Which direction to go with new CPU?


LostAlone

Recommended Posts

Hey guys

 

I'm thinking about (finally) buying some new hardware for my Unraid, instead of running her off old components. However, there's a LOT of competing hardware at the lower end these days so I thought I'd ask for some opinions from you guys as to where to start looking. Presently I'm running from an old Athlon 64 X2 5000+, so pretty much any more modern CPU is going to be an improvement. I run Plex on top of Unraid and stream out to a couple of Rokus so I do need some transcoding power in there, but at the same time I don't want to waste cash getting radically more crunching power than I actually need.

 

Some shopping around has given me a few competitors, such as the Pentium G2020 as well as the AMD A-4 4000 but the field is wide open really. I've heard that the last two generations of intel chips has massively better performance at media encoding, but I have no idea if that translates into unraid transcoding performance, and (somewhat stunningly) the A-4 is cheaper than the Pentium and with a little more clock speed.

 

Really I'm not experienced enough with the demands of Plex to know just by looking at specs how much power is enough, and in fact if either of those chips would actually have the power to run two high quality transcoding streams at the same time. My venerable old A64 will run one, although with some stutters, but definitely not two. On paper both of the chips I suggested are better, but not by a vast amount (2 cores at 2.6Ghz at the moment, against 2.9Ghz and 3Ghz respectively) so should I perhaps even be looking towards an A6-6400K? Not a huge price bump over the pentium, but certainly has more grunt. Both chipsets have motherboards with abundant SATA ports and gigabit networking, so that's not going to break the tie either. It really comes down to what's going to be the right performance for my system.

 

As an additional consideration, when I do the new build I'll be putting in a proper PSU. Does anyone know off the top of their head what kind of wattage I should be looking at for these kind of CPUs with six drives, and the potential to support (say) another six as I expand?

 

Thanks in advance guys!

Link to comment

I could be wrong here, but a dual core running @ 2.6MHz should be enough for most use.

why do you need to trans-code going to Roku box?

can't you trans-code the video to proper format and quality when you store it on your media server so Plex can just stream it.(sorry I do not use Plex so I am not sure how it works)

I rip and or transcode my DVD collection and all of my home videos into MKVs and drop it to unraid.

I use the XBMC runing on windows HTPC  for my living room.

works great.

 

yes, my unraid setup is much more powerful than yours, but had to buy the hardware a new and was planning to

go Virtual thus need more power. well guess what I am now building a totally new server for my needs and the current setup will end up as my primary windows PC :-).

 

so good luck with your new build but do plan carefully and try to thing ahead.

you never know where you will end up :-P

 

as for PSU,  check one out in my sig.  I have been running it for 2 years non stop and it is perfect and very quet.

also it is one of the few I came across that have 72A on single rail (well yours might be different as if you go with less wattage it will have less Amp on a rail.) I have planned to go upto 20 drives so I got the  760W but they do have lower specs. get the best one you can afford as the PSU very important.

 

 

Link to comment

I'm also looking to upgrade.  My unRAID has only been setup for a few months now and was keeping it simple.  I have Plex, SAB, SB and Transmission running on an old MacMini with a dual core 2GHz.  When I want to play something that is an AVI and want to send it to my Roku3, the MacMini could not keep up unless everything else was completely idle on the host.

 

That's when I realized I had to beef up the CPU significantly when I eventually migrate Plex, SAB, SB and Transmission to my unRAID server.  Was looking at going with an AMD Athlon II X4 640 Propus 3.0GHz for $79.  Figured that would be plenty of horsepower without going overboard (and only $20 more than the dual-core).  I assumed 3GHz would be plenty for any transcoding I need to do.  Most of my content is MP4 and MKV, so no transcoding needed for that content other than the system downscaling it for mobile devices to sync.

Link to comment

If the goal is to ensure very ample performance for anything you may want to do with your UnRAID server, I'd go for more "horsepower" than the X4 640 Propus provides.    It's PassMark rating is fairly good -- 3364 -- but not really competitive with the Intel CPUs.    A Core i3-3245 is $60 more ... but scores 4616 on PassMark => more than 1/3rd more "horsepower" while at the same time running much cooler and drawing less power [55 watts for the i3 vs 95 watts for the X4].    And on a per/core basis, the Intel is FAR more powerful -- remember it's providing 37% more power with only 2 cores compared to the 4 cores of the Propus.

