A Budget Home Theater & PC Setup: 4K, HDR, UHD Blu-ray, and More
by Ganesh T S on December 26, 2017 8:30 AM ESTYouTube Streaming
Our HTPC testing with respect to YouTube has been restricted to playback of a 1080p music video using the native HTML5 player in Firefox. However, the shift to 4K and the necessity to evaluate HDR support have made us choose Mystery Box's Peru 8K HDR 60FPS video as our test sample moving forward.
The TCL 55P607's Roku platform has a YouTube app. Our sample stream played back the 4Kp60 HDR version encoded in VP9 Profile 2 along with AAC audio.
4K YouTube HDR on the TCL 55P607
The NVIDIA SATV also has a YouTube app. However, accessing the sample clip resulted in the fetching of the 4Kp60 VP9 version without HDR. Further research revealed that the Tegra K1 X1 SoC in the SATV does not support VP9 Profile 2. Google's refusal to use HEVC for the HDR videos on YouTube mean that SATV owners can forget about HDR in YouTube streams.
4K YouTube on the NVIDIA SHIELD Android TV
On the PC front, the KBL-U systems support VP9 Profile 2 decoding. Using the recommended browser (Microsoft Edge) allows us to play back the HDR stream after putting the desktop in HDR mode.
4K YouTube HDR on the ASRock Beebox-S 7200U using Microsoft Edge
The Zotac EN1080K, however, does not have VP9 Profile 2 hardware decoding. Our sample clip played back the 4Kp60 VP9 version without HDR even with the desktop set to HDR mode and streaming HDR videos enabled.
4K YouTube on the Zotac ZBOX MAGNUS EN1080K using Microsoft Edge
We also tracked the power consumption (using a Ubiquiti Networks mPower Pro) of the various playback devices while streaming the YouTube sample clip.
| YouTube Streaming - Power Consumption | |||
The Roku power numbers also include the display itself. So, it is not really fair to compare it against that of the other players. Disregarding the Roku data, we find that the ASRock Beebox-S 7200U is the most power-efficient of the lot with respect to YouTube streaming. If the display power consumption were to be considered in addition, it is likely that the Roku would emerge as the winner.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
191 Comments
View All Comments
Reflex - Thursday, December 28, 2017 - link
Again, you made the claim he gave a "$2000 HTPC reccomendation" as part of the article. He did not. He merely listed it as an option for those focused on gaming. You lied. You can spew all sorts of crap into as many paragraphs as you wish, but you have no credibility when you willfully lie about the contents of articles simply to 'prove' whatever point you somehow think you are proving.As to the rest, spend some time on AVSForums and you'll learn what is budget, midrange and high end for a 'home theater', rather than what you think you can cobble together with your home CNC setup and 'custom networking protocols'.
You are the biggest joke on this site since Steve Lake/Lord Raiden.
ddrіver - Thursday, December 28, 2017 - link
Guess they're not important enough to show up when you look for "budget receiver" on Google huh? Stop trying to cover up the mess. There are options between $100 and $1million. But almost every normal person will agree that $1000 is not "budget". That's why every article and review out there confirms what I'm saying: $300-$500 is what most regular people call "budget".But just to show you how unbelievably dumb you are I actually searched AVS Forum for "budget receiver". Guess what was the most commonly recommended price range... You probably guessed wrong. It's between $300-$500, with very, very, VERY few exceptions at $600-$700.
Like this: http://www.avsforum.com/forum/gtsearch.php?q=budge...
Or this: http://www.avsforum.com/?s=budget%20receiver
Come on, keep making that point =)). I'm sure you can make a bigger ass of yourself.
ddrіver - Thursday, December 28, 2017 - link
BTW, you're so focused on insulting me and proving I'm wrong that you don't even realize your own arguments contradict your case. That's just pathetic. You're willing to make a fool of yourself and ignore all common sense and evidence in your attempts to just contradict me.A $1000 receiver isn't budget. It just isn't. Budget is another word for cheap but still reasonably OK. And I was actually looking for a good recommendation for a home theater setup, at least the receiver and speakers part. I expected some info about a budget setup. $1000 just for the receiver? Yeah, he mentions another cheaper (~$500) receiver but that doesn't help sine I basically have to read the details elsewhere. So how is that an article about a budget setup again?
