View Full Version : Higher clockspeed or more cores?

January 21st, 2009, 02:13 AM
Hi All,

Looking to put together a MythBuntu based HTPC for a friend and am trying to decide between the AMD 4850e (dual core, 2.5Ghz, 45w) or the 9350e (quad core, 2Ghz, 65w) CPU. Either would be fine for watching/recording HD content, but my friend has told me he will want to be able to do both at the same time. I.e watch HD TV/Movies while recording HD TV.

Firstly, is this possible? Secondly, if it is possible then am I better off with a higher clock speed or more cores? He'll also want to do some transcoding jobs so the quad core would be better for that, however it is more important that he is able to watch and record seperate HD content at the same time. Any suggestions?

January 21st, 2009, 03:10 AM
I happily record HD and watch recorded HD at the same time with a AMD dual core @ 2.0 ghz and a NVIDIA 8500gt. My tuner is a HVR1600

January 21st, 2009, 03:44 AM
If it were me, I'd Go AMD 4850e. The quieter, the better. Also, I've been able to record an HD channel, an analog channel, transcode running in the background while I watch a video on my Athlon 64 3500+ (so only one core) without any issues.

I can't speak for your friends usage, but I'm hardly ever in a hurry for my transcodes, not to mention that I've never needed to do more than one transcode at a time.

Bottom line to me is that the AMD is less noisy (which makes for a more enjoyable experience) and less expensive (which frees up funds for more hard drive space, important when recording HD).

January 21st, 2009, 03:31 PM
No problems with the 4850e in my combined front/back end Mythbox.