 

And if you want even more "headroom" for growth in processing demands, the newest Haswell Core i5 units are superb -- and have even better video encoding capabilities.  A Core i5-4570S, for example, scores 6498 on PassMark yet still has a TDP of only 65 watts.

Link to comment

A major problem over here is that old hardware is damn near impossible to source at a reasonable price. On newegg the A6-6400k is the same price as an X4 640 ($79.99)  but domestically the x4 640 costs the equivalent of ~140 USD, which kinda takes that out of the running.

 

My worry with going up to an i3 is that I can get more theoretical horsepower from AMD and at a lower price. A quad core A8-6600K comes in about twenty bucks below the i3-3245, and has 400mhz more clock. It rolls in cheaper than the i3-3245 (new hardware we do tend to get at the newegg level) it CPU marks better (4616 for the i3 vs 4931 for the A8). It's right at the top end for what I'm happy to spend, but it seems to fit the bill pretty well.

 

A quick answer to the transcoding questions:

 

As for formats and properly recoding over transcoding, my collection of stuff has been building diligently for a decade and I've used a lot of different formats over that time, primarily to save space during the period where just buying more drives wasn't financially viable. As things stand now, I'm ok to keep things as they are unless it's coded into something obnoxious (I am proud to report there is no longer any .RM in my collection). If nothing else, I just don't have the dedication to find things that need to be recoded. Since I moved to Plex/Rokus as my playback to TVs and mobile devices there's nothing that just refuses to play. If nothing else, transcoding is something that I still want to have the ability to do. When I have mates over, it's cool to be able to plug in any media they have into the tower and it'll pull to whatever device we want it on.

Link to comment

My worry with going up to an i3 is that I can get more theoretical horsepower from AMD and at a lower price. A quad core A8-6600K comes in about twenty bucks below the i3-3245, and has 400mhz more clock. It rolls in cheaper than the i3-3245 (new hardware we do tend to get at the newegg level) it CPU marks better (4616 for the i3 vs 4931 for the A8). It's right at the top end for what I'm happy to spend, but it seems to fit the bill pretty well.

 

The i3-3245 is a FAR more capable CPU than the A8-6600k.  While they have almost the same total processing capacity, don't forget the i3 is doing that with 2 cores vs. the 4 cores of the A8.  For a transcoding task the much higher performance of an i3 core will run circles around the A8.

 

... Not to mention that if you go with a board that supports the i3, you could easily more than double your processing power in the future by simply switching out the CPU for an i7  :)

Link to comment

My MOBO only takes AM3 and AM3+, so that limits me to those CPU's.  Not ready to reinvest in a new MOBO, so Intel is out for now.

 

Not expecting to need anything high performance here.  I know I want multi-core to address several things running while allowing the core of unRAID to keep going unimpeded.  At first I just looked at the dual-core and knew that would be an improvement.  Using NewEgg, I narrowed it down to these choices:

 

Current: AMD Sempron 145 Sargas 2.8GHz Socket AM3 45W Single-Core ($39, PassMark 833)

Option 1: AMD Athlon II X2 270 Regor 3.4GHz Socket AM3 65W Dual-Core ($55, PassMark 1991)

Option 2: AMD Athlon II X4 640 Propus 3.0GHz Socket AM3 95W Quad-Core ($79, PassMark 3365)

Option 3: AMD FX-4100 Zambezi 3.6GHz Socket AM3+ 95W Quad-Core ($99, PassMark 4056)

 

So many choices.  :-\  Probably going with option 3, but 2 ain't bad either if I want to save another $20.  :)

Link to comment

My MOBO only takes AM3 and AM3+, so that limits me to those CPU's.  Not ready to reinvest in a new MOBO, so Intel is out for now.

 

Not expecting to need anything high performance here.  I know I want multi-core to address several things running while allowing the core of unRAID to keep going unimpeded.  At first I just looked at the dual-core and knew that would be an improvement.  Using NewEgg, I narrowed it down to these choices:

 

Current: AMD Sempron 145 Sargas 2.8GHz Socket AM3 45W Single-Core ($39, PassMark 833)

Option 1: AMD Athlon II X2 270 Regor 3.4GHz Socket AM3 65W Dual-Core ($55, PassMark 1991)

Option 2: AMD Athlon II X4 640 Propus 3.0GHz Socket AM3 95W Quad-Core ($79, PassMark 3365)

Option 3: AMD FX-4100 Zambezi 3.6GHz Socket AM3+ 95W Quad-Core ($99, PassMark 4056)

 

So many choices.  :-\  Probably going with option 3, but 2 ain't bad either if I want to save another $20.  :)

 

Go for the FX because of the 8GB L3-Cache.

Besides, the mobo in your SIG supports ECC RAM....I'd spend some money on that next.

 

Edit: The next possible upgrade for your mobo is the Opteron-3380, PassMark 6565 at 65W TDP.

Edit2: the cooler of the FX will possibly sound like a jet engine....performance wise, an opteron-3350HE will stay almost silent at 45W TDP and PassMark 4130

Link to comment

My worry with going up to an i3 is that I can get more theoretical horsepower from AMD and at a lower price. A quad core A8-6600K comes in about twenty bucks below the i3-3245, and has 400mhz more clock. It rolls in cheaper than the i3-3245 (new hardware we do tend to get at the newegg level) it CPU marks better (4616 for the i3 vs 4931 for the A8). It's right at the top end for what I'm happy to spend, but it seems to fit the bill pretty well.

 

The i3-3245 is a FAR more capable CPU than the A8-6600k.  While they have almost the same total processing capacity, don't forget the i3 is doing that with 2 cores vs. the 4 cores of the A8.  For a transcoding task the much higher performance of an i3 core will run circles around the A8.

 

... Not to mention that if you go with a board that supports the i3, you could easily more than double your processing power in the future by simply switching out the CPU for an i7  :)

 

I'd certainly agree that the i3 is a better chip all told... The thing is that if I'm buying an i3 then I'd be much more likely to build a new desktop with the i3 in and put the Core2Quad from my desktop into the Unraid, because that certainly has the power to transcode and I'd get a better desktop into the bargain

 

Since we're opening the discussion up a little perhaps we should talk about some more general questions:

 

Does Intels reported improvements in media encoding power translate to better transcoding performance per mhz?

What's more important for this kind of application; cores or speed?

What are the best benchmarks to look at to determine potential transcoding ability?

Link to comment

Intel's Quick Sync technology in their on-chip HD graphics for Sandy Bridge and later (Ivy Bridge and Haswell) gives far better transcoding performance than you'll get with any of the other options you've mentioned.    It's significantly faster than NVidia's CUDA, and of course much faster than any CPU-only solution.    The clock speed of modern CPU's is essentially irrelevant unless you're comparing chips of the same series.

 

In other words, an i3 would be FAR better than a Core 2 Quad for transcoding chores.

 

Link to comment
  • 2 years later...

Intel's Quick Sync technology in their on-chip HD graphics for Sandy Bridge and later (Ivy Bridge and Haswell) gives far better transcoding performance than you'll get with any of the other options you've mentioned.    It's significantly faster than NVidia's CUDA, and of course much faster than any CPU-only solution.    The clock speed of modern CPU's is essentially irrelevant unless you're comparing chips of the same series.

 

In other words, an i3 would be FAR better than a Core 2 Quad for transcoding chores.

 

Digging up and old post I know but can Quick Sync be utilised from a VM? Blue Iris benefits from Quick Sync but I'm not sure if BI in a VM can actually use it

Link to comment

Intel's Quick Sync technology in their on-chip HD graphics for Sandy Bridge and later (Ivy Bridge and Haswell) gives far better transcoding performance than you'll get with any of the other options you've mentioned.    It's significantly faster than NVidia's CUDA, and of course much faster than any CPU-only solution.    The clock speed of modern CPU's is essentially irrelevant unless you're comparing chips of the same series.

 

In other words, an i3 would be FAR better than a Core 2 Quad for transcoding chores.

 

All well and good, except the OP is running Plex, which doesn't (and probably never will) utilise QuickSync.

 

 

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.