Western Digital WDTV Live Hub Review
by Ganesh T S on October 26, 2010 7:38 AM EST- Posted in
- Home Theater
- Media Streamer
- Gadgets
The WDTV Live Hub was put through v1.0.2 of the AnandTech Media Streamer Test Suite. This version has 50 different test streams and a maximum possible score of 358. The WDTV Live Hub came out with a score of 239 (66.76%). This is a slight improvement over WDTV Live Plus (which score 58.14%). The improvements are enumerated below:
- WMA / WMAPro audio decode supported
- DTS core bitstreamed for DTS-HD tracks in MKVs
- Bitstreaming of TrueHD tracks in MKV containers
The streams in which the LiveHub lost out are enumerated below:
- DTS-HD bitstreaming from M2TS / MKVs
- Vorbis decode
- Real Media decode
- Hebrew and Vietnamese subtitle display
- Support for (forced) PGS subtitles in MKV containers
- Playback of some 1080p30 H264 streams (These are L4.1 H264 streams which play properly on almost all other Sigma / Realtek streamers we have tested. The issues happen only in the WDTV lineup)
- Playback of 1080p60 Panasonic camcorder H264 streams
- Support for stylized subtitles (ASS/SSA) with special effects
- MPEG-4 videos with 3 warp points and GMC
- Support for playback of Blu-Ray ISO / folder structure
In essence, whatever used to work on the Live Plus worked very well on the Live Hub. Some improvements were seen, but not as many as we would have liked.
Moving onto the picture quality, I put the WDTV Live Hub through the HQV 2.0 benchmark and the Live Hub scored 56 on 210. It is clear that the Live Hub is no great shakes when it comes to video post processing. Do note that some of the tests simply make no sense for media streamers because the knobs to activate and test out the features just don't exist (as manufacturers don't want to befuddle the average user with some arcane menu options). In any case, the score tallies closely with what Cameron got for the WDTV Live Plus.
At this juncture, I realized that the capabilities of the unit with respect to video decoding were almost the same as that of the WDTV Live Plus (particularly with respect to artifacts exhibited when certain test streams were played back). It looked likely that the Live Hub was powered by a Sigma Designs SoC. However, I was not aware of any mass-production ready Sigma chip with GbE capabilities or proper HDMI 1.4a support....
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
53 Comments
View All Comments
ganeshts - Tuesday, October 26, 2010 - link
I know these aren't in the piece yet. I will try to get those figures in as soon as possible.casteve - Wednesday, October 27, 2010 - link
Ganesh, when you do have a chance to add the power and noise levels...be sure to include power used when off/sleeping/idle. Thanks!ganeshts - Tuesday, November 16, 2010 - link
Sorry for the delay, but the power consumption numbers are as below:1. Power off, adapter connected to the mains (WDTVLiveHub visible on the network) : 7.7W
2. Power off, transferring files to WDTVLiveHub drive over the network: 9.4W
3. Power on, running 1080p video / playing Netflix: 10.7W
4. Power on, running 1080p video, transferring file to internal drive at the same time: 11.3W
dman - Tuesday, October 26, 2010 - link
I'd be interested if it had recording capabilities at this price point. Well, I'm sure a lot of people would be... I just say it because I really don't need the built in HDD on this device since it's not recording anything.It's nice that they've updated the interface, something the previous generation of WD devices have been asking for, however, with Google and Apple getting serious in this space I think WD has been moving a little to slowly here.
Lastly, did they finally include a 30s skip function or is it still just FF/RR while watching shows and the huge 10 or 20 minute (I think) skip?
ganeshts - Wednesday, October 27, 2010 - link
The LiveHub has the ability to navigate to any time instant in the video file. There is an option for a x16 forward / rewind too. No explicit 30s skip as far as I can seeblckgrffn - Tuesday, October 26, 2010 - link
Really? That's getting up into well-connected blu-ray player pricing - not to mention the nettops you can put together for nearly that much...dandar - Tuesday, October 26, 2010 - link
I have an Iomega Home Media NAS. It has gigabit port and it's also limited to an average of 10.6 MB/s. I was getting slightly above 8 MB/s on 100 megabit router so it's a slight upgrade, but a far cry from what I expected (ie 50+ MB/s). They both must have similar bottleneck between the HDD and the network interface.Aikouka - Tuesday, October 26, 2010 - link
If I'm understanding your setup properly, you have a computer and the Iomega Home Media NAS plugged into a 100 Base-T router. Regardless of your NIC's capable speed, you'll never transfer faster than the hardware **between the two points** allows.A 100 Base-T system is theoretically capable of up to 12.5 MB/s (100 / 8).
dandar - Tuesday, October 26, 2010 - link
No, I had it hooked up to 100 megabit router, then I hooked up a gigabit switch in preparation to wiring my house up for nas serving a PS3 and Cinematube. To transfer the files I hooked up my laptop to the switch as well. I haven't tested read speeds yet, but write speeds increased from 8+ MB/s with both my laptop and NAS on my 100 megabit router to 10.6 MB/s with both on the gigabit switch, which incidentally meets what Anandtech got with this box and what other websites got when testing WD Mybook World.Ps. The switch shows both devices connected with gigabit protocols so getting write speeds equivalent to what you could get on a good 100mbps connection is pretty disappointing. Having said that, read speeds should be around 27-30 MBps. Anand or should I say Ganesh should test that and update this review.
Samus - Tuesday, October 26, 2010 - link
That shitty 25mm (sleeve bearing?) fan is going to get really loud, really soon. It's too bad they didn't keep it passively cooled.