PDA

View Full Version : Intel Atom: Suitable for transcoding?



DarkWeaver
2009-02-27, 10:13
Hey guys,

Thought I'd make my first post here, as I'm contemplating making my own little server for SC and video streaming to my Xbox.
Basically, I've just sent back a Buffalo Linkstation because it was too slow; I use iTunes so a fair few of my music files are in AAC format, so they needed to be transcoded before being sent to my SLiMP3. I'm hoping someone has some experience with the Atom, and knows how suitable it would be for transcoding, as that's obviously important for me.

I'll be running Ubuntu Server, and will be pairing the Atom with 2GB of RAM and a 1TB HDD.

Any ideas?

HansS
2009-02-27, 10:50
I run FreeBSD on an eee-box with a single core atom N270 and only 1 Mbyte of RAM and have no problem transcoding Apple Lossless files to Flac. For a test I also transcoded AAC to Flac , WAV and MP3 and that worked just fine.

agillis
2009-02-27, 13:03
The Atom Rocks. I use it all the time here to build VortexBoxes and it works great even under moderate load. I you really want to do a lot at once get the Dual core Atom.

DarkWeaver
2009-02-27, 19:59
Thanks for the replies guys!
I've placed my order; everything should be arriving early next weeks, so I should be up and running soon! Finally; a dedicated media box!

Moonbase
2009-02-28, 07:01
Thanks for the feedback! Good to know, though I’ll be waiting for the MSI D-130 (Dual Atom, will be available mid-year/autumn).

BlueScreenJunky
2009-02-28, 07:16
I've read somewhere that the dual core Atoms was not really useful compared to the single core ones, because single core Atoms already have HyperThreading (which allows them to run two threads at the same time on one core), and are more limited by their FSB than by the power of the processor itself.

I'll link to the article if I can find it.

Uluen
2009-03-01, 10:15
I've read somewhere that the dual core Atoms was not really useful compared to the single core ones, because single core Atoms already have HyperThreading (which allows them to run two threads at the same time on one core), and are more limited by their FSB than by the power of the processor itself.

I'll link to the article if I can find it.I'd like to read that article.
HyperThreading was never any good, even Intel admitted that eventually. Usually there were no performance gains with HT enabled and sometimes it even made things worse.

kolding
2009-03-03, 10:00
I'd like to read that article.
HyperThreading was never any good, even Intel admitted that eventually. Usually there were no performance gains with HT enabled and sometimes it even made things worse.

I wouldn't go that far. Hyperthreading on the Pentium 4 had serious issues. It worked well on some workloads, and very poorly on others, giving an overall "meh" level of performance.

Hyperthreading can also have an unfortunate effect. If you're running two pieces of work, it would slow both down, making the system seem slow. The total time of doing both would be faster than doing one then the other, so it was an overall win, but the immediate impact was negative.

On other architectures, and the Atom is very different from the P4, it can be quite useful. I don't know enough about how Atom works to say for certain, but it's more likely useful than it was on the P4.

Eric

Moonbase
2009-03-03, 21:29
Before I go for an Atom-based system, can anyone tell for sure it would be able to stream to 2 SB's (no transcoding) plus stream to two (remote) software players, transcoding to 128 kbps MP3? (I plan for a N270/1.6GHz, or a Dual-core 330/2x1.6GHz; 2GB RAM, running Linux.)

Worst-case scenario: 2 hardware players running locally, plus two people listening over the Internet from work.

agillis
2009-03-03, 23:08
The Atom chip is amazing. I was interested in you question. So I started 2 mp3 streams to VLC from my VortexBox here running on a single core Atom. I then fired up my SB3 streaming FLAC of course. Oh and I have an over night background job running converting about 1000 FLACs to mp3s. All three players sounded great 0 skip or distortion. You can see a screen shot of top below. I'm running about 17% CPU load and that's with only 512MB of RAM. I like to keep this system light to really test out VortexBox. You can see I swapped 48K of memory but that was when I fired up all three players at the same time and the CPU was already busting it's ass transcoding my FLACs. It didn't swap anymore after it re-adjusted.

So the point of all this is get 1GB of memory and you should be fine. if you really want to go to town spend a few bucks more for the dual core Atom.




top - 00:56:14 up 6:24, 2 users, load average: 1.68, 1.68, 1.42
Tasks: 149 total, 2 running, 147 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
Cpu(s): 17.2%us, 1.8%sy, 49.4%ni, 31.3%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.2%si, 0.0%st
Mem: 505532k total, 499352k used, 6180k free, 3804k buffers
Swap: 786424k total, 48k used, 786376k free, 297028k cached

Moonbase
2009-03-03, 23:31
Now that sounds great. Thanks for taking the effort and actually testing it, much appreciated!

Taking MusicIP into account, I’ll then go for a Dual-Atom and 2GB, as originally planned. Hope I can wait for the MSI D-130, but impatient as I am I might just buy a mini-ITX dual atom board and a case and build it myself :-)

Or maybe this one (http://www.ixsoft.de/cgi-bin/web_store.cgi?cart_id=2703293_21759&page=Products/de/IXTH3302HW-BK.html). Could become a nice VortexBox ;-)

agillis
2009-03-04, 11:16
That is a very slick looking little box. I wonder if there is a reseller in the US?