Bullwinkle-J-Moose - Thursday, December 28, 2017 - link
ddriver, For BUDGET Home Theater......Check the comparisons and reviews of PreSonus Eris Powered 5 and 8" Monitors to the JBL LSR305 and 308 on Youtube (I chose the JBL)
(Room size will determine which one you need)
2nd place>
KRK are too colored and boomy for me and Yamahas HS5 and HS8 are considerably more expensive for 2nd place sound
3rd place> There is no 3rd place!
---------------------------------------------
I also noticed you mentioned > "A receiver is an integral part of a home theater."
WHY?
For those who make the computer their central repository of all things Media to keep their setup "Minimal", I would think that a receiver would only have value for those who value DRM Lockdown and clutter
Reflex - Thursday, December 28, 2017 - link
1) I don't have to prove you wrong, you do that effectively on your own.2) The article also listed a receiver in the price range you suggest is budget as well. You seem unwilling to acknowledge that fact. Weirdly enough, you give more attention to the very brief mention of a gaming HTPC (on a primarily PC based site no less!) than the fact that they actively discussed the even cheaper option in the article itself and in the final table. Seriously, selection bias much?
And yes, I never claimed there was no such thing as a receiver for less than $1k. However even at $1k, its a budget receiver. It is in no way out of scope for an article like this. $1k is below what is considered mid-range in this space for actual 'home theaters' rather than "TV and receiver in the living room" class setups.
Bullwinkle-J-Moose - Thursday, December 28, 2017 - link
Reflex says....(on a primarily PC based site no less!)
---------------------------------------------------
Sorry Reflex but this is clearly not a PC based site!
A "Personal" Computer would let "you" control every aspect of your own system
This site is based around Locked Down DRM Spyware Platforms that prevent the end users from securing their own systems
DRM destroys the National Security of All Countries by keeping those back doors open
Try using the Internet without letting Microsoft continually make changes to "your" computer or monitoring everything you do while using Spyware Platform 10
Whenever you must rely on strangers to provide YOUR security, you have no security
The PC died with Sandy Bridge
Reflex - Friday, December 29, 2017 - link
You are welcome to your opinion, but others are not required to subscribe to it.Bullwinkle-J-Moose - Friday, December 29, 2017 - link
"You are welcome to your opinion, but others are not required to subscribe to it."---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As are you
When you say "Real Home Theater"
How does that differ from "ANY" Home Theater
Must we conform to 1000 different "Standards" to make it "Real" ?
Must it have the latest DRM Lockdown ?
What "EXACTLY" makes your Home Theater "Real" and mine "not so much" ?
We would like to hear your expert opinion on the matter before we destroy it
Reflex - Friday, December 29, 2017 - link
I usually refer to what people consider the definition on home theater focused websites and forums. Obviously you are free to define home theater however you like.Most people who build a home theater these days want at least Dolby 5.1/7.1 with many opting for the better positional audio of Dolby Atmos. Most people who build a home theater these days want 4k resolution with at least HDR10 with some opting for the slightly superior Dolby Vision standard.
If your goals are to display content optimally, and playback audio optimally, equipment choices are dictated by those factors within the budget you have permitted yourself. All the rest is just noise. I don't give a damn if my content is DRM'd so long as the equipment I select can play it back reliably. I'm not even sure what 'DRM Lockdown" means in this context if everything I set up to play back the content can play it. I don't really care about hypotheticals or other scenarios that I am not interested in, nor are most people in this space given that as you point out those standards generally win out in the market.
As for the value judgement, I've made zero comments about your home theater and its 'realness'. If you consider it real, more power to you. But again, I don't have to subscribe to your interpretations, recommendations or priorities when discussing or making recommendations on this area myself. As with most people, I go with what the prevailing standards are and it is reasonable to judge articles, content and conversations based on that understanding. If everyone builds their own definition of a term and insists others cater to only their definition we lose the ability to discuss any topic rationally.
Bullwinkle-J-Moose - Friday, December 29, 2017 - link
"I usually refer to what people consider the definition on home theater focused websites and forums. Obviously you are free to define home theater however you like."-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's a valid point
After defining and building the modern 3-Channel System upon which all these current standards are based (3.1 / 5.1 / 7.1 etc), it's nice to know I can have my own opinion on the matter
The only standard now is that there is no standard!