Buying a Laptop for HTPC

sud98

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
2,596
Points
113
Location
bangalore,india
While I know a laptop is not ideally suited to be used as an HTPC, I am in the process of buying a laptop, so was wondering if I can double it as a HTPC.

I would like to know what are the items to consider in terms of processor/graphics/ports/brands...

Some of my initial considerations are
1. Prefer Windows possibly 7.
2. Budget in the range of 50k

Processor - I guess most intel processors in the range of 1.6 to 1.8 ghz should be fine, but do I need the ones above 2 Ghz

Memory - I would go for 4 GB RAM

Graphics card - anything one needs to take care of? Would a 512MB dedicated be good enough or one needs to go for a 1 GB

Output slots - preferred would be HDMI to fit my LCD TV, should I take care of anything else?

Do you get optical/Digital Coax out for audio in laptops to connect to a receiver?

In terms of brands - I have primarily used Dell, unless there are any red flags with them.

Please add anything I need to consider.
 
Get a usb or external soundcard powered by a linear psu. This will give better quality SQ.
Maybe a beresford 7520 type.

Any lappie that can run Win7 (certified) smoothly will do. it should have spdif-out and hdmi and 802.11n.

Cheers
 
I use my ACER 5738G for this. It has HDMI, good RAM, SPDIF output and a reasonable dedicated Graphics card. At 36k it was an excellent VFM.
 
While I know a laptop is not ideally suited to be used as an HTPC, I am in the process of buying a laptop, so was wondering if I can double it as a HTPC.
I would like to know what are the items to consider in terms of processor/graphics/ports/brands...

Some of my initial considerations are
1. Prefer Windows possibly 7.
dont go for vista. xp or 7 or linux will be fine.
2. Budget in the range of 50k

Processor - I guess most intel processors in the range of 1.6 to 1.8 ghz should be fine, but do I need the ones above 2 Ghz
CPU is not enough for Hidef movies, either 720p or 1080p. Your graphics card better be able to handle the video.
Memory - I would go for 4 GB RAM
2gb is enough for htpc purposes, so if your other needs are met by 2gb, no need to go for 4gb..
Graphics card - anything one needs to take care of? Would a 512MB dedicated be good enough or one needs to go for a 1 GB

Output slots - preferred would be HDMI to fit my LCD TV, should I take care of anything else?

Do you get optical/Digital Coax out for audio in laptops to connect to a receiver?
some of the laptops use the mic in or something like that for spdif output using coaxial cable. the software controls what the port is used for. Check the specs before buy one.
In terms of brands - I have primarily used Dell, unless there are any red flags with them.

Please add anything I need to consider.

take a few 720p and 1080p hidef movies on a dvd-r or a large pen drive. test it out to make sure it works fine and there is no jerkiness, skipping etc.
 
Thanks for the inputs.

I am looking for the following laptop Dell Studio 15

Genuine Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit (English)
Intel Core i3-350M Processor (2.26Ghz, 4 Threads, 3M cache)
3 Yrs Ltd Hardware Warranty, InHome Service after Remote Diagnosis
15.6 " 720p WLED (1366x768) Display with TrueLife
3GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM (1 x 2G+1 x 1G) (Work at 1066MHz for Intel Arrandale CPU)
320GB 7200RPM SATA Hard Drive
Internal 8X DVD+/-RW Combination Drive with dual layer write capabilities
512MB ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4570
Integrated Stereo Sound with Subwoofer
Dell 1520 Wireless-N Card
Dell(TM) Wireless 365 Bluetooth Module

This has an HDMI Output, but not sure I can connect to an external DAC. Also, Gobble, the Bereford does not accept HDMI input only optical/coaxial.
So, I suppose the best would be to connect to a HDMI capable receiver (which I dont have currently).
 
Last edited:
"for an additional 6-8K you can upgrade to a Bluray Slot, may be for future use"

Thought of it, but not sure of the restrictions it will end up posing for DVD too if its similar in logic to blu ray players wherein the dvd region too gets locked.
And buying in India will mean a big restriction.

Will check out the 17inch but I guess it loses the portability to a large extent and its not available online, so I cant use my corporate discount, however, will check it at staples or a Dell store.

Not sure how does one customize the video card, not much into gaming, and for movies plan to connect to the TV, will it still make sense?
 
For HTPC purpose, this Dell is toooooo much...
Core i3? oof..will be used max 20% i guess. (maybe less with a radeon in there)

AMD & ATI are the ones to go for HTPC. (avoid intel & nvidia)

Save money here & buy an AVR with HDMI pass through. It will decode ur surround sound as Radeon 4xxx series has HDCP.(using ur HDMI output) so no need of external DAC or SPDIF.
Check if ur model of mobility radeon has any issues. (avsforum.com is good place)

Windows 7 has been reported to be good for surround sound. Try the one with Media Centre.

I have a 15.4". 14" is good for portability..kind of ideal laptop size.

Actually there are many components to look into...AVR, speakers, software for running the HD content instead of just the laptop.

Regards
Manish
 
Experience & info, nothing personal.
ATI has 'working' capability of surround sound from their GPUs which Nvidia doesnt.
AMD is always better in the multimedia department.
Besides, intel creates a hype for their products that i dont like.

I have been using computers since 1989, the early days of microcomputers. After having used them for many years, my friend and i discussed abt getting over the Intel fever (part of which was due to the fact that Intel introduced the first 8086 and we programmed on it)
We bought an AMD laptop and its working fine ever since. End of monopoly!

