| | |
Celeron processors and video caputure.
| View Poll Results: What processor would You chose for a dedicated capture box? | |||
| Intel Pentum class | | 3 | 27.27% |
| Intel Celeron | | 1 | 9.09% |
| AMD Athlon | | 6 | 54.55% |
| AMD Duron | | 0 | 0% |
| Forget it and get a DVD recorder. | | 1 | 9.09% |
| Voters: 11. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
Hey all,
I'm considering building a dedicated video caputure box for recording signals from cable and satilitte feeds. Among the hardware I'm considering is a 2.5 Ghz Celeron processor, ATI All In Wonder 9600 card with 128 MB Video memory onboard, and 512 MB of pc3200 DDR and a 400 Mhz FSB motherboard by aopen.
My biggest concern is weather a Celeron processor will perform to standards or should I get a full blown pentuim processor for it's bigger cache? I'm attempting to do this on a budget and as this is going to be a dedicated system with nothing but the OS and capture card software installed, I figured I may have finally found a use for intel's "cheap" processor choice.
Any comments are appreciated!
Thanks all.
I'm considering building a dedicated video caputure box for recording signals from cable and satilitte feeds. Among the hardware I'm considering is a 2.5 Ghz Celeron processor, ATI All In Wonder 9600 card with 128 MB Video memory onboard, and 512 MB of pc3200 DDR and a 400 Mhz FSB motherboard by aopen.
My biggest concern is weather a Celeron processor will perform to standards or should I get a full blown pentuim processor for it's bigger cache? I'm attempting to do this on a budget and as this is going to be a dedicated system with nothing but the OS and capture card software installed, I figured I may have finally found a use for intel's "cheap" processor choice.
Any comments are appreciated!
Thanks all.
The Soundman
I'm like a genius, only not as smart... :evil:
I'm like a genius, only not as smart... :evil:
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by The Soundman
I'm considering building a dedicated video caputure box for recording signals from cable and satilitte feeds. Among the hardware I'm considering is a 2.5 Ghz Celeron processor, ATI All In Wonder 9600 card with 128 MB Video memory onboard, and 512 MB of pc3200 DDR and a 400 Mhz FSB motherboard by aopen.
-- Michael RudasHow To Ask Questions The Smart Way (article by Eric Raymond).
Dealing with Malware
My Articles page.
My Best-of-Breed Free Software for Windows list
Other Windows- & Microsoft-related links
The Audio Tech's Page
My blog
The Oak Park Computer Club
PenguiCon 4.0 Open Source & Science Fiction convention, April 21-23, 2006.
Knoppix Linux (CD-bootable) download. information, & support.
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by TallCool1
Are you specifically tied to an Intel platform? AMD offers considerably more bang-for-the-buck than either the badly-crippled (cache-starved) Celeron or the P4. You can use the money you save to purchase better audio/video capture hardware or fancier software.
I was thinking Celeron as You can go 800 FSB as opposed to 333 max with the AMD line so I can make to most of the 400Mhz DDR and keep everything in sync. I may check my price list for an AMD solution yet. I have an 850 Duron system now, but I don't think I can do full MPEG 2 capture with it.
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by mbturner
I say the heck with PC when it come to video and go with MAC. I know, hold on ppl, don't plot my death yet. MAC is far better than PC when it comes to anything graphic. BUt, if you don't go mac I would use the P4 with Hyper Threading.
By all means, keep the feedback comming!
And feel free to vote in the poll if you haven't already.
Thanks again.
The Soundman
I'm like a genius, only not as smart... :evil:
I'm like a genius, only not as smart... :evil:
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by The Soundman
I was thinking Celeron as You can go 800 FSB as opposed to 333 max with the AMD line so I can make to most of the 400Mhz DDR and keep everything in sync. I may check my price list for an AMD solution yet. I have an 850 Duron system now, but I don't think I can do full MPEG 2 capture with it.
Don't be fooled -- even a 800-MHz-bus Celeron is no match for ANY AMD processor. That's like saying a go-kart motor can spin 10,000 RPM -- so what? The Celeron's limited cache, when combined with the long pipeline of the P4 architecture, is deadly to performance. Nobody should ever buy a Celeron, for any reason, no matter what.
The differences between the Mac and PC platforms when used with graphics and video applications is narrowing fast, especially with the new AMD-64 systems and the Linux 2.6 kernel.
-- Michael RudasHow To Ask Questions The Smart Way (article by Eric Raymond).
Dealing with Malware
My Articles page.
My Best-of-Breed Free Software for Windows list
Other Windows- & Microsoft-related links
The Audio Tech's Page
My blog
The Oak Park Computer Club
PenguiCon 4.0 Open Source & Science Fiction convention, April 21-23, 2006.
Knoppix Linux (CD-bootable) download. information, & support.
•
•
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 59
Reputation:
Solved Threads: 1
quote:
Nobody should ever buy a Celeron, for any reason, no matter what.
That is a bit extreme. I have used celerons for some time and I have not had any problems with them. Remeber, most people use their computers to write reports, e-mail, and surf the net. Celerons will do that with no problems.
The Soundman, I don't think you will have any problems with either intel or amd. It will probably come down to pricing for you.
Nobody should ever buy a Celeron, for any reason, no matter what.
That is a bit extreme. I have used celerons for some time and I have not had any problems with them. Remeber, most people use their computers to write reports, e-mail, and surf the net. Celerons will do that with no problems.
The Soundman, I don't think you will have any problems with either intel or amd. It will probably come down to pricing for you.
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by twilli227
quote:
Nobody should ever buy a Celeron, for any reason, no matter what.
That is a bit extreme. I have used celerons for some time and I have not had any problems with them. Remember, most people use their computers to write reports, e-mail, and surf the net. Celerons will do that with no problems.
The Celeron processor was developed for one reason only: marketing-by-numbers (clock speed). There is no customer benefit to it whatsoever. Its in-built limitations make it a poor choice for any purpose. You can research the benchmarks yourself -- a slower P4 will outperform a faster Celeron by a wide margin. You can cherry-pick benchmarks to show some advantage, but in balanced real-world use, there's no comparison. Why spend more for less performance?
-- Michael RudasHow To Ask Questions The Smart Way (article by Eric Raymond).
Dealing with Malware
My Articles page.
My Best-of-Breed Free Software for Windows list
Other Windows- & Microsoft-related links
The Audio Tech's Page
My blog
The Oak Park Computer Club
PenguiCon 4.0 Open Source & Science Fiction convention, April 21-23, 2006.
Knoppix Linux (CD-bootable) download. information, & support.
I realize that I slightly botched when I said that the celeron processor I was considering had and 800Mhz FSB. It's actually only 400. :o
I did a price up based on a Athlon processor with a 333 Mhz FSB speed and 512k cache and it appears to be about the same as the celeron solution I was considering. I'm still open to comments here so by all means keep talking and thanks again everyone.
I did a price up based on a Athlon processor with a 333 Mhz FSB speed and 512k cache and it appears to be about the same as the celeron solution I was considering. I'm still open to comments here so by all means keep talking and thanks again everyone.
The Soundman
I'm like a genius, only not as smart... :evil:
I'm like a genius, only not as smart... :evil:
![]() |
Other Threads in the Motherboards, CPUs and RAM Forum
- Previous Thread: Shared RAM reporting
- Next Thread: IBM ThinkPad T22 bad cmos battery?
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |





