• AnyStream is having some DRM issues currently, Netflix is not available in HD for the time being.
    Situations like this will always happen with AnyStream: streaming providers are continuously improving their countermeasures while we try to catch up, it's an ongoing cat-and-mouse game. Please be patient and don't flood our support or forum with requests, we are working on it 24/7 to get it resolved. Thank you.

Graphics Card recommendation, too much choice!

S

sanderh

Well-Known Member
Thread Starter
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
282
Likes
0
I m looking for a budget HTPC videocard. It is ONLY meant for HTPC use (.mkv files etc) and NOT for gaming.

I ve narrowed down my options:

ATI HD4350
ATI HD3650
NVIDIA 8600GTS
NVIDIA 9500GT

all are passive cooled cards.

What would you guys recommend?
 
3650 I guess...or 46xx if you're patient as pstrip doesn't seem to support them properly at this point(there's been a new beta a few days ago, but no feedback yet)

the nvidia don't give a picture as sharp as the ati, and you can't achieve pin-point custom resolutions(48.000 etc etc)
 
I'm assuming you have PCIe (and not AGP). There is also the power consumption and heat aspects to consider. The 3650 will use approx 45-60W and not generate so much heat. I suspect the 4xxx series will use more power and generate more heat. You can also use a lower model 26xx for less power & heat with a dual core (or better) system.

Are you limited to 1 slot ? or can you afford 2 ?

What is your CPU & power supply output ?
 
I can afford 2 slots easy. Own a quadcore Q6600
 
and why not the newer 4350 in your opinion?
 
edit: I've just checked out the 4350, and it's only 40euros and consumes less power (therefore less heat).
 
Last edited:
...but the 4350 has fewer stream processors than the 3650 (80 vs 120) - this might limit the HD de-interlacing capability (which uses the stream processors), and the 4xxx drivers are still very new.

Have a look at this thread on the AVS forum if you are interested in the ATi 4xxx for HTPC - http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1074288

Tony

(I've just moved from a low-profile HD3450 to a low-profile XFX 9500GT - fan cooled but pretty quiet - because I needed more 3D/de-interlacing performance for playing HD video in MediaPortal, and I wasn't sure the HD4350 was going to be enough of a performance boost)
 
Last edited:
The 4xxx cards support multi channel PCM over HDMI, which makes them the best choice for HTPCs with ReClock. :p The Catalyst 8.11 drivers seem to be the first which start to work quite well.
Saves you a lot of money compared to a "HDMI" soundcard (which IMHO is "broken by design" anyway)
I would go with a "medium" 4xxx card. I use a 4850, but it is quite hot and power hungry (and expensive) for a HTPC. The "lower" cards weren't available at the time I bought it.
 
Were I not going to be gaming on my system I would have gone with a lower-end 4xxx series card. The 4350 uses a mere 10 watts. I'd love to hear feedback on real world use in an HTPC. It's small, low power, passively cooled, and still has acceleration. NewEgg has it on sale so it's selling for 24.99 USD. I'm unsure of the shipping but it's reasonable.
 
DrinkLyeAndDie said:
Were I not going to be gaming on my system I would have gone with a lower-end 4xxx series card. The 4350 uses a mere 10 watts. I'd love to hear feedback on real world use in an HTPC. It's small, low power, passively cooled, and still has acceleration. NewEgg has it on sale so it's selling for 24.99 USD. I'm unsure of the shipping but it's reasonable.
Click to expand...

The 4350 and 4550 both consume less than 25WATTS of power. The comments above about the newer 4350/4550 chipsets using more power than the 36xx series is a complete farse. I wound up choosing the 4550 as it had better DirectX 10.1 support and higher resolution support than the 4350. It is a little more expensive. I absolutely love and recommend either for HTPC.

They are *not* gaming GPU's.
 
shadow07 said:
The 4350 and 4550 both consume less than 25WATTS of power. The comments above about the newer 4350/4550 chipsets using more power than the 36xx series is a complete farse.
Click to expand...

I thought as much but it's been awhile since I read the power consumption of the 3xxx cards. I knew the power usage was low for the 4xxx cards.

shadow07 said:
I wound up choosing the 4550 as it had better DirectX 10.1 support and higher resolution support than the 4350. It is a little more expensive. I absolutely love and recommend either for HTPC.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you like it and thanks for the info. I knew about DX 10.1 and high resolution but it's still nice to hear more from actual users and not just reviews. I had planned on recommending and using one of these two models for HTPCs but I was wanting to know more real world experiences.

shadow07 said:
They are *not* gaming GPU's.
Click to expand...

Definitely not! :)
 
DrinkLyeAndDie said:
I'm glad you like it and thanks for the info. I knew about DX 10.1 and high resolution but it's still nice to hear more from actual users and not just reviews. I had planned on recommending and using one of these two models for HTPCs but I was wanting to know more real world experiences.
Click to expand...

The only drawback is if anyone has the cash for any of the new 120Hz HDTV's, the 4350 and 4550 do not support native 120Hz @ 1920x1080p. They do support 24hz, and with the newer Catalyst drivers (v8.11 as of right now) it does produce a really good image. I am extremely happy with the 4550 chipset. Well done ATI. Well done.
 
I used the 4550's (MSI) in a two low budget retail builds. They perform surprisingly well and stay amazingly cool considering they are passively cooled.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top