Mini-itx Barebone systems....

[2Tired2Tango]

Over the past week I've had a number of inquiries about Mini-itx Atom based systems. Seems the "really tiny PC" thing is getting set to catch on in my area. (And aren't all thos guys with the monster cases gonna look silly if it does!)

The few people who've asked me about them so far are looking for "a box to stick in the TV stand" (as one put it). A couple have asked about gaming and I suggested they might be happier with a micro-atx or flat out atx system... But this does strike me as a viable replacement for video and audio reproduction in a HTPC setting...

I've been looking at a couple of barebone systems on NewEgg...
The MSI Wind , Foxconn and Shuttle machines are very interesting and all seem to be in about the same price range...

I'm generally pretty cautious when the industry takes a left turn like this but there does seem to be some interest among people who want reasonable behaviour but not necessarily top of the line performance....

So my questions....

1) Has anyone had a chance to live with one of these machines for a while and what were your overall impressions?

2) How much of a pain is it to get them running XP?

3) Have there been any reports of serious problems with them?

4) How is the Video and Audio performance?

 

[Rob Williams]

It depends on how small these people want their machines, and what they want it to do. Acer just released their ION-based AspireRevo not long ago, and it looks like it has a lot of potential. It's a lot smaller than the Shuttle solutions I've seen. MSI Wind might be similar, but since I've seen what ION can do, I'm a little hesitant to out-right recommend a Intel integrated graphics if people want to watch high-definition content... even HD YouTube videos are affected.

Personally, the Acer looks like an attractive offering to me. I'd like to get one in soon so I know if I have a right to say that or not...

As for XP, all those machines that I'm aware of come with XP. If it has an Atom, it pretty much has to (save for ION, because the GPU helps a lot with Aero). So, XP won't be a problem whatsoever. A/V should be alright... most have HDMI output, and I'm doubtful for regular desktop performance, you'd see anything different from an expensive machine. It all comes down to the HD capabilities and such.

 

[Kougar]

As far as #4 goes, don't expect much with integrated sound or integrated graphics capabilities. Don't use anything with an Intel IGP at all, either... most Intel IGP solutions still can't offload HD content and most processors would be in trouble without GPU offloading. The older (ie cheaper) ones can't really do much or any offloading at all.

ASUS did just launch this thing though: http://www.nordichardware.com/news,9301.html

 

[2Tired2Tango]

It depends on how small these people want their machines, and what they want it to do. Acer just released their ION-based AspireRevo not long ago, and it looks like it has a lot of potential. It's a lot smaller than the Shuttle solutions I've seen. MSI Wind might be similar, but since I've seen what ION can do, I'm a little hesitant to out-right recommend a Intel integrated graphics if people want to watch high-definition content... even HD YouTube videos are affected.

Personally, the Acer looks like an attractive offering to me. I'd like to get one in soon so I know if I have a right to say that or not...

Thing is that's competing with the Intel eeeBox. There's no expansion, no DVD and very limited storage (160g) capability.

If you look at the links in my original message you will see machines that carry standard OD slots, one or more standard 3.5" HD slots and can support motherboard upgrades.

The thing is they're SMALL... about the size of a school binder, but still fully functional computers. Apparently able to run anything XP can run...

However this is a very immature platform. The Wind (for example) is missing a bunch of I/O that would be needed for desktop use, like PS2 connectors for keyboard and mouse. The Shuttle model uses laptop drives. Of the Three, the foxconn comes the closest to a reasonable computer... and still the box is 1/2 the size of a M-ATX home theatre case.

A/V should be alright... most have HDMI output, and I'm doubtful for regular desktop performance, you'd see anything different from an expensive machine. It all comes down to the HD capabilities and such.

That's what I'm trying to determine before I dump my life savings into this. IF these are capable little machines in their own right, I see a real shift in computing happening. The big noisey --and massively annoying-- boxes of the past will be relegated to gamers and power users where most people will be seeking out these little gems for their everyday use.

