Do they make bay trail or cherry trail atx or itx boards? D

>>56362587
>will a cheap one like this be enough to run quiet

a heatsink that size, running on a CPU that is only being used for loads typical of an HTPC, will be more than enough. Even on my 4670k while playing a game that maxes out all 4 cores, my Hyper212 rarely ever gets noticeably audible.

>>56362918
Problem is, the pc will be right next to where I'm sitting so I'm worried about even a little noise.

If I go with the a8 though, I guess I could also use it for play some steam games like csgo from my sofa? It's only a 65w cpu so it shouldn't get loud with that cooler, right?

>>56363069
Yes you can. Curious though, why would it be right next you instead of next to the TV if you're sitting on the sofa?

>>56363089
Because it's easier having a single long HDMI cable going to the tv instead of multiple k/m and usb extension wires to the sofa.

I already have the k/m and a 10m hdmi cable laying around that I don't use so it just made more sense to use what I have instead of buying those new again.

Plus I can plus usb drives and shit into the pc easier.

Just get a i3 and pair it with a 450 or 460, and you are golden.

>>56363187
That's cost a lot more than an a8 on its own though.

Why would a htpc/csgoPC need that?

>>56363285
It wouldn't, that's a low-end gaming rig level of hardware. Just go for an APU setup.

File: image.png (97KB, 201x201px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 201x201px

>>56363476
This, APU systems don't make noise because they never get hot

File: 20151118111902_big[1].png (183KB, 1000x573px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 1000x573px

>>56362587
N3150/N3170 ITX

>>56363285
A8 on it's own cannot game... Trust me i3 and GPU is better, and you can upgrade CPU to something better in the future.

>>56362587
I want to lick her feet

>>56363741
>is better
???

>>56363761
Gaming

Just get a NUC and use in-home streaming.

>>56363827
Really wouldn't want to do that. My pc is an i7 [email protected] and a HD7950 @ 1100mhz.

Just looking for something cheap and casual for the tv that won't put out 500w of heat. Was originally only for media consumption, but now I'm thinking csgo would be nice to try on a big screen and maybe smaller multi-player games when friends come over like magicka 2 or n64 emulation(mario party, kart, tetris battle, etc)

>>56363741
>>56363796
but he already said he doesn't want to game on it primarily, and if he does it will just be CS:GO or some shit that doesn't require shit to run, so why would he build a low-end rig with dedicated parts instead of just getting an APU that can play lighter games just fine?

>>56365138
A8 7600 is ~110 aud, but I can get the a10 7800 for ~140 aud iirc. Worth the price difference?

>>56362587
They make server Atoms, my next computer's going to have one
>8 cores with virtualization
>20W TDP

>>56365228
>8 cores
>20w
What? My z3735f is only 2w and it's quad core?

>>56365225
If you feel like you will game on it, then I'd say go for it. If you feel it's not going to be a frequent thing then I'd just save your money.

>>56365243
It's not a tablet CPU though, this is a low power server CPU
http://ark.intel.com/products/77987/Intel-Atom-Processor-C2750-4M-Cache-2_40-GHz

>>56365286
Thanks m8, I'll probably go for the a10 just in case

>>56362587
I have a Cherry Trail board. It's an ASRock N3710/DC, which has a DC power port on the rear I/O panel and comes with its own power brick.
One PCIe x1 (Cherry Trail only has one lane coming from the SoC)

>>56365684
Doesn't cherry trail have a good igpu?

>>56365712
No, it's worse than a desktop Celeron/Pentium iGPU. It's not noticeable if you're watching movies on it like I do, but don't expect to be able to play games at high resolutions. It uses very little power.

>>56365816
>play games
Dude, Intel atom haha

>>56366661
The highest resolution on low settings I managed on womb Raider was 640

>>56366746
I would never expect to game on an atom, Just media and web browsing.

Was thinking a console with a cluster of atoms and something like a rx 450 would be awesome though.

Maybe 16 atom cores? Isn't a quad core like 3w only but equivalent to a c2d like e7200?

File: Screenshot_2016-09-01_06-38-41.png (358KB, 1071x600px) Image search: [Google]

358KB, 1071x600px

>>56363148
>Because it's easier having a single long HDMI cable going to the tv instead of multiple k/m and usb extension wires to the sofa.
Do you also use a wired television remote control? Or are you one of those folks allergic to wi-fi or any electromagnetic signals specifically in the 2.4 GHz band?

Just use wireless tech.

Oh, and you can always stick a gargantuan heat sink with a wide CPU fan and set custom fad speed curves, so that the fan only starts churning when the Cherry Trail starts baking at 75° or when you mistakenly open a VP9 webm.

If I were you and the HTPC was anywhere near me, I'd be a bit more concerned with heat output honestly.

>>56367049
He already has a k/m and hdmi cable, are you retarded?

Also what if he wants to plug a usb stick into his pc? Walk up to the tv every time?

>>56362587
Get an a8 7650k or a10 7800 instead

>>56366807
>Was thinking a console with a cluster of atoms and something like a rx 450
An Xbox One is just an A6-5200 times two plus an R7 260. The closest thing to that that you can buy is an Atom C2750/2751, which is an eight-core embedded processor with roughly the same IPC and efficiency as the eight-core Jaguar. It even has 8 lanes of PCIe 2.0 so you can pair it with a low-end graphics card like the R7 360.

File: 14-IGP-Bioshock-Infinite.png (41KB, 634x1057px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 634x1057px

>>56368206
Imagine something like 16 cherry trail cores with an iris pro graphics

>>56368301
>Imagine something like 16 cherry trail cores with an iris pro graphics
5 FPS in Skyrim
Core 0: 99%
Core 1: 50%
Core 2-15: 0%

>>56368301
It would still be shit. I'm upgrading from an Atom C2550 because it's barely able to handle one media streams/transcoding at high-bitrate 1080p. Double the cores and it's still not enough for two consecutive streams at 1080p. Low-power cores like the Atoms and Kabinis of the world are meant for normalfag shit, like going on Facebook and playing Youtube videos. They are absolute shit for everything else.
Also, Iris Pro graphics still isn't enough for 1080p low settings on most two year old games, draws far more power, and defeats the purpose of having an Atom-based processor.

>>56368350
Not on a console?

>>56368364
Iris pro is almost as fast as a gtx 750, but unlike nvidia and amd, Intel never optimises their shit for games, which means much better performance in a console with a low level api.

Also isn't cherry trail quad cores close to an e7200? 4 of those (16 cores) would perform pretty good, but I'm sure it'll be a bitch to optimize for.

Don't forget, consoles are not running ultra settings like pc, it'll be closer to low or medium. Battlefield 4 was even 720p on xbox and 900p on ps4.

http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Confirmed-Battlefield-4-720p-Xbox-One-900p-PS4-60210.html

>>56368459
There's no market for that sort of processor. Skull Canyon flopped. Intel won't do anything like that again. They even canceled Skylake-C, the overclockable desktop Skylake with the Iris Pro GPU and 256MB L4$ because Broadwell-C flopped.

>>56368459

Consoles are getting too fat these days on extra features and other shit. I can almost promise you, the next Xbox is just going to be "The ultimate Windows 10 PC for gamers!" or some shit.

Plus, the PS3 tried super-multi-core processing with the Cell. It failed pretty fucking hard. It could basically just keep up with a Tri-Core PowerPC like in the xbox 360.

>>56368587
>PS3 tried super-multi-core processing with the Cell
PS3 had a single-core CPU.

>>56368587
>ps3
>super multi processing
It had a single core CELL with 7 floating point units. The fact it could keep up with the 3 core xbox 360 is impressive.