Receiver benchmarking????

[sherry]

Hi Guys,

I was thinking there that now we have the new boxes out with dual core 1.3Ghz processors, large amounts of RAM and Flash, is it possible to benchmark these to compare how they compare to other boxes?
I do know they give better performance but as with pc's laptops etc is good to see by benchmarking what difference the new hardware brings and is it worth the extra money spent on them.

Any ideas on this would be great and i think it would make purchasing a new box a little easier if we all know how they perform instead of just an opinion if one is good or not.

Cheers.

:thumbsup:

[pooface]

imo, would be useless...

All boxes perform the same functions. These new 1.3ghz boxes are faster, end of story. Not sure on correct times, but they are about twice as fast to load as the other boxes...

Different kernels make boxes run slightly slower or faster, different images make them run slower or faster, number of plugins installed make them run slower or faster...

[Larry-G]

as pooface says there are a heck of a lot of variables to consider and results would be vastly different depending on which image and plugins the user loads. I'm not saying it's a bad idea but it would take a good deal of time and effort to compare the various different images then say the most popular 10 plugins on every supported receiver.

maybe it could be someone's pet project but i cant see it coming any time soon if ever.

[Rob van der Does]

Different sets of timers & autotimers make a huge difference as well.
Anyway: what benchmark would you prefer? Surely not boot times?

For PC's a benchmark consist of a series of 'simulated normal use'. In the case of an STB that would mean viewing live-TV/Recordings and recording. In that are you won't experience any interesting difference between 'old' 400MHz boxes and those running on a 1.3GHz CPU.