However, like I say, this is a very immature platform... there are no ITX level expansion devices yet, a unifying buss structure is not in evidence, many things need to be done before these will compete heavily with the old dustbin sized machines... but I do see a lot of potential there.

Care to supply me with a couple of samples so I can review them for you?

 

[2Tired2Tango]

As far as #4 goes, don't expect much with integrated sound or integrated graphics capabilities. Don't use anything with an Intel IGP at all, either... most Intel IGP solutions still can't offload HD content and most processors would be in trouble without GPU offloading. The older (ie cheaper) ones can't really do much or any offloading at all.

ASUS did just launch this thing though: http://www.nordichardware.com/news,9301.html

I'm no fan of integrated graphics. The memory contention alone imposes a hit on CPU performance that is sometimes quite noticeable. But the thing is these are small, quiet and cheap... perhaps if there has to be a tradeoff, the onboard sound and video isn't such a bad deal, so long as it will fill a television screen or monitor with a reasonable image.

The M-ATX board you linked to is plenty interesting. But even in the smallest box I've seen yet (the N-Media) it's still the size of a suitcase, the biggest component in the rack... which is a problem for many people.

LOL... maybe size does matter, afterall?

 

[Rob Williams]

As far as #4 goes, don't expect much with integrated sound or integrated graphics capabilities. Don't use anything with an Intel IGP at all, either... most Intel IGP solutions still can't offload HD content and most processors would be in trouble without GPU offloading.

It really depends on what you're using it for. No one can expect excellent audio from a $300 machine, but the video for regular use would be fine. It's not as though colors are going to be degraded because it uses a cheaper GPU. Intel's integrated solutions are fairly useless where HD is concerned though. G45 was a step in the right direction, but even we had a slew of issues with it. It's too bad... I really was looking forward to that one.

As for that ASUS board... that looks fantastic... everything from the colors to the design to the features.

If you look at the links in my original message you will see machines that carry standard OD slots, one or more standard 3.5" HD slots and can support motherboard upgrades.

Of course, but like I said, it depends on what people are looking for. Some people are fine with bare-basics computing, some aren't. I'm not familiar enough with Shuttle's offerings, or other machines like that to give valuable input. Up until recently, I had extremely low interest in such things.

From what you're saying though, I'd definitely consider an mATX form-factor... as long as the peeps don't mind something semi-bulky near the TV. Or, if it's a big TV, they could somehow hoist it behind it (if room allows) and build a little stand for it or something.

Regarding samples, just shoot me a PM about what you have in mind, and we can discuss it further.

 

[2Tired2Tango]

Of course, but like I said, it depends on what people are looking for. Some people are fine with bare-basics computing, some aren't. I'm not familiar enough with Shuttle's offerings, or other machines like that to give valuable input. Up until recently, I had extremely low interest in such things.

I will confess they've just recently caught my attention too... Of course they've only been on market for a few months and have barely made any penetration in to Canada at all. 'Round here it's still "bigger is better"... even though the thing is 90% air.

From what you're saying though, I'd definitely consider an mATX form-factor... as long as the peeps don't mind something semi-bulky near the TV. Or, if it's a big TV, they could somehow hoist it behind it (if room allows) and build a little stand for it or something.

The NMedia case is pretty small... but also overpriced considering it's flimsy construction.

I've been running micro-ATX boards for years and have yet to find anything lacking for my kind of use (I've never needed 7 expansion slots.). In-Win probably makes the best mini-towers for M-ATX boards, they're sturdy, well thought out and no sharp edges. I've used Gigabyte, Asus, MSI and others, both intel and amd and can't really fault any of them. Basically it's just ATX with fewer slots.

Of course this is why Mini-itx interests me... Probably half of the people I do work for don't even use 1/4 of the computers they buy... Most don't upgrade, they replace... So I'm seeing a market for "less bulky" but reasonably capable machines... 1.6 ghz is not bad, considering that most of my present flock spend most of their time throttled down to 900mhz or so and nobody complains of balkiness.

