Is Placeshifter representative of the HD200 experience?

[sdsean]

So I decided that I would try out placeshifter too see how well it works. . .
The goal is to get a gauge for whether or not I should purchase an HD200 and be able to use it as the sole solution for my bedroom.

I have two networking options available too me. . .

Wireless-N (server connected to wireless-n access point via cable, client built in wireless-n card).

Powerline networking (although currently i still have to have the server connected via wireless b/c I only have 2 adapters and one has to be plugged into the router).

My laptop that I have placeshifter installed on has a P8700 Intel centrino 2 chip, with 3GB of RAM on windows XP, with ATI HD 3400 mobility graphics

The server (see my signature line), is plenty stout enough to handle multiple clients. . .

Results. .

As I have tested it. . .the picture seems to skip frames quite a bit. . .

And this is just watching sitcoms, not sports or anything. . .

Using online services seemed totally unusable. . . lots of frame drops etc.

I noticed my CPU is at like 40% on the laptop, and there didn't seem to be a way to choose which decoder to use (laptop is xp, and i have both powerdvd 8 and coreavc codecs also installed).

My wi-fi router is also set up too prioritize traffic between the sage server and any other ip. . .

I tried both using powerline networking (which did seem to improve things a bit), and wi fi.

Needless to say, I still am not satisfied with the experience. . .

Currently I don't have the option of wiring the whole house with cat5/cat6 ethernet (which I'm sure would help). . .

So. . . is this experience indicative of what I'd see if I spent the cash on an HD200?

Do I really have to go to some better networking solution?

Are there other settings that I can tweak that I don't know of?

Thanks. . .

[Fuzzy]

placeshifter is NOT representative of the HD200 (or any full) sage experience. Placeshifter doesn't use ANY hardware decoding. It is a simple software decoder, based on the open source mplayer. It was really designed to handle nothing but VERY low bitrate MPEG2 that it would receive over the internet, nothing more. If you are just trying to guage the network capabilities, you would be better off using SageTVClient, which is FAR more robust than placeshifter, and has the same full playback capabilities you are experiencing on the server (in fact, it's pretty much the same playback code).

That laptop hardware should JUST be able to handle any playabck fine, given the proper decoders. To check, I'd recommend plugging it in locally at your router, and make sure video playback is working well. then, try the tests in the bedroom. If there is a drop in performance (skipping, circles of death, etc), then your current networking schemes are not going to work for the HD200 either.

[sdsean]

yeah since i saw my cpu going bonkers i realized that quite a bit of this could be due
to cpu usage on top of net working. . . .

i'll download the sage client software and give that a try as well. . . and test directly from the router. . .

[MitchSchaft]

I watch LiveTV and videos through placeshifter while I'm at work on my laptop. I dont have those issues so maybe there's something with your network.

[Fuzzy]

more than likely network related... because you are using it over the LAN, the sage server dowsn't transcode the video, it just sends the raw file data for placeshifter to work on. unfortunately, without any hardware accelleration, that H.264 HD from the HD-PVR's is not going to be playable on that hardware. As said, the only way to truly check whether the networking is up to par, is to use sageclient. This would eliminate the playback chain as a potential source of the problems.

[sdsean]

Haven't had time to do all tests but here's what else I've done so far. . .

Laptop currently in same room as wi-fi router, connected using wireless N.
Server is out in living room, again connected to a wireless n bridge

Both Placeshifter and Client preformed just fine (client seemed like it was a bit better, most likely since it uses client laptop resources).

So while I didn't test the laptop being direcly plugged into the router (which would effectively remove one wi-fi link from the loop), this test shows that wi-fi could work.

I still need to test client in the bedroom over both wi-fi and power over ethernet. . .
and the other thing I could do is go power over ethernet from the server as well. . .

But I think you all are right in that its mostly networking that's the issue. . .

[sdsean]

Ok did some further testing now from the bedroom. . .

Tested client this time since i already tested placeshifter. . .

This time laptop was connected by via ethernet over power,
server still connected via wireless n bridge. . .

However I also had another laptop running via direct ethernet line to the server
just so i could have multiple streams going.

Client performed flawlessly on the laptop in the bedroom (which is what I was looking for), I had one spot for about 10 secs where the video stopped playing but other than that it was fine. . .

I think I feel safe to buy myself an extender now. . . hopefully my network tests still hold true. . .if all else fails i suppose i could do the home project of wiring fiber everywhere. . . but cross your fingers and lets hope I don't have to do that. . .

[Fuzzy]

fiber is rediculous in home... honestly, even if wireless or powerline DOES work for now, I'd spend some time figuring out the best way to route real ethernet wherever you need it. there's a reason many new homes being built have provisions for ethernet in every bedroom, office, living room, and even kitchen... some CAT6 now will pay off quite well in the future.

[wayner]

I agree - with 1Gbps available over copper I can't envision what would need more than that - totally uncompressed super HD is about all I can come up with. Even if we go to 4k HD resolution (4 times the horizontal lines of 1080p) it is still hard to see how we will come close to 1 Gbps.

[sdsean]

totally agree. . .although i'm sticking with ethernet over power for now. . .

i'd litterally have to spend at least a week doing the wiring simply b/c i have all hardword floors, and no basement or attic. . the only way to run cabling would be to pull all the baseboards. . . or install crown molding, or try to fish it through walls, or go from the outside wall. . . all definitely viable options, but would also wreak havoc on wallet and dry wall. . .

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by wayner

I agree - with 1Gbps available over copper I can't envision what would need more than that - totally uncompressed super HD is about all I can come up with. Even if we go to 4k HD resolution (4 times the horizontal lines of 1080p) it is still hard to see how we will come close to 1 Gbps.

If you ever have to move stuff to/from a networked machine (eg copying BD rips to your server/NAS) you can easily see where Gig-E is limiting.