[mythtv-users] Low powered nvidia GPU

[Bert Haskins]

On 01/03/2013 02:58 PM, Nick Rout wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 9:27 PM, GZ <gzornetzer.lists at gmail.com 
> <mailto:gzornetzer.lists at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Fred Watt
>     <fredwattmythtv at gmail.com <mailto:fredwattmythtv at gmail.com>> wrote:
>     > Thank you both for your thoughts, all progressive.  What I am
>     looking for is
>     > a low powered kepler card.  When the slave is recording without
>     anyone
>     > viewing the frontend it would lovely if the gpu idled as low as was
>     > possible.  Likewise when myth frontend is in use, a low draw
>     would help with
>     > the efficiency of the slave.
>
>     Just to add a bit of background on the Nvidia GT 600-series cards -
>     note that even though they are designated  6xx, they are not all
>     Keplers..
>
>     The 610 is a rebadged GT 520 (Fermi architecture).  It will actually
>     be the card with the lowest power draw, but has some drawbacks.  Using
>     VDPAU, it cannot deinterlace 1080i using the advanced 2x profile,
>     which gives the quality.  It is generally agreed that you must step
>     down to a lesser deinterlacer.
>
>     The 620 is a rebadged GT 430 (Fermi). This card has higher power
>     consumption but can generally deinterlace 1080i using advanced 2x.
>     Some people in the USA (60 fps) have reported problems, but this
>     shouldn't be an issue for the UK (50 fps).
>
>     The 630 is a rebadged GT 440 (Fermi).  This card is a 430 with a
>     higher clock rate and faster memory.  Its power draw is similar to the
>     620, and should work fine in a frontend.
>
>     The GT 640 is the lowest end card that's actually a Kepler.  You're
>     going to pay a bit more money for this card.  A review at tomshardware
>     (http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gt-640-review,3214-10.html)
>     shows this card uses 20W less power than the 440 under load, but only
>     a 1W difference at idle.  You'll get better gaming performance, but
>     you won't really notice it if you're just using the system for video
>     playback. If having the latest card is important to you, feel free to
>     get it, but it will likely not result in significant power savings on
>     your frontend.
>
>     The GTX 650 is an interesting choice.  It's the same as the GT 640,
>     but the GPU is clocked slightly faster and uses faster GDDR5 memory.
>     It has better gaming performance (but you won't notice this unless
>     your frontend performs double duty).  However, according to the tests
>     at tomshardware
>     (http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-660-geforce-gtx-650-benchmark,3297.html)
>     it idles 8W lower than the GT 640, but is the same under load.  In the
>     US, these are running about $20-$30 more than the 640.
>     How much is the reduced power consumption with Kepler worth to you?
>     Or do you prefer Kepler to future-proof your rig?
>     I hope this is helpful.
>
>
> No matter whether it is helpful to the OP, it is a great summary and 
> will be helpful to many! Cheers.
So what is the best choice ( with a little gaming capability ) if you 
really, really don't want a fan?
I have yet to see a graphics card fan that has lasted more than about 
six months and yet the ones
in my laptops seem to last a long time.
No fan seems to equal low capability.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users at mythtv.org
> http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.mythtv.org/pipermail/mythtv-users/attachments/20130103/9e78bcc7/attachment.html>