It's the limited expansion that concerns me... It would be nice if they could settle on a standard connector (PCI?) and supply riser cards for laydown expansion... I'm also a little disappointed with the limitations Intel is imposing on the Atom platform... seems kinda like hillbilly logic to me...

 

[Rob Williams]

Well, I'm still a fan of big PCs, but that's only because I thrive on the power they offer. If I could get my full-blown desktop performance in a small little box, I sure wouldn't hesitate to take that route. It's not the size I mind so much, but rather the noisy fans. It's so hot in this room in the summer (90F in here right now), that I'm forced to keep the fans full throttle all the time. I gotta invest in a good portable A/C or something.

I can agree on the mATX factor too... for most people, they're probably fine. I love good airflow though, and when you have a beefy GPU, an audio card, multiple hard drives and so forth, mATX chassis' are going to overheat without question. Performance-wise though, I don't think mATX falls short anywhere (if anywhere, it'd be overclocking).

Agreed on the Atom limitations... it's absolutely absurd. With Computex happening in a few weeks, I'm really hoping to see some really cool stuff there. ASUS also makes a lot of barebone machines too, did you happen to check theirs out? I honestly don't know what they have, but no one ever seems to look at those.

 

[2Tired2Tango]

Well, I'm still a fan of big PCs, but that's only because I thrive on the power they offer. If I could get my full-blown desktop performance in a small little box, I sure wouldn't hesitate to take that route.

I've continued looking into this and ... well, it's mindboggling how much of it there is! Do a NewEgg search for ITX... and get ready for page after page after page.... The thing is they've been selling this stuff for quite some time as industrial product --sign controllers, point of sale, imbedded systems etc.-- and it's gone largely unnoticed (well, at least in Canada). This nice quiet little revolution in computing that nobody knows about...

If computing power is your game check out the Zotac lineup. They have AMD Phenom and Intel Core support on a mini-itx board only 7" square!

There's even one (from JetWay, I think) that has "side memory" on board so the GPU doesn't share the mains...

The only drawback is the imbedded video... but in my wanders about the net I saw mention of a "mini-pci-e" connector that might be integrated into the platform.... That's what's needed... a unifiying buss structure... perhaps a mini-buss connector on the motherboard, with 2 or 3 slot risers that lay mini-itx expansion cards on their sides.

It's getting real interesting... A little box too small to stuff my smelly old running shoes into with abilities that rival my current luggage size tower... gotta love it.

It's not the size I mind so much, but rather the noisy fans. It's so hot in this room in the summer (90F in here right now), that I'm forced to keep the fans full throttle all the time. I gotta invest in a good portable A/C or something.

LOL you could do what a friend of mine tried... he took a hose from an unused tap, ran a pair of lines over to his computer... Put a water cooling block on the CPU, cold ground water in, warm water out and down the drain... Says his computer is actually cooler than the room... Now that's a trick I really have to try sometime.

I can agree on the mATX factor too... for most people, they're probably fine. I love good airflow though, and when you have a beefy GPU, an audio card, multiple hard drives and so forth, mATX chassis' are going to overheat without question. Performance-wise though, I don't think mATX falls short anywhere (if anywhere, it'd be overclocking).

Yes heat can be an issue. When building mATX systems (and most of mine are) I've been very careful to manage the airflow so that cool air circulates in from the bottom front of the computer, travels the entire length of the box then rises up and out the rear fans. Covering unused fan holes in the back of the box can make quite a difference as can case design. InWin has an excellent case solution in their mATX towers, lots and lots of airflow even when relying upon power supply fans for overall cooling.

But power wise, so long as the fewer expansion slots and drive hookups is not a problem mATX machines are every bit as fast and useful as their big brothers.

