[mikeLmedic]

Any thoughts on these two systems?

Inspiron Zino HD

ASRock ION 330HT-BD, Intel Atom 330, 1.6 GHz, 2GB DDR2, 320 GB HDD, Blu-Ray Combo, Black - Scan.co.uk

ASRock ION 330HT-BD

The Dell Online Store: Build Your System

If you spec the Dell the same as the ASRock then it comes out £85 more but includes win 7. Is one better then the other though when it comes to performance?

Mike

[jensrow]

Originally Posted by mikeLmedic

Any thoughts on these two systems?

Inspiron Zino HD

ASRock ION 330HT-BD, Intel Atom 330, 1.6 GHz, 2GB DDR2, 320 GB HDD, Blu-Ray Combo, Black - Scan.co.uk

ASRock ION 330HT-BD

The Dell Online Store: Build Your System

If you spec the Dell the same as the ASRock then it comes out £85 more but includes win 7. Is one better then the other though when it comes to performance?

Mike

Asrock has better integrated graphics, the Dell would probably struggle on some 1080p/1080i content.

[FairyDave]

I'm quite impressed with the Dell. My faulty REVO is being sent back, I'm thinking I might get a refund and go for this instead.

What's the 6850E like when compared to the Atom 330? I've done a search but can't find much about it.

[conan]

Unless I missed something it doesn't mention HDMI out and only has 2.1 sound output.

[FairyDave]

I've done a bit more research and I've ordered one

It does have HDMI according to the only review I can find, and I'm not too worried about the sound atm as I'm just using the TV speakers.

Hope I have more sucess than with the Revo!

[mikeLmedic]

ref the HDMI - The Zino doesn't but the Zino HD does,

For me it comes down to performance but I cant find anyone who has the Dell!

Mike

[Aquarianx]

The zino HD with the 1.8Ghz processor is really the one to go for along with a discrete graphics card.
It would blow the Asrock out of the water for only £160/- more (without bluray though).
The biggest (and probably fatal) drawback of the Zino is the lack of optical digital output. The Asrock also comes with a remote but no OS (zino 's got Win7).

[BlueC]

Originally Posted by mikeLmedic

Any thoughts on these two systems?

ASRock ION 330HT-BD

The ION 330 series looks excellent and I've been holding out for the 330HT as it has wireless and a powered eSata too (and 7.1 sound etc etc). Not seen one available until you posted that link so I'm going to buy it right now!

I'd go for the ASRock over the Dell every day, but looks like you already decided!

[Java Jack]

Originally Posted by conan

Unless I missed something it doesn't mention HDMI out and only has 2.1 sound output.

The unit (Zino HD) does have HDMI. It is based upon the AMD 780G chipset so it is eqivalent in GPU performance as the Ion chipset.

As for audio, 2.1 analog. The 780G does support 5.1 DD/DTS over HDMI. It should work on the Zino HD as well unless Dell did something to disable it (doubtful).

I put one throgh it's paces...

http://links.amd.com/ZinoHD

[jensrow]

Originally Posted by Aquarianx

The zino HD with the 1.8Ghz processor is really the one to go for along with a discrete graphics card.
It would blow the Asrock out of the water for only £160/- more (without bluray though).

I'm not sure how you work out it would blow the Asrock out of the water, the Asrock can be overclocked to 2.1GHz, and the only graphics upgrade for the Zino HD is an Radeon 4330 which I doubt is as powerful as the Ion (Nvidia 9400).

Originally Posted by Java Jack

The unit (Zino HD) does have HDMI. It is based upon the AMD 780G chipset so it is eqivalent in GPU performance as the Ion chipset.

Wrong, Ion uses Nvidia 9400 which is more powerful than the ATi 3200 HD gfx in the 780G.

[Java Jack]

Originally Posted by jensrow

I'm not sure how you work out it would blow the Asrock out of the water, the Asrock can be overclocked to 2.1GHz, and the only graphics upgrade for the Zino HD is an Radeon 4330 which I doubt is as powerful as the Ion (Nvidia 9400).


Wrong, Ion uses Nvidia 9400 which is more powerful than the ATi 3200 HD gfx in the 780G.

Actually, the nvidia 9400 is based upon their mCP79 which is the same core used in MCP78 which is eqivalent to the RS780 chip.

I know because I work at AMD and my group is responsible for working with industry partners including nvidia. . While I don't work in our graphics group, I do know full well how their parts stack up against our own products.

