1 |
Am Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 07:45:25AM -0500 schrieb Dale: |
2 |
> Mark Knecht wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> > > Another question. My rig is getting a bit aged. I have a AMD FX-8350 8 |
5 |
> > > core CPU running at 4GHz. I also have 32GBs of memory. I've read that |
6 |
> > > Intel currently has the best bang for buck on CPUs nowadays. I'm open |
7 |
> > > to the idea of switching. As far as speed goes, if I built a new rig |
8 |
> > > that is using a reasonably cost CPU and memory, would I see any real |
9 |
> > > improvements? |
10 |
> > |
11 |
> > I think it all depends on what you're going to use the machine for and |
12 |
> > whether you really use all your CPU for extended periods of time. |
13 |
|
14 |
This! My mini PC with its passive 10 W Celeron N5100 is enough for desktop |
15 |
use, including encrypted storage. But maybe not for Gentoo. :) |
16 |
|
17 |
> > […] |
18 |
> > PixInsight has a benchmark program built in and all the results |
19 |
> > are open to look at: |
20 |
> > |
21 |
> > https://pixinsight.com/benchmark/index.php?sort=cpu&os=all |
22 |
> > |
23 |
> > Interestingly I didn't find your processor even on the list |
24 |
|
25 |
That’s probably because the FX processors are ooooold. Old and hungry. ^^ |
26 |
|
27 |
> Sometimes a CPU that costs $500 can only be just a fraction faster than a |
28 |
> $200 CPU. |
29 |
|
30 |
That’s still the case today for those impatient gamer enthusiasts who are |
31 |
after the “longest bars” [in benchmarks]. The same goes for power |
32 |
consumption. With Zen 4, AMD of course launched the fastest X-processors |
33 |
first with a gargantuan power demand. A few months later the non-X were |
34 |
released. They used 40 % or so less power at a performance cost of maybe 10 |
35 |
% (not actual numbers, but figuratively speaking from memory). |
36 |
|
37 |
> Given that my rig, as you point |
38 |
> out, sits here and waits on me to do something most of the time, that's |
39 |
> a lot of money for something I won't see much time savings on. I might |
40 |
> add tho, I do sometimes convert videos from 1080p to 720p. That makes |
41 |
> the CPU max out pretty good. Compiling Libreoffice, Firefox etc also |
42 |
> maxes out the CPU but those are what, once a month or so??? |
43 |
|
44 |
Intel and AMD are giving themselves quite a race these days about who offers |
45 |
more bang for the buck, or rather, more bang. In the past, Intel used to |
46 |
have more to offer at the lower end (below 100 € CPUs, like Pentiums and |
47 |
i3’s, while AMD was milking the market with high-end chips due to their |
48 |
limited manufacturing capacities). |
49 |
|
50 |
If you want to save money and aim for a low-cost AMD APU (processor with |
51 |
integrated graphics), you can get an older 3000-series Ryzen for a two-digit |
52 |
price. It’ll still be much faster than your old FX at a fraction of the |
53 |
power consumption. Like the 4300G, which is twice as fast for half the |
54 |
electricity. With today’s processors, basically none of the socktetable |
55 |
models are too slow unless you have specific performance requirements. |
56 |
|
57 |
With each generation, the architecture becomes more efficient, meaning more |
58 |
instructions per cycle, lower consumption and so on. The max frequency is |
59 |
not really the driving force behind performance increase anymore due to |
60 |
efficiency issues at higher frequencies. |
61 |
|
62 |
Here are some benchmark comparisons from cpubenchmark.net: |
63 |
|
64 |
Processor year power cores single-core score multi-core score |
65 |
FX-8350 2012 125 W 8/8 1580 6026 |
66 |
i5-4590 2014 84 W 4/4 2086 5356 |
67 |
i5-10400 2020 65 W 6/12 2580 12258 |
68 |
R3 4300G 2020 65 W 4/8 2557 11017 |
69 |
R5 5600G 2021 65 W 6/12 3185 19892 |
70 |
R5 7600X 2022 145 W 6/12 4213 28753 |
71 |
|
72 |
Sources: |
73 |
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html#desktop-thread |
74 |