Agreed on the Atom limitations... it's absolutely absurd. With Computex happening in a few weeks, I'm really hoping to see some really cool stuff there. ASUS also makes a lot of barebone machines too, did you happen to check theirs out? I honestly don't know what they have, but no one ever seems to look at those.

Make sure you check out Foxconn, Zotac and Albatron if they're there... some very interesting stuff happening with those companies.

 

[Kougar]

LOL you could do what a friend of mine tried... he took a hose from an unused tap, ran a pair of lines over to his computer... Put a water cooling block on the CPU, cold ground water in, warm water out and down the drain... Says his computer is actually cooler than the room... Now that's a trick I really have to try sometime.

Well sure, that'd work wonders for temps! The only obvious issue is the average watercooling setup uses a ton of water... The MCP655 can top out at 317GPH (Gallons per hour), so I assume your friend doesn't have to pay the water bill!

There's some site dedicated to a person that did some creative plumbing with his swimming pool, he managed to run a pipe to his system and uses the pool water during the cool months to chill his server PC, and the heated water just goes back out into the pool. Going over his photos that was a ton of work though, I think he even said he did it just to see if it could be done more than actually intending to use it for anything. Link

As far as miniITX system goes, I think the "Ion 2" that uses a Via Nano CPU would be about as good as it gets. The chipset already offers HD video offloading and can handle older videogames, but changing the Atom for a Nano would give it even more processing room and drop the cost a bit. So far it's just in the design stage... although if they have it working I guess they will be showing it off at Computex.

 

[2Tired2Tango]

Well sure, that'd work wonders for temps! The only obvious issue is the average watercooling setup uses a ton of water... The MCP655 can top out at 317GPH (Gallons per hour), so I assume your friend doesn't have to pay the water bill!

I don't know... but I'm glad I didn't have to pay it. I don't know if it was just an experiment of if was intended to be perminent... but it did work.

As far as miniITX system goes, I think the "Ion 2" that uses a Via Nano CPU would be about as good as it gets. The chipset already offers HD video offloading and can handle older videogames, but changing the Atom for a Nano would give it even more processing room and drop the cost a bit. So far it's just in the design stage... although if they have it working I guess they will be showing it off at Computex.

I found this report quite interesting... http://techreport.com/articles.x/16893

I figure if I want hi-def running anywhere but a computer monitor, I'll have to go beyond the Atom... Zotac (and others) have m-itx boards running AMD socket 2 chips which gives them access to the low power AMP X2 64 bit stuff with a power limit of 45watts... Given that an AMD will wup an Intel chips butt at the same clock speeds, I would be very interested to see just how much difference there is.

From what I gather the Atom isn't all that lame... the 1080p/i problems seem mostly related to the imbedded video and wouldn't even play a part in workstation applications... which is where I really want to test them.

But I suspect the current issues are just growing pains... The platform has some history so it will be interesting to see where it goes.

 

[Rob Williams]

If computing power is your game check out the Zotac lineup. They have AMD Phenom and Intel Core support on a mini-itx board only 7" square!

I have to give kudos to Zotac for that, too. Those boards are amazing... tons of features for such little space. No one else seems to be doing it... yet Zotac, a company who's not known for motherboards, is.

LOL you could do what a friend of mine tried... he took a hose from an unused tap, ran a pair of lines over to his computer... Put a water cooling block on the CPU, cold ground water in, warm water out and down the drain... Says his computer is actually cooler than the room... Now that's a trick I really have to try sometime.

Whoa, now that's dedication! I'm not sure I want to go that far. I think I'd be pleased with a good water-cooling rig in general, but I hate the hassle that goes into them. Plus, even with water-cooling, the PC isn't too much quieter. It runs cooler, but temps aren't so much my issue, it's the noise. Of course, water-cooling would help a bit, but I am not confident it'd be worth the cost-of-entry.

There's some site dedicated to a person that did some creative plumbing with his swimming pool, he managed to run a pipe to his system and uses the pool water during the cool months to chill his server PC, and the heated water just goes back out into the pool. Going over his photos that was a ton of work though, I think he even said he did it just to see if it could be done more than actually intending to use it for anything.