The Radeon 4330 is a discrete chip based upon or RV710 core and will likely outperform the 9400 in a majority of the cases.

In case you were wondering, here is a review from Tech Report that shows our 7xx chipsets vs. 9300 vs. Intel G45.

http://techreport.com/articles.x/15690/8

They win some, we win some, but overall, they are pretty equally matched. Yes, the link shows the 9300 but the 9300 and 9400 are the same core architecture with a slight difference in clocking much like our 780 and 790 are the same architecture with a difference in clocking.

Therefore, I think it is easy to say that these 780/790 chipsets are about the same as the 9300/9400 chipsets.

Perhaps you were thinking of gaming performance where they might hold a slight advantage in chipset to chipset. However, if you are gaming on an HTPC, you probbaly don't want integrated graphics. That is where the 4330 comes in as it would offer decent gaming performance over either chipset solution.

[jensrow]

Originally Posted by Java Jack

They win some, we win some, but overall, they are pretty equally matched. Yes, the link shows the 9300 but the 9300 and 9400 are the same core architecture with a slight difference in clocking much like our 780 and 790 are the same architecture with a difference in clocking.

Therefore, I think it is easy to say that these are our 780/790 chipsets are about the same as the 9300/9400 chipsets.

I give it to you that the 4330 is faster than the 9400/Ion but the 9400 is also clearly better than the HD 3200 according to Notebook check:

Ati Radeon HD 4330: 3D Mark 05 - 4969

Nvidia 9400M (Ion): 3D Mark 05 - 3394

Ati Radeon HD 3200: 3D Mark 05 - 2634

so taking a Zino HD with an equivalent dual core processor, blu ray and slightly weaker gfx it comes to £459, but does that include blu ray software, i.e. Arcsoft TMT or PowerDVD (not just cut down OEM stereo versions), if not that is another £70 on top?

[Java Jack]

Originally Posted by jensrow

I give it to you that the 4330 is faster than the 9400/Ion but the 9400 is also clearly better than the HD 3200 according to Notebook check:

Ati Radeon HD 4330: 3D Mark 05 - 4969

Nvidia 9400M (Ion): 3D Mark 05 - 3394

Ati Radeon HD 3200: 3D Mark 05 - 2634

so taking a Zino HD with an equivalent dual core processor, blu ray and slightly weaker gfx it comes to £459, but does that include blu ray software, i.e. Arcsoft TMT or PowerDVD (not just cut down OEM stereo versions), if not that is another £70 on top?

2 things to note about this...

Notebook review is looking at the 780M version which is the mobile version of the chipset, not the 780G which is the desktop version. Same architecture, but slightly defeatured to hit lower power numbers. The Zino HD is using the 780G which will offer slightly better performance over the 780M. Not much but it is slightly better.

However, the big thing here is that these scores are based upon 3D gaming. As stated earlier, yes the 9400 does have an edge on gaming, however, how important is 3D and gaming in an HTPC? To me, not very much.

What matters to me in a small box like this is video playback performance. It is an HTPC afterall, audio and video are really the key attributes. In that case, the 780 chipset is on par and in some cases, better than the 9400 which I provided in my links.

Frankly speaking, any UMA graphics solution today including the 9400 is really not an ideal solution for gaming. You can do it, but if gaming is at all important to you, a discrete solution would be much better. Hence the 4330 option addresses that need if it is important.

So, I stand by my statement that Ion graphics in an HTPC is about the same as the 780G chipset. No clear winner in that perspective.

As to the rest of the platform, they share similar specs though the Dell box seems more configurable with different options.

I have not seen any benchmarks that compare the Atom 330 to our Athlon 3250e or 6850e offered here. Probably have to wait for reviewers to get that data out there to see where things fall. Based upon internal data, I have reason to believe the Athlon will outperform the Atom but time will tell I suppose.


UPDATE:
Somone pointed out this similarly spec'd out All In One comparrison that pits a box with near identical specs to the Dell box vs. an AIO based upon Atom 330. Not exactly the best line up since the Atom 330 AIO is using a different chipset. However, testing does show off the CPU comparrison given the benchmarks they ran are less GPU dependent and more CPU dependent. It should provide some level of comparrison between the Athlon 3250e vs. an Atom in terms of CPU performance. . Though a head to head comparrisons beteen Atom/Ion and Athlon/780G would be nice. Between this data and the info I provided earlier on similar GPU performance, you can draw some conclusions

http://reviews.cnet.com/desktops/ave...?tag=mncol;txt


The price point of the Dell is very compelling. I think it is not only performance competitive with the Asrock solution, it also seems a tad more flexible in the config.

