[jbarr]

One of my biggest complaints about my new 5040 is its seeming lack of speed. Compared head-to-head with my stock 2020, the difference is definatly noticable. The 2020 is peppy and acts more like an "appliance" in that things respond quickly. My 5040 exhibits noticable delays when responding to commands. Mind you, these delays are VERY minimal compared to the first "bad" 5040 I bought (the first one was a low serial numbered model that exhibited the ifamous slowdown on every remote button press) but compared to my 2020 and upgraded 2001, the speed differences are noticable. While it definatly is usable, the lack of speed is noticable. (Maybe if I haad never owned a 2000 series box, I wouldn't complain.


Anyway, this got me thinking. What would be the impact of "upgrading" the CPU to a faster one? I know almost nothing about "overclocking" and "CPU Upgrades" other than enough basic concepts to get me into trouble, so I may be WAY off base here, but it seems to me that after viewing sometimes inordinatly high numbers on the CPU meter that a faster CPU might pep things up a bit.


So, does anyone know...


1. if a faster CPU is even available

2. if the CPU installed in the 5000 series can even be upgraded (is it surface-mounted or socketed)

3. if the CPU could be replaced, would it have any functional impact on the overall operation? (For example, are there CPU-specific timing issues that would be messed up, etc.)


I do understand that the CPU, RAM, motherboard speed, Bus speed, the OS, and probably a number of other things can significantly affect a computer's performance. I'm just trying to come up with an inexpensive and easy way speed up my 5040.


Thoughts?

 

[rugby]

I installed a 7200rpm drive in my 5040 (now a 5175) and the difference is amazing. There is NO lag anymore. I suggest getting a faster drive and enjoy your faster rtv.

 

[RamblinWreck]

There are numerous threads that discuss the improved menu access that comes with the faster drives with more memory ( 7200 rpm with 8 MB vs 5400 rpm with 2 MB). The link below is one of the better threads:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...highlight=7200


Bottom line is that going to a faster drive should help things. My 5040 with the WD 7200 rpm 8 MB is now MUCH faster.


Hope this helps.

 

[kcobra]

From my uneducated point of view, that is surprising about the faster HD speeding up performance. Are the 5040 having to use swap space on the HD or something because they don't have enough memory? Any other reason for a the performance increase?

 

[JustTrio]

I've also been curious about the possibility of upgrading units. Specifically, memory upgrades. I haven't cracked the seal to look and the few pictures of the innards I've been able to find were more for pointing out mounting details. . . Other than the drive(s), is there anything that can be upgraded in there? I would imagine a memory upgrade would be useful for who experience problems with number of replay guide channels and number of channel guide entries.

 

[rugby]

Actually, consider this. With anything in life, speed is determined not by the fastest component, but by the slowest component. A computer is only as fast as the slowest component, which is the hard drive. If you upgrade the hard drive it brings the slowest component, and the entire computer, up to a higher performance level. I have upgraded many computers in my work and ALWAYS recommend a faster hard drive over a cpu upgrade. It makes a world of difference.

 

[kcobra]

Quote:

Originally posted by rugby Actually, consider this. With anything in life, speed is determined not by the fastest component, but by the slowest component. A computer is only as fast as the slowest component, which is the hard drive. If you upgrade the hard drive it brings the slowest component, and the entire computer, up to a higher performance level. I have upgraded many computers in my work and ALWAYS recommend a faster hard drive over a cpu upgrade. It makes a world of difference.

This is certainly dependant on what you are running and what you are not running. A good example is an XBox. The only thing a faster HD gives you is quicker level loads and boot-ups. It doesn't do squat for menu access (not that the xbox menus are slow). In an ideal world, I would assume the ReplayTV OS runs in real memory and should have no dependency on swap space and thus the speed of the hardrive. Well, maybe a little bit by waiting on IO calls and whatnot, but it shouldn't be noticable.


So the only thing I can think of is the boxes are memory starved. Again, I am not trying to say anyone is wrong about the upgraded HD helping but just wondering exactly why it helps.