That's amazing... talk about finding a purpose from something not too obvious.

From what I gather the Atom isn't all that lame... the 1080p/i problems seem mostly related to the imbedded video and wouldn't even play a part in workstation applications... which is where I really want to test them.

Well, that's the thing. It has little to do with Atom if there's a GeForce integrated GPU instead of Intel's solution. When I took a look at the ASUS Eee Top a few months ago, the Atom and graphics weren't powerful enough to handle YouTube HD video, and that's not even true HD. That's not an issue if a GeForce is used, which is why the ION platform holds so much promise.

 

[2Tired2Tango]

I have to give kudos to Zotac for that, too. Those boards are amazing... tons of features for such little space. No one else seems to be doing it... yet Zotac, a company who's not known for motherboards, is.

Yeah, 2.2ghz, 45 watt AMD running passive cooling with a ton of connectivity... It's pretty amazing how they do it. Zotac definately has my attention.

Well, that's the thing. It has little to do with Atom if there's a GeForce integrated GPU instead of Intel's solution. When I took a look at the ASUS Eee Top a few months ago, the Atom and graphics weren't powerful enough to handle YouTube HD video, and that's not even true HD. That's not an issue if a GeForce is used, which is why the ION platform holds so much promise.

Far as I can tell the onboard video thing has mostly been a way to beef up sales, in ATX and even mATX boards where there's almost always a card slot for video. It's in the bridges and thus no big cost to them. If anything come from this new generation of really effing small boards ( ) it will most likely be a solid improvement in video. Like integrating ram into the chipsets rather than sharing CPU memory or perhaps two separate memory slots one for mains and one for vid... on a board that small, they could use laptop memory and actually save space doing it.

This certainly is getting interersting!

 

[Kougar]

Well, that's just it. Nvidia's (And AMD's latest) IGPs are actually half decent IGPs and offer gaming capability at low resolutions. If the IGP sharing the system memory is a concern, then the user would be better off with a low profile, discrete GPU that'd be much better than any IGP could hope to be.

Intel's Atom would be great for internet connectivity and netbook tasks, but I'm not sure even the rare dual-core Atom would make a half-decent mini-HTPC setup. Anand Lal Shimpi published a personal review of his testing with Atom and his results showed even the dual-core Atom, with the 9300IGP's help, still wasn't powerfull enough to not drop frames on the highest bitrate Blu Ray movies currently out. Of course NVIDIA disputed his results and he pulled the article claiming he was working with them to make sure he didn't make any mistakes in his testing, but he has never since said another word about it.

 

[2Tired2Tango]

Well, that's just it. Nvidia's (And AMD's latest) IGPs are actually half decent IGPs and offer gaming capability at low resolutions. If the IGP sharing the system memory is a concern, then the user would be better off with a low profile, discrete GPU that'd be much better than any IGP could hope to be.

Thing is that an integrated graphics chip is simply a graphics chip. Very often the same design is used for on-board as you would find in a separate card. What's different is the memory usage. A buss card will (of needs) have it's own memory whereas the on-board one ends up sharing CPU memory producing a performance hit for both. Memory is only so fast, CPUs are already faster, as are GPUs, so sharing the memory produces a system bottleneck.

I once surprised a customer by upgrading to faster memory but *underclocking* the CPU just a bit... Not only did his graphics rendering problem clear up, the darned thing ran faster too. What I did was adjust the system so the memory could keep up.

Intel's Atom would be great for internet connectivity and netbook tasks, but I'm not sure even the rare dual-core Atom would make a half-decent mini-HTPC setup. Anand Lal Shimpi published a personal review of his testing with Atom and his results showed even the dual-core Atom, with the 9300IGP's help, still wasn't powerfull enough to not drop frames on the highest bitrate Blu Ray movies currently out. Of course NVIDIA disputed his results and he pulled the article claiming he was working with them to make sure he didn't make any mistakes in his testing, but he has never since said another word about it.

