We've seen standalone R690 motherboards. We are eagerly awaiting the arrival of the M690 mobile platform. And now the first media centres pre-built with an R690 motherboard are rolling off production lines.
How will this new chipset change our expectations of small form factor media centre PCs? It has a lot to offer that could put Intel's equivalent offering into second place. The graphics on board - equivalent to an X1250 Pro - are more powerful than most other onboard solutions, taking some of the load off the CPU for decoding high definition video.
Since the majority of R690 motherboards come in Micro-ATX dimensions, they are perfect for squeezing into an HTPC case. With HDMI output on board as well, the Ebox HD could be a taster of how R690 will raise the performance bar for home theatre PCs this year.
Varied results
Evesham has removed the guts from its previous media centre efforts - built around the KMF Ebox 3 chassis - and replaced them with MSI's K9AGM2-FIH and an Athlon X2 3800 chip.
We have already looked at that particular board and the AMD Athlon X2 3800 sits neatly in the mid range of CPU performance tables, hitting the sweet spot between value and performance.
Dual cores and decent number crunching abilities can deliver smooth media playback when it's needed, and although there are plenty of faster CPUs out there, this one isn't adding greatly to the Ebox HD's cost.
Pairing Windows Vista Home Premium with this hardware is an obvious choice, since Microsoft's Media Center application comes as standard with more complete Vista bundles. The X1250 has no problem running the Aero interface, with a full 2GB of DDR2 memory aiding media playback.
However, since the R690's integrated graphics use a UMA shared memory interface, the total memory was reported as 1.5GB. The exact amount devoted to graphics can be set in the BIOS, and lowering it slightly helps Vista's overall performance without visibly hurting the graphics.
While the general performance of the Ebox HD was fine, there were some times when the system was not as responsive as we would have liked. Some tasks seemed to take longer than similar Vista machines we have tested.