 

[rugby]

kcobra, it all depends where the system taxes it's resources. MOST computers use the HD a LOT, so therefore making the hard drive faster will help a lot. Same thing with the ReplayTV. I have a noisier drive in it now and I hear it all the time clicking away. Buffering is writing to the hard drive, so all buffers must be written all the time. If buffering takes most of the speed away from the Replaytv due to a slow drive, then other resources must compensate. menus are accessed faster with a faster hard drive because the entire system isn't consumed with writes to the drive with a faster drive that can handle the traffic.


That's my opinion, it may be wrong, but it's what Ithink.

 

[JohhnyReplay]

Theoretically EITHER a hard drive with a larger buffer OR additional memory _could_ help speed up the menus if they are dependant on I/O functions from the processer reading from the HD... (no flames, I agree they are not the same, but they _could_have a similar effect if the software was relying heavily on reading info from the hd)


On the other side, I am not sure that putting a faster processor would help.. if you draw an analogy to PC's, where you can add a faster processor, it may not be the same. In a PC, when you add a new processor, the MB has to "know" that a new processor is there and adjust the multiplier (system bus speed x multiplier=processor speed)... If the replay doesn't look for a processor id, it would just run the 'faster' processor at the same speed...


In order to get a gain from a faster processor, you would likely need to figure out how to increase the bus speed or change the multiplier...

 

[adone36]

A mb does not care what the "multiplier" is. It runs the same way no matter what processor you put in. The only thing a mb cares about is the bus speed. mb with dip switches or jumpers for multiplier, only have them for the display readout when the bios boots.

 

[JohhnyReplay]

Ummm... It does not just affect the BIOS readout... the BIOS readout is a result of the change. Granted, some MB's can auto detect, but if you change the multipliers, both the BIOS readout AND the actual frequency change...


For example...When you put an 800Mhz Athlon in a 100 Mhz board for simplicity... first of all the MB will auto detect it.... but if you override the autodetect and say run the system bus at 100Mhz and the multiplier at 9, then the althon WILL run at 900 Mhz... though it may not like it... if it only changed what the BIOS reported and resulted in no real gain, then I think overclockers would have caught on by now....



Now I would agree that the MB itself doesn;t give a damn...after all, it is just a PWB... but the chipset DOES care... it handles the data flow in and out of the processor and needs to adjust timigs as such...

 

[ianken]

Quote:

Originally posted by kcobra From my uneducated point of view, that is surprising about the faster HD speeding up performance. Are the 5040 having to use swap space on the HD or something because they don't have enough memory? Any other reason for a the performance increase?

You've pretty much nailed it. These units don't have a lot of RAM. Looking at the guts of my new 5K (warantee? WTF is that?) there appears to be a LOT of cost reduction going on. All the guide info and graphics are on disk so the faster the HD and the bigger the buffer on the HD the peppier the UI response should be, within limits of course.


I'll probably stuff a baracuda V in there this weekend.


On a different tangent:


I'm still bummed that the analog video stage and tuner in these units is so primitive. No noise reduction, no 3D comb filter, no ghost reduction tuner.


What I want is some mutant hybrid between my Toshiba RD-X2 hardware (awesome recording and image quality) and the software from a ReplayTV.


For reference the RD-X2 looks better at 2.2mbps than my Replay4K looks at 6mbps on the same content. This is mainly due to the better tuner, comb filter and noise reduction. And the replay at 2mbps? Not even close and at this mode both the Replay and RD-X2 record at 352x480, the panasonic MPEG encoder that toshiba uses just kicks all kinds of ass. It even does scene change detection and bumps up the bitrate to get rid of maco blocking on transitions.


So, here's to hoping a great Japanese A/V vendor gets the Replay technology and does great things with it. I prefer the Replay PVR software over TiVO and would love to see it mated to a hardware chassis that does it justice.

 

[jbarr]

OK, so a faster hard drive will probably speed things up. But I go back to my original questions:


1. Is a faster CPU is even available?

2. Can the CPU installed in the 5000 series even be upgraded (is it surface-mounted or socketed)?

3. If the CPU could be replaced, would it have any functional impact on the overall operation? (For example, are there CPU-specific timing issues that would be messed up, etc.)