I3 2100 vs 2105 vs A8-3850 - HTPC

I am going to be building my HTPC this week and have a few parts left (really kicking myself trying to figure out the best approach)...

Main Uses:

Watch / recording live tv
stream it multiple tvs in my house via Ceton tuner
watch Hulu / Netflix
No gaming / no graphic desiging
Removing commercials (not sure if this counts as video editing)

What I have:

Ceton InfiniTV Tuner
4 x 2 GB Patriot G Series 'Sector 5' edition DDR3-1600 (PC-12800)
Cooler Master Hyper 212+
2 x 2 TB Hitachi Deskstar 5K3000
Cooler Master 550W Power Supply
Cooler Master Mystique 631 Case (Used in a previous computer)

My biggest concern left is a SSD & Motherboard / processor.

For the SSD I was looking at getting a 60gb Sata III SSD for the operating systems and basic programs (going to use the 4tb for recordings). Looking at the $100-125 range if anyone has recommendations as Crucial and OCZ are at about the same price point?

For the processor I am looking at either i3 2100 vs 2105 vs A8-3850 as I think the 2500k might be a little overkill. For the 2100 vs 2105 the only difference I see is HD2000 vs. HD3000 graphics. This is going to be hooked up to a 52" Sony LED TV through HDMI. I also figured that I would be able to stick with a H67 board unless SSD caching is worth the extra money for the Z68?

I also see another option being AMD's new A8-3850..

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!!!

the z68 is worth it if you don't want to manage what goes on the SSD and what goes on the storage drive, the graphics different won't be noticeable unless you are planning on gaming

If no gaming at all, then I think the i3 with HD2000 or HD3000 graphics should be more than enough for streaming/1080p/blueray. It uses less power than the new AMD A8, and the CPU is better. The A8's graphics is much better than the HD2000/3000; I know some will disagree with picking the i3 over the A8, but the A8's graphics are meaningless if you won't use its 3D capabilities.

If you don't need the extra graphics power of the A8, go for the i3 and HD graphics.

Quote from fz66047 : If no gaming at all, then I think the i3 with HD2000 or HD3000 graphics should be more than enough for streaming/1080p/blueray. It uses less power than the new AMD A8, and the CPU is better. The A8's graphics is much better than the HD2000/3000; I know some will disagree with picking the i3 over the A8, but the A8's graphics are meaningless if you won't use its 3D capabilities. If you don't need the extra graphics power of the A8, go for the i3 and HD graphics.

I am leaning towards the i3 as well. It is just the question of the HD2000 vs. 3000 graphics or getting a separate video card? I can only find the 2105 at newegg for $140 whereas I have a microcenter by my we with the 2100 for $99 plus $40 off the motherboard...

From what you've listed in your first post, HD2000 is definitely enough for those usages even without a separate video card. Plus, about $40 difference for the HD3000 is a lot of money for not much gain.

You could certainly get a separate video card if you wish, but it'll add more heat, consume more energy, probably add a little noise too if it has a fan. But if you're only going to be using the system for what you've already stated, then I don't think there's much point to purchase a separate video card.

So, here's the thing:

If you don't need more video power than the HD2K/3K (you don't do 3D gaming on this system):
Get the i3 2100.

If you're using the system for some gaming, and need more video power than the HD2000 or HD3000:
i3 + separate video card
or AMD A8.

So if the A8 costs around $130, and you decide to pair the i3 with a $30 video card to get to the same $130 value; the i3 and separate video card would most likely use slightly more watts than the AMD A8 with its integrated RadeonHD graphics, and the $30 graphics card might perform around the same as the A8's graphics. But the i3 + video card would give better CPU performance but would use slightly more power than an A8.

This is getting complicated. I say the HD2000 is enough for what you're planning to do with the system. $40 extra for the HD3000 isn't worth it. The i3 2100 + HD2000 is certainly the most economical and bang-for-buck option, especially if Microcenter gives a discount on the motherboard as well. And if in the future you decide that you need better 3D performance, you can always get a low-powered separate video card with the money you saved.

