Am Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 07:45:25AM -0500 schrieb Dale: > Mark Knecht wrote:
> > > Another question. My rig is getting a bit aged. I have a AMD FX-8350 8 > > > core CPU running at 4GHz. I also have 32GBs of memory. I've read that > > > Intel currently has the best bang for buck on CPUs nowadays. I'm open > > > to the idea of switching. As far as speed goes, if I built a new rig > > > that is using a reasonably cost CPU and memory, would I see any real > > > improvements? > > > > I think it all depends on what you're going to use the machine for and > > whether you really use all your CPU for extended periods of time. This! My mini PC with its passive 10 W Celeron N5100 is enough for desktop use, including encrypted storage. But maybe not for Gentoo. :) > > […] > > PixInsight has a benchmark program built in and all the results > > are open to look at: > > > > https://pixinsight.com/benchmark/index.php?sort=cpu&os=all > > > > Interestingly I didn't find your processor even on the list That’s probably because the FX processors are ooooold. Old and hungry. ^^ > Sometimes a CPU that costs $500 can only be just a fraction faster than a > $200 CPU. That’s still the case today for those impatient gamer enthusiasts who are after the “longest bars” [in benchmarks]. The same goes for power consumption. With Zen 4, AMD of course launched the fastest X-processors first with a gargantuan power demand. A few months later the non-X were released. They used 40 % or so less power at a performance cost of maybe 10 % (not actual numbers, but figuratively speaking from memory). > Given that my rig, as you point > out, sits here and waits on me to do something most of the time, that's > a lot of money for something I won't see much time savings on. I might > add tho, I do sometimes convert videos from 1080p to 720p. That makes > the CPU max out pretty good. Compiling Libreoffice, Firefox etc also > maxes out the CPU but those are what, once a month or so??? Intel and AMD are giving themselves quite a race these days about who offers more bang for the buck, or rather, more bang. In the past, Intel used to have more to offer at the lower end (below 100 € CPUs, like Pentiums and i3’s, while AMD was milking the market with high-end chips due to their limited manufacturing capacities). If you want to save money and aim for a low-cost AMD APU (processor with integrated graphics), you can get an older 3000-series Ryzen for a two-digit price. It’ll still be much faster than your old FX at a fraction of the power consumption. Like the 4300G, which is twice as fast for half the electricity. With today’s processors, basically none of the socktetable models are too slow unless you have specific performance requirements. With each generation, the architecture becomes more efficient, meaning more instructions per cycle, lower consumption and so on. The max frequency is not really the driving force behind performance increase anymore due to efficiency issues at higher frequencies. Here are some benchmark comparisons from cpubenchmark.net: Processor year power cores single-core score multi-core score FX-8350 2012 125 W 8/8 1580 6026 i5-4590 2014 84 W 4/4 2086 5356 i5-10400 2020 65 W 6/12 2580 12258 R3 4300G 2020 65 W 4/8 2557 11017 R5 5600G 2021 65 W 6/12 3185 19892 R5 7600X 2022 145 W 6/12 4213 28753 Sources: https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html#desktop-thread https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+FX-8350+Eight-Core&id=1780 https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i5-4590+%40+3.30GHz&id=2234 https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i5-10400+%40+2.90GHz&id=3737 https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Ryzen+3+4300G&id=3808 https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Ryzen+5+5600G&id=4325 https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Ryzen+5+7600X&id=5033 You can see the increase in performance. My old i5-4590, at half the cores, can keep up with your FX, even though it is only 1½ years younger. Ryzens used to be more efficient in multi workloads (look at the 2020 entries). But I’m not too sure about current generations due to Intel’s big-little concept. DDR5 and PCIe5 have higher requirements at signal quality, making the boards and components much more expensive (and, again, more power hungry). That’s why, even though DDR4 platforms are on their way out technologically, they are still an economically sound choice. > I was also wondering what a mobo/CPU/memory combo would cost nowadays. > Maybe someone who recently built a decent rig recalls how much they paid > for those three. I don't go cheap on power supply but I don't require a > lot for a video card or anything. Some spend half their money on a > video card alone but I just don't need anything that fancy. Any current Intel non-F CPU (F means no graphics) can cover your graphics need. Finally, AMD caught up and started shipping a minimal graphics chip in all of their processors with Zen 4, but as I said, that platform is still expensive. > I got a Nvidia GeForce GTX 650 that drives both my monitor and my TVs > through a splitter and it does just fine. How cute. This should be about twice as fast as the integrated graphics in my 8-year-old i5. So you’ll be fine with *any* integrated graphics (which will also cut down on idle consuption, compared with a dGPU). > This is some good info tho. Maybe someone who built a rig recently can > chime in on costs, US dollar would be nice. ;-) As mentioned, DDR5 is still expensive. With DDR4 platforms getting older, their prices are going down. The Ryzen 5 5600G is an excellent and efficient processor (it’s basically a laptop chip in a desktop socket) and currently can be had for around 125 € (including taxes of course, not sure about US prices). It has over twice the single- and thrice the multi-core performance of your FX chip. Its graphics are way overkill for you, but you never know. ;-) If you want to keep yout GPU, there’s also the Ryzen 5 5500, it has no graphics and is only minutely slower than the 5600G, but can be had for less than 100 €. So, in summary (talking German consumer prices, meaning all taxes included, but I think you can assume very similar $ pricse) for a not too fancy¹ system: Processor 120 € (or up top 150 € for a current i3/i5) RAM 60 € 32 GB DDR4 (cheap RAM, low latency costs more, but has no real use for your use case) Board 100..120 € depending on I/O needs and quality. Going DDR5 means an increase in budget by at least 100 € for a 32 GB system. ¹ As far as I can see, compiling packages is the most taxing thing you do, which is why I don’t see you needing a big-rig processor. (Though I understand the nice feeling you get from having one.) -- Grüße | Greetings | Salut | Qapla’ Please do not share anything from, with or about me on any social network. “Meow” <SPLAT!> “Woof” <SPLAT!> Jeez, it’s really raining today!
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