Recently AMD had sued Intel over business malpractices and Intel has lost both in EU & US (settlement in US with AMD due to fear of losing 3 times as much money as in EU).

I think that its generally sits well for us customers to be a bit careful when some entity starts to get overly dominant & awe-inspiring.
Microsoft included. Though i must add that surround sound is currently reported to work well on Win 7.

U can check avsforums.com for more info.
 
I would say 2 cores are enough. Three or four cores would be required if you are into animation and graphics.
Two cores will give you good performance with a good motherboard. I am assuming you will use your HTPC for playing audio and video. Also, few other works. You will not use it for animation and graphics.
This way you will save money here and could potentially buy other things.
 
Recently AMD had sued Intel over business malpractices and Intel has lost both in EU & US (settlement in US with AMD due to fear of losing 3 times as much money as in EU). I think that its generally sits well for us customers to be a bit careful when some entity starts to get overly dominant & awe-inspiring.

Please avoid making recommendations based on fanboyism. This is one of the few forums where rabid flag waving of brands (like AMD/Intel, ATI/NVidia, Apple/PC, etc.) does not happen.

AMD desktop processors currently provide more bang for the buck than Intel processors in the low-end and mid-end range. However, they have a lot of catching up to do when it comes to laptops - which is being discussed. (Same goes for servers)

AMD is always better in the multimedia department.

Can you substantiate that statement with any facts??
 
AMD is always better in the multimedia department.



Can you substantiate that statement with any facts??


For desktops, AMD is better for multimedia because of CPU + GPU combination in budget range.ATI Radeon Integrated graphics is quite capable chip and costs just 6K.

For 10k, you can get CPU and Motherboards that will run pretty much any workload for video playback + moderate games. Not sure if that would apply to laptops.

However, for latest and greatest games, it does not apply since you need fastest CPU/ GPU where Intel and Nvidea rule.
 
Cool it baby!

There can be no fanboyism when u've worked for decades...thats initial phase! and as i said me & my friend broke off the intel-hype ourselves. Do u think i wud break off the hype of one company only to develop an attachment to another brand? that wud be dumb!

Regarding surround sound 'working' GPUs u can check the related thread on avsforums.
Regarding AMD being good in multimedia, tomshardware has a comparisons page. Just select any 1 processor from Intel and another from AMD of the same freq and generation. See the results for urself!
AMD Athlon II is quite good for laptop CPU (my bro has one). However no comparison of i3(do u know that i3 actually beats 4-core processors from AMD? great no?)

...and i've just stated 2 useful things
- Intel has been sued and has lost (yes its true)
- avoiding hype & awe is good for customers (true)
whose gain will it be if u avoid awe? urs!

If one wants to look forward and wants to be very careful of speed, up-to-date etc & money is not an issue, then i3 is not a bad choice for laptop (provided some heavy workload is foreseen not just simple office work)

Cheers
 
Last edited:
Regarding AMD being good in multimedia, tomshardware has a comparisons page. Just select any 1 processor from Intel and another from AMD of the same freq and generation. See the results for urself!

Although THG has had some reliability issues in the past, I'll follow your suggestion:

Here is the latest CPU benchmark comparison I could find in THG:

Benchmarks 2009 Desktop CPU Charts (Update 1)

Let us see the multi-media scores you were talking about:

-------------------------------------------------------
XviD 1.2.1 Video Transcoding: MPEG-2 to AVI
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/2009-desktop-cpu-charts-update-1/XviD-1.2.1,1383.html

Intel Core i7-975 Extreme Edition (Bloomfield 4c)
* 3.33 GHz, DDR3-1066, 1 MB L2, 8 MB L3
Score (lower is better): 117 seconds

AMD Phenom II X4 965 (Deneb 4c)
* 3.4 GHz, DDR3-1333, 2 MB L2, 6 MB L3
Score (lower is better): 156 seconds

(The first AMD was 12th on the list, actually. 1-11 are Intel CPUs. By the way, the AMD CPU is clocked slightly higher. This has no meaning, but you mentioned that we should be comparing CPUs of the same frequency)

--------------------------------------------
Mainconcept Reference 1.6.1
Video Transcoding: MPEG-2 to H.264/AVC (FullHD Video)
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/...pdate-1/Mainconcept-Reference-1.6.1,1385.html

Intel Core i7-975 (3.33GHz): 80 seconds (lower is better)
AMD Phenom II X4 965 (3.4 GHz): 118 seconds (7th in list)

-------------------------------------------------
Lame 3.98
Audio Encoding: wav to mp3 (160 Kbit/s)
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/2009-desktop-cpu-charts-update-1/Lame-3.98,1384.html

Intel Intel Core i5-660 (Clarkdale 2c) (3.33 GHz): 127 seconds
AMD Phenom II X4 965: 181 seconds (18th on the list. ALL Intel Core i7 and even i5 beat the top-most AMD)

---------------------------------------------------

Please explain how exactly AMD is better in "multimedia" than Intel?

In all fairness, AMD was really whipping Intel in the P4 days when their Athlon CPU, interconnect, and x64 architecture was so far ahead of its time. However, that was several years ago. Intel's Merom and Nehalem architectures are way more advanced than AMD today. AMD has pretty much stagnated after that, and has slowly slid down the value chain after that, and have kept reducing their prices to stay competitive even with Intel's mid-range CPUs. Only in the budget low end are they still competitive, and that too only from a price-performance perspective.
 
Last edited:
For excellent sound that won't break the bank, the 5 Star Award Winning Wharfedale Diamond 12.1 Bookshelf Speakers is the one to consider!
Back
Top