+1 to the above - go with the $100 build, you get the best CPU out of the 3 builds, and then if the graphics aren't enough, a $40 graphics card will blow them away anyways

Quote from fz66047 : From what you've listed in your first post, HD2000 is definitely enough for those usages even without a separate video card. Plus, about $40 difference for the HD3000 is a lot of money for not much gain. You could certainly get a separate video card if you wish, but it'll add more heat, consume more energy, probably add a little noise too if it has a fan. But if you're only going to be using the system for what you've already stated, then I don't think there's much point to purchase a separate video card. So, here's the thing: If you don't need more video power than the HD2K/3K (you don't do 3D gaming on this system): Get the i3 2100. If you're using the system for some gaming, and need more video power than the HD2000 or HD3000: i3 + separate video card or AMD A8. So if the A8 costs around $130, and you decide to pair the i3 with a $30 video card to get to the same $130 value; the i3 and separate video card would most likely use slightly more watts than the AMD A8 with its integrated RadeonHD graphics, and the $30 graphics card might perform around the same as the A8's graphics. But the i3 + video card would give better CPU performance but would use slightly more power than an A8. This is getting complicated. I say the HD2000 is enough for what you're planning to do with the system. $40 extra for the HD3000 isn't worth it. The i3 2100 + HD2000 is certainly the most economical and bang-for-buck option, especially if Microcenter gives a discount on the motherboard as well. And if in the future you decide that you need better 3D performance, you can always get a low-powered separate video card with the money you saved.

That is pretty much the logic I was thinking. My only concern is with streaming to the other tvs and have the commercials removed (I am assuming this is considered video editing), if the i3 can handle the load without lag? Also if there will be any issues playing 1080i broadcast video and occasional blu-rays?

Lastly any recommendations on which ssd to go with?

Thanks everyone's help!

Quote from Burnedby89 : That is pretty much the logic I was thinking. My only concern is with streaming to the other tvs and have the commercials removed (I am assuming this is considered video editing), if the i3 can handle the load without lag? Also if there will be any issues playing 1080i broadcast video and occasional blu-rays? Lastly any recommendations on which ssd to go with? Thanks everyone's help!

Not sure about blu-rays (1080p) you may need a dedicated graphics card. That and are you going to remove commercials while watching? Cause if you are you definitely are going to lag. When you remove the commercials you have to re-render the file which does count as video editing. Or at least that's the only way I know of to remove commercials.

Quote from APhamX : Or at least that's the only way I know of to remove commercials.

TV commercials are timed to last exactly X amount of seconds, I would imagine that you can create an action in something like aftereffects to remove exactly the time where there are commercials, and then run it as a batch operation - you would need to do this before watching, and it would be video editing, but you can do this ahead of time, and watch something you have already done while doing this

Quote from slapshot136 : TV commercials are timed to last exactly X amount of seconds, I would imagine that you can create an action in something like aftereffects to remove exactly the time where there are commercials, and then run it as a batch operation - you would need to do this before watching, and it would be video editing, but you can do this ahead of time, and watch something you have already done while doing this

Is he rendering like 4480/720p videos? Or just standard resolution. Because he will lag on higher res videos if he renders (cpu is going to be at full load)

There are a bunch of programs available. I was thinking of using MCE Buddy [mcebuddy.com]

Quote from APhamX : Not sure about blu-rays (1080p) you may need a dedicated graphics card. That and are you going to remove commercials while watching? Cause if you are you definitely are going to lag. When you remove the commercials you have to re-render the file which does count as video editing. Or at least that's the only way I know of to remove commercials.

Lots of built in GPUs can handle bluray. 1080p video really isn't that intensive of a task. However, if you want HD audio, you want an HD 5XXX GPU unless your mobo has HD audio capabilities.