I'll confess to not knowing the bit rates necessary for Blu-Ray, but it can't be all that high if the imbedded processors in a Blu-Ray player can keep up... those things typically use microcontroller chips running at about 250mhz, or so.

The thing is, I'm presently using a workstation system as my HTPC... it's ugly but it's only while I develop the software I was talking about. (I'll probably go Shuttle for the final system) This is a 2.2ghz AMD X2 system on an ASUS M2N-MXse mATX mobo with Nvidia 6100 graphics and 2gb of 667 ram. To keep things a bit cooler I enabled cpu throttling and it now steps up and down in 6 increments from 990mhz to 2.2ghz. Even when playing HD content from AVI files it almost never ramps up above the 1.2ghz mark. It always sits at 990mhz while playing CD or DVD content... and so far the entire thing has been utterly flawless.

To give you an example... Playing avi content at relatively high bit rates, downloading several torrents, defragmenting one of the drives and serving files to my other computers typically results in about 35% CPU usage at 1.5ghz. That is to say, it never even breaks a sweat.

If the Atom at 1.6ghz is so crippled that it can't match that, there is something wrong with the design of that chip. And of course that's why I want to put the thing through it's paces before I let it loose on my friends and customers who will be using it as a presentation server, workstation, htpc, etc. as they choose.

Gaming is a different world. I've tried some games on my workstation and they played OK but not impressively... lower frame rates, limited resoluton graphics and so on. The background processing would slam the CPU right up to 100% and keep it there most of the time... So I get that an Atom, and even my own system aren't going to keep up.

Of course there is also the matter that XP and Vista are loaded with tweakable settings. Extra core threads, task offloading, GUI tweaks etc. can significantly improve performance if you are willing to spend some time in RegEdit sorting each system out. My personal workstation was a real dog when I first fired it up but some careful tweaking really brought it to life... So, I do find myself wondering how much of the problem actually is hardware.

 

[Kougar]

I'll confess to not knowing the bit rates necessary for Blu-Ray, but it can't be all that high if the imbedded processors in a Blu-Ray player can keep up... those things typically use microcontroller chips running at about 250mhz, or so.

Actually, no. The very first HD-DVD players used Intel Northwood processors to keep prices lower, Toshiba was using them for quite awhile at that although they migrated to Mobile Pentiun 4 Northwoods later on, then I'm no longer sure but I think they finally did do away with them.

Hm, after googling I found one of Anandtech's follow ups. He blames his previously poor Atom Blu-ray performance on a not fully optimized (up to date) PowerDVD 8 program. With dual-core Atom having the NVIA 9300 IGP doing al lthe grunt work the results aren't bad at all anymore, but still it's around 30% with a mentioned spike to 50% during one scene. Link The bit-rates used on new Blu-ray titles is only increasing though, so having the CPU headroom is critcial. Some CGI movies/scenese in particular tend to get heavy with it.

I see what y'all were saying about the Flash player issues. So much for watching HD quality video on Atom in flash, such as Hulu... Link The problem here is the GPU is not able to offload any of the processing... this tells you that if the GPU is taken out of the picture, Atom can't handle 1080P HD content even if it is dual-core and four thread capable.

This was one of the articles I was thinking of that shows how CPU intensive a medium bit-rate H.264 disc can get on a X6800 without help from a GPU. Granted PowerDVD seems to have optimzied their software since then, so I'm not sure how it looks today. Link One of my engineering friends still uses a Pentium 4... even low bit-rate H.264 videos look like a slideshow on windowed mode on his rig. It was one reason I was able to talk him into getting a real GPU, he can at least now watch most HD content.

To give you an example... Playing avi content at relatively high bit rates, downloading several torrents, defragmenting one of the drives and serving files to my other computers typically results in about 35% CPU usage at 1.5ghz. That is to say, it never even breaks a sweat.