The advantage of the Asrock is that price includes a BD drive. However, if BD is not important, then you can config a pretty impressive solution using the Dell box as the base.

[Stephen Neal]

Originally Posted by Java Jack

What matters to me in a small box like this is video playback performance. It is an HTPC afterall, audio and video are really the key attributes. In that case, the 780 chipset is on par and in some cases, better than the 9400 which I provided in my links.

Doesn't the 3200 only provide 2.0 and DD/DTS SPDIF-quality bitstreamed audio over HDMI, whereas the 9400 provides 5.1/7.1 PCM over HDMI? Therefore the 9400 outperforms the 3200 in audio terms doesn't it?

As such if you are building an HTPC the 9400 has a major advantage in audio terms if you're going to be playing Blu-ray content ? (PDVD/TMT will decode True HD and DTS HD lossless compressed audio to PCM 5.1/7.1 with just the relatively minor 48k/16bit restriction, whereas the 3200 will only allow you to bitstream a DTS core, a DD accompanying track or a PCM 2.0 decode)

Also - the de-interlacing performance of the 3200 is noticably inferior to that of the 9400 IME (I have built HTPCs around both the 3200 and 9400 IGPs - and had to install a 4550 card in my 3200 to get decent audio and de-interlacing performance. My 3200 doesn't do good Vector Adaptive, whereas the 9400 does.)

There may be different issues for gaming - but for HTPC video and audio for TV, Blu-ray, DVD etc. the 9400 is noticably better in my experience than the 3200.

Also - if you're based in the UK and want to use Win 7 Media Center to watch BBC HD DVB-S broadcasts - you currently HAVE to go nVidia. The MS H264 decoder/ATI driver solution used in Win 7 MC won't currently work properly with BBC HD H264 broadcasts - after a few seconds the video just breaks up - and the only cure is to jump around the Live TV buffer until it settles down (similar issues with ARD/ZDF/ARTE HD in Germany and also with HD in New Zealand). They've recently upgraded the BBC HD encoder to use the full AVC toolset, and the ATI/MS H264 combo falls apart completely on this. The nVidia/MS H264 combo works fine...

[mikeLmedic]

I noticed 4 different CPU for the the dell?

I think the only reason I would go for the Dell as it is for expensive is to get a decent jump in performance.

Would the AMD X2 3250E 1.5GHz and the ATI Radeon™ HD 4330 512MB graphics card with 3mb of RAM provide a performance jump against the ASROCK overclocked and 3mb of RAM?

Cheers for the info so far,

Mike

[jensrow]

Originally Posted by Java Jack

2 things to note about this...

Notebook review is looking at the 780M version which is the mobile version of the chipset, not the 780G which is the desktop version. Same architecture, but slightly defeatured to hit lower power numbers. The Zino HD is using the 780G which will offer slightly better performance over the 780M. Not much but it is slightly better.

You may be right about the 780GM, and it seems very hard to find a direct comparison between a standard 780G and 9400M (one being mobile and the other not) so I'll have to take your word on it that they are roughly equivalent. I do agree with Stephen's comment above though, based also on my own experience, that the 780G cannot do advanced vector adaptive deinterlacing on 1080i material unless combined with a processor with HT 3.0 i.e. a Phenom, and since it looks like the Neo Athlons are clocked down versions of the 4050e/4850e which can't do HT 3.0 it looks like they would have the same problem.

[Java Jack]

Originally Posted by jensrow

You may be right about the 780GM, and it seems very hard to find a direct comparison between a standard 780G and 9400M (one being mobile and the other not) so I'll have to take your word on it that they are roughly equivalent. I do agree with Stephen's comment above though, based also on my own experience, that the 780G cannot do advanced vector adaptive deinterlacing on 1080i material unless combined with a processor with HT 3.0 i.e. a Phenom, and since it looks like the Neo Athlons are clocked down versions of the 4050e/4850e which can't do HT 3.0 it looks like they would have the same problem.

Hmm, I will look into this, though I have other 780 solutions at home and they seem to work fine for 1080i content. I don't see any noticable jaggies or combing effects.

However, I will try some 1080i content on the Zino HD and see what happens.

[fredz85]

If I understand it correctly, the ION would currently be the better of both systems, as it allows for more hardware decoding because it uses the Intel/Nvidia platform. Is this correct?

