Fallback + EVR | ||
| Stream | GPU Usage % | Power Consumption |
| 480i60 MPEG-2 | 27 | 20.75 W |
| 576i50 H.264 | 24 | 20.56 W |
| 720p60 H.264 | 49 | 25.23 W |
| 1080i60 H.264 | 35 | 23.44 W |
| 1080i60 MPEG-2 | 35 | 22.23 W |
| 1080i60 VC-1 | 33 | 30.45 W |
| 1080p60 H.264 | 58 | 27.04 W |
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
40 Comments
View All Comments
duploxxx - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - link
very easy just use a low end Liano based or trinity based platform.enough performance , power consumption controllable and low cost
GotThumbs - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - link
If you haven't already, Take a look at Zotecs (Zotac ZBOX ZBOXNANO-AD12-U AMD A68M ) using the AMD E2-1800 APU 1.7GHz Dual-Core. $229.00 Bare-bone or 299. with 2 Gigs and 320 HD (5400).http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...
Zotac has had these form factors out for around 2 years, so Intels NUC is nothing new and yet is still over priced IMO.
Knowledge is power.
It would be nice if Anandtech did an in-depth review/comparison of the NUC and Zotacs offerings.
ssj3gohan - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - link
It's very simple: Intel forbids them to use anything but mobile platforms. And mobile=really expensive (even though it's the same silicon). There are perfectly fine desktop processors that will fit inside those enclosures, well within the thermal limits. Intel's newest i3-3225 only uses about 30W full blast in actual use, scratching 45W under the most demanding synthetic load. The rest of the desktop platform is already super-efficient and doesn't contribute particularly much. And even though it outperforms any mobile processor, it costs only $130 vs $370ish for the cheapest hd 4000-outfitted mobile processor.So it's perfectly easy to make a much cheaper, better performing SFF PC, but Intel forbids it. Because that's good for the world.
nathanddrews - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - link
Just buy an Ivy Bridge notebook on Black Friday for $300. Plenty of power for HTPC --> 1080p everything. HD4000 can play some games. Close the lid, connect and HDMI cable and you're done.Aikouka - Monday, November 12, 2012 - link
I considered purchasing this unit before, but I'm very picky about noise. It's not only noise when the unit is being used, but also how noisy is it when the room is quiet? I poked through this article, and unless I missed it, I don't see anything on noise characteristics for this unit.I ended up building a HTPC using the Streacom fan-less chassis instead of buying one of these. Let me tell you, if you want a build that's a bit of a PITA, go with that case. =P
ganeshts - Monday, November 12, 2012 - link
The thermal design / noise factor is covered in the final section. The solution is very similar to what we had in the previous generation HTPCs, and ASRock had tests with video proof to show less than 35 dB noise under full loading conditions.I have been keeping my eyes open for information / samples of Streacom's recently introduced FC10 chassis. We might see a piece on that if Streacom is able to get it into production anytime soon :)
capeconsultant - Monday, November 12, 2012 - link
A machine such as this should always include noise info. Not a reference to another machine's noise. It is a CRITICAL issue for a machine of this size whether used for HTPC or not. I will still be getting the mac mini. Keep trying.mikael.skytter - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - link
I bought the unit this August and I am also picky about noise.As far as I am concerned this unit is really good. I have disabled the Blue Ray player and installed an SSD instead of the HDD.
The unit is completely silent unless you put your ear less then 10cm from it in a quiet room. My tv accually sounds more (Samsung Series 8 with fans).
When playing standard MKV 1080p files over the network, the unit does not increase the fanspeed but instead stays quitet.
I hope this help and I know it´s not numbers. But I am really picky about my units. It needs to be quiet and the Asrock does just that
cjs150 - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - link
Ganeshts: for an HTPC review you must cover noise. You have to cover the noise in 3 situations, idle, full workload and (critically) playing a movie from the included Bluray player - if the machine is quiet but the bluray player noisy (vibration usually) then as an HTPC this would be an epic fail. This is one of my complaints about HTPC cases, they never include any vibration dampening for the optical driveI do not regard 35db as quiet, what it means is that in quiet sections of the movie I am hearing the computer which is not good enough.
There are some odd design choices here, although some may be forced on ASRock due to motherboard limitations. MSata or an SSD would be better than mechanical disk. Personally I would prefer better quality memory and more of it.
Then there is the issue of frame rates. This is not ASRock's fault but Intel's and is completely unforgiveable. I would really like you to get an interview with Intel and ask them to explain why, given that the frame rate standards has remained fixed for years, can they still not get it right.
Finally I would really like to see a review by you using Windows 8 as the OS for an HTPC. I am trying it on my HTPC and hate it (when Linux gets blu ray playback I am switching) but would love a second opinion to confirm whether I am just old fashioned or not!
Kevin G - Monday, November 12, 2012 - link
I see a little bit of comparison at the end to the Mac Mini but it'd be nice to have it represented in the performance charts for full comparison. Then again with just updating the line up, there could have been a bit of a time crunch.