AVI doesn't tell me anything nor the bit-rates involved... most torrents aren't full HD quality. Also HD can mean it is MPEG-2, H.264, or MPEG-4 encoded. Considering MPG2 is just a high-DVD encoding, it can generally be run on anything even though first generation Blu-ray movies tended to use it. Preferrably H.264 1080P enocding is required to load a CPU. Just for fun, download this one and play it in 1920x1080 resolution, I'd be curious what CPU usage it would require for your AMD 6100 IGP rig: http://www.elecard.biz/clips/mp4/misc/FCL_1080p.mp4 I don't pretend to know anymore what Blu-ray titles are the worst offenders else I'd list those as well.

 

[2Tired2Tango]

Actually, no. The very first HD-DVD players used Intel Northwood processors to keep prices lower, Toshiba was using them for quite awhile at that although they migrated to Mobile Pentiun 4 Northwoods later on, then I'm no longer sure but I think they finally did do away with them.

Actually I was referring to the actual DVD players you stick in your home theatre setup. These tend to run on all-in-one microcontrollers; computers, yes, but not from our computing world. I don't know if you know much about microcontroller electronics or not but here's an introductory link in case you want to read-up LINK It's really a very fascinating side of computing... the little buggers are everywhere, remotes, disk drives, video displays, cars (lots and lots of them), even refrigerators...

Hm, after googling I found one of Anandtech's follow ups. He blames his previously poor Atom Blu-ray performance on a not fully optimized (up to date) PowerDVD 8 program. With dual-core Atom having the NVIA 9300 IGP doing al lthe grunt work the results aren't bad at all anymore, but still it's around 30% with a mentioned spike to 50% during one scene.

Ahhh yes, the big bugaboo... inneficient software. Been there, done that... burned the T-Shirt!

I see what y'all were saying about the Flash player issues. So much for watching HD quality video on Atom in flash, such as Hulu... Link The problem here is the GPU is not able to offload any of the processing... this tells you that if the GPU is taken out of the picture, Atom can't handle 1080P HD content even if it is dual-core and four thread capable.

Well, don't forget that in this scenario you also have to consider network issues... *Especially* if you are on an ISP that throttles. Between 5pm and 2am each day I can simply forget watching online video. In HD mode YouTube just hangs. Outside this time span everything works just fine with about 15% cpu usage.

AVI doesn't tell me anything nor the bit-rates involved... most torrents aren't full HD quality.

AVI files can be created with a wide range of bitrates. The file format can *approach* HD quality but leaves off short, letting other formats (MP4, etc) take over. Actually most AVI movies downloaded in Torrents are only slightly better than NTSC Television (old-TV) quality and the software does a lot of cleaning up. But they download quickly, clean up nicely and are quiet watchable on a 19" or 24" monitor... CPU usage is typically in the 10 to 15% range.

Just for fun, download this one and play it in 1920x1080 resolution, I'd be curious what CPU usage it would require for your AMD 6100 IGP rig: http://www.elecard.biz/clips/mp4/misc/FCL_1080p.mp4 I don't pretend to know anymore what Blu-ray titles are the worst offenders else I'd list those as well.

I tried your clip... WOW that was interesting...
Workstation with 6100 IGP ... 70% cpu usage, CPU at full speed, fans whizzing.
Workstation with 8200 PCIe ... 40%, still at full speed but the fans shut up.
Toshiba Satellite 300D laptop ... 80% CPU usage, some frame dropping, but watchable.
(Note: the laptop can't do the 1920 x 1080 resolution on it's internal display.)

Of course I knew this more or less but haven't really played with it all that much, yet.

I don't think I expect an Atom to do this. But there are some Mini-Itx boards that should, including those with nvidia graphics and AMD 2+ sockets... As I said before, I really do think this platform has a lot of promise but since it's just now getting out of "imbedded systems" and into the real world (The atom is Intel's first Mini-ITX board) it will be interesting to see where it goes.