- This topic has 13 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Does anyone know what CPU and Memory/Cache are fitted to the 4000T and 5000T models (the same I believe) and has anyone ever looked at the possibility of an upgrade?
Thanks.
I would guess there is not much spare for anything ease other than to service the designed functions. If you upgraded it I do not imagine it would achieve anything.
I seem to remember that Humax use Broadcom chipsets.
davidrew – 5 hours ago »
Does anyone know what CPU and Memory/Cache are fitted to the 4000T and 5000T models (the same I believe) and has anyone ever looked at the possibility of an upgrade?
I would say the chance of an upgrade is zero. The Humax PVRs use special chipsets designed for PVR applications.
It would be interesting to know exactly what David hopes to achieve by upgrading the CPU/memory.
If it was possible to upgrade, I would hope it might improve the speed of response of the GUI and possibly cut down on the crashes. But it probably wouldn’t. As it is unlikely that an upgrade is possible, I won’t be worrying about it.
EEPhil – 1 day ago »
If it was possible to upgrade, I would hope it might improve the speed of response of the GUI and possibly cut down on the crashes. But it probably wouldn’t. As it is unlikely that an upgrade is possible, I won’t be worrying about it.
It’s likely to be the cpu that’s underpowered, rather than the peripherals.
No way to change this.
Similar units using the android FVP system (4K firestick for instance), have quad core processors. The 4K firestick though has no tuners, so can only use streaming sources.
No idea what Humax are planning.
There are other similar units already available including one from V-box that has an extra processor core and a increased clock speed.
I was just throwing the idea out there. Unfortunately for me I just want things to work as they should and want to fix them if they don’t. I already have workarounds to power reset the box every 24 hours to avoid days of missed recordings when the box hangs, and another to ensure the EPG is updated daily.
I’m from an IT background, mostly infrastructure and UNIX, and have always strived to provide customers with fast reliable systems. I have been involved with many projects over the years to identify and fix existing poor performing systems which can often involve many additional factors other than the kit actually doing the number crunching.
From a technical perspective there is no reason why the 4000T/5000T should not be effortless to use. With my professional hat on I can exclude my internet connection (very fast and reliable), network (Humax directly wired to Gigabit switch, connected to Gigabit managed backbone switch, no errors or resource issues reported). Other devices on the same network, such as the TV, Xbox work fine, so this only leaves the number crunching bit, the Humax box.
Usually I would then look to engage the OS and application software vendors to see if any patches, config changes, or updated releases may fix the issues. There appears to be radio silence from Humax so based on the assumption the box is now running legacy code the only option left is a hardware (CPU and/or memory) fix, or the option to migrate to new properly supported equivalent platform.
Interesting post. What puzzles me is why these boxes seem to be deteriorating in performance. My 4000t was replaced under warranty and the replacement box whilst not lightening fast was reasonable. But over the last 6 months or so it has become laggy with very slow responses to the remote. On top of that the catch up players are pretty much useless. There is no obvious reason why so many of us seem to be suffering from the boxes poor performance. Very poor that Humax seemed to have abandoned these models at a relatively early stage.
mikeatupwey – 40 mins ago »
On top of that the catch up players are pretty much useless.
Have you tried the catch up players recently? You have to be very patient (several minutes) if you haven’t used ITV Hub or All4 for a while (my guess is that the app is silently updating itself with very little indication of anything happening) and then the first time used the performance is dreadful but subsequently it becomes acceptable.
I haven’t noticed my FVP-5000T getting any slower; you could try a reset to default to see if that helps.
Could the perceived progressive slowing up in performance be either progressively more recording being stored on the HDD, or even some sort of reverse placebo effect (insofar as you are expecting it to be slower, so it ‘will be’)?
Definitely not the number of recordings as I personally don’t store that many. Placebo maybe but that doesn’t explain the lack of action from the catch up players. It feels to me that something is hogging the limited RAM that these players have, thus slowing everything down.
Quote:I already have workarounds to power reset the box every 24 hours to avoid days of missed recordings when the box hangs, and another to ensure the EPG is updated daily.Whilst I accept that the box can be unresponsive and slow to react to the remote control, I am surprised that you need to do this. I never need to resort to these measures to keep the EPG updated and ensure reliable recordings. However I have discovered, by trial and error, that it is very useful to run the media server – in my case between 6:00am and midnight. I also have the Samba and FTP servers on. This seems to keep the box alive – and importantly keeps the network connection alive. In my case this seems to allow enough time for the EPG to be updated during the 20 minute startup before a scheduled recording. I don’t think I can recall a failed recording in the last 12 months. Worth a try?
I agree that the catch-up services are very slow to load (except Netflix) but so they can be with other catch-up players (eg my Firestick which is quite old). I have spent many hours watching and recording network traffic with Wireshark and it does seem that slow start up is down, in many cases, to slow responses from the remote servers (there are very many!) – and many rejected packets causing frequent re-trys. That issue may well of course be down to poor network implementation in the FVP but it is very difficult to isolate specific issues as much of the network traffic is encrypted. The interaction with remote servers seems excessively complicated but no more so than with my Firestick.
The only function that used to work but now doesn’t is remote recording. But as I am confined to barracks at the moment that is a problem for another day.
This page has some of the tech specs for the 4000t, including memory.
https://uk.humaxdigital.com/product/fvp-4000t/
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.