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+FX-8350+Eight-Core&id=1780 |
75 |
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i5-4590+%40+3.30GHz&id=2234 |
76 |
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i5-10400+%40+2.90GHz&id=3737 |
77 |
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Ryzen+3+4300G&id=3808 |
78 |
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Ryzen+5+5600G&id=4325 |
79 |
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Ryzen+5+7600X&id=5033 |
80 |
|
81 |
You can see the increase in performance. My old i5-4590, at half the cores, |
82 |
can keep up with your FX, even though it is only 1½ years younger. Ryzens |
83 |
used to be more efficient in multi workloads (look at the 2020 entries). But |
84 |
I’m not too sure about current generations due to Intel’s big-little |
85 |
concept. |
86 |
DDR5 and PCIe5 have higher requirements at signal quality, making the boards |
87 |
and components much more expensive (and, again, more power hungry). That’s |
88 |
why, even though DDR4 platforms are on their way out technologically, they |
89 |
are still an economically sound choice. |
90 |
|
91 |
> I was also wondering what a mobo/CPU/memory combo would cost nowadays. |
92 |
> Maybe someone who recently built a decent rig recalls how much they paid |
93 |
> for those three. I don't go cheap on power supply but I don't require a |
94 |
> lot for a video card or anything. Some spend half their money on a |
95 |
> video card alone but I just don't need anything that fancy. |
96 |
|
97 |
Any current Intel non-F CPU (F means no graphics) can cover your graphics |
98 |
need. Finally, AMD caught up and started shipping a minimal graphics chip in |
99 |
all of their processors with Zen 4, but as I said, that platform is still |
100 |
expensive. |
101 |
|
102 |
> I got a Nvidia GeForce GTX 650 that drives both my monitor and my TVs |
103 |
> through a splitter and it does just fine. |
104 |
|
105 |
How cute. This should be about twice as fast as the integrated graphics in |
106 |
my 8-year-old i5. So you’ll be fine with *any* integrated graphics (which |
107 |
will also cut down on idle consuption, compared with a dGPU). |
108 |
|
109 |
> This is some good info tho. Maybe someone who built a rig recently can |
110 |
> chime in on costs, US dollar would be nice. ;-) |
111 |
|
112 |
As mentioned, DDR5 is still expensive. With DDR4 platforms getting older, |
113 |
their prices are going down. The Ryzen 5 5600G is an excellent and efficient |
114 |
processor (it’s basically a laptop chip in a desktop socket) and currently |
115 |
can be had for around 125 € (including taxes of course, not sure about US |
116 |
prices). It has over twice the single- and thrice the multi-core performance |
117 |
of your FX chip. Its graphics are way overkill for you, but you never know. |
118 |
;-) |
119 |
If you want to keep yout GPU, there’s also the Ryzen 5 5500, it has no |
120 |
graphics and is only minutely slower than the 5600G, but can be had for less |
121 |
than 100 €. |
122 |
|
123 |
|
124 |
So, in summary (talking German consumer prices, meaning all taxes included, |
125 |
but I think you can assume very similar $ pricse) for a not too fancy¹ system: |
126 |
|
127 |
Processor 120 € (or up top 150 € for a current i3/i5) |
128 |
RAM 60 € 32 GB DDR4 (cheap RAM, low latency costs more, but has no real use |
129 |
for your use case) |
130 |
Board 100..120 € depending on I/O needs and quality. |
131 |
|
132 |
Going DDR5 means an increase in budget by at least 100 € for a 32 GB system. |
133 |
|
134 |
|
135 |
¹ As far as I can see, compiling packages is the most taxing thing you do, |
136 |
which is why I don’t see you needing a big-rig processor. (Though I |
137 |
understand the nice feeling you get from having one.) |
138 |
|
139 |
-- |
140 |
Grüße | Greetings | Salut | Qapla’ |
141 |
Please do not share anything from, with or about me on any social network. |
142 |
|
143 |
“Meow” <SPLAT!> “Woof” <SPLAT!> Jeez, it’s really raining today! |