[fredz85]

Here are the tests with the new Flash 10.1 beta, on the Ion 330 (not even the HT version). Wow!
AnandTech: AnandTech Tests GPU Accelerated Flash 10.1 Prerelease

[jensrow]

Originally Posted by Java Jack

Hmm, I will look into this, though I have other 780 solutions at home and they seem to work fine for 1080i content. I don't see any noticable jaggies or combing effects.

However, I will try some 1080i content on the Zino HD and see what happens.

It is a known problem with the 780G and 1080i HDTV, see here and the rest of that thread.

Originally Posted by fredz85

Here are the tests with the new Flash 10.1 beta, on the Ion 330 (not even the HT version). Wow!
AnandTech: AnandTech Tests GPU Accelerated Flash 10.1 Prerelease

AFAIK Adobe never claimed 10.1 would provide acceleration for ATi GPUs, with Nvidia they are using its CUDA ability and ATi doesn't have that.

[will252]

:eek

Dell zino hd is lame piece for crap .
IT'S NOT EVEN IN THE SAME lane of the asrock ion 330.I got the zino hd last night and sent it back today to dell never ever again.The zino wasn't loud at all ,howvever it choke on hulu everything .Don't buy at all get the asrock 330HT .

[Stephen Neal]

Originally Posted by Java Jack

Hmm, I will look into this, though I have other 780 solutions at home and they seem to work fine for 1080i content. I don't see any noticable jaggies or combing effects.

However, I will try some 1080i content on the Zino HD and see what happens.

Also - if you want to watch BBC HD in Win 7 with a DVB-S/S2 tuner (such as the Tevii or Technotrend USB2 devices) then you're currently stuffed if you want to use an AMD graphics solution.

The combination of the MS H264 decoder and the ATI drivers mean that the new, advanced H264 encoders that the BBC (and other broadcasters are now using that use more of the full AVC toolset than previous generations) don't work well - with horrible video corruption rendering the channel unwatchable (you can skip back to improve things - but this is such a faff).

nVidia drivers and the MS H264 decoder (and hardware decoder solutions like the Sigma Designs chips in Popcorn Hours etc.) work fine with the same video streams (though the XBox 360 - also ATI based - doesn't...).

My secondary HTPC - which was originally based on a Radeon 3200 780G solution, but the rubbish de-interlacing and no 5.1/7.1PCM audio via HDMI made me upgrade to a Radeon 4550 card, which worked well and gave me 5.1/7.1PCM HD audio - now has an nVidia graphics card in it so that I can continue to watch BBC HD.

My main HTPC is an nVidia 9400 IGP based system and has never been anything but great (well apart from getting the right black levels...)

[will252]

When you something it should work out of the box.Dell has a great idea ,however even the lowest should work without stuttering .
Case and point the Asrock just works right out the box.I have built htpc from the ground up and it ran crysis with no probelm at all.The asrock can run crysis also . The Dell zino can 't even do that .Dell really dropped the ball on this one.

[DrMekon]

IMO.. if you are after a purely dedicated htpc, then nothing other than the ION will do.. particularly when you consider the fact that these chipsets support CUDA which means decoding via gpu and not cpu...

I have the Astock ION with XBMC (Live version installed).. and it makes a quality system... I love it so much, Im probably going to buy another!!

[gavpre]

Ordered a Dell Zino HD a week ago from dell, and should arrive 1/3/10 (bit long i know) but looks a good deal, except no blu ray (but got a Blu Ray Player n PS3) what do people reckon of the spec and price £475.04??

Inspiron™ Zino HD(D00ZHD06)
Inspiron Zino HD with graphics, ODD, Black, Genuine Windows® 7 Home Premium 64bit - English
£ 387.27

Inspiron Zino HD with graphics, ODD, Black
AMD X2 6850E 1.8GHz 512k
6144MB Dual Channel DDR2 800MHz [1x2048 + 1x4096] Memory
ATI Radeon™ HD 4330 512MB
1TB (7200rpm) SATA Hard Drive
Genuine Windows® 7 Home Premium 64bit
Dell Wireless 1397 Mini Card (802.11 b/g)

Dell Multimedia Wireless Keyboard & Mouse Black - UK/Irish
McAfee® Security Centre - 15 Month Protection - English


Total excl. VAT VAT Rate VAT Total incl. VAT
Sub-total(s): £ 387.27 17.50% £ 67.77 £ 455.04
Delivery Charge: £ 17.02 17.50% £ 2.98 £ 20.00
Total Price: £ 404.29 £ 70.75 £ 475.04