1 |
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 10:18 AM, Евгений Пермяков <permeakra@×××××.com> wrote: |
2 |
> On 07/26/2012 05:50 PM, Michael Mol wrote: |
3 |
>> |
4 |
>> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Евгений Пермяков <permeakra@×××××.com> |
5 |
>> wrote: |
6 |
>>> |
7 |
>>> On 07/26/2012 12:05 AM, Philip Webb wrote: |
8 |
>>>> |
9 |
>>>> I've listed what's available at the local store, |
10 |
>>>> which I trust to stock reliable items, tho' I wouldn't ask their advice. |
11 |
>>>> |
12 |
>>>> All the AMD's are 32 nm , while the Intel recommended by one commenter |
13 |
>>>> -- Core i5-3570 4-Core Socket LGA1155, 3.4 Ghz, 6MB L3 Cache, 22 nm -- |
14 |
>>>> is 22 nm : it costs CAD 230 & they have 3 in stock, |
15 |
>>>> which suggests demand, but not the most popular ( 9 in stock). |
16 |
>>>> |
17 |
>>>> Isn't 22 nm going to be faster than 32 nm ? |
18 |
>>>> |
19 |
>>>> In the same price range, AMD offers Bulldozer X8 FX-8150 (125W) |
20 |
>>>> 8-Core Socket AM3+, 3.6 GHz, 8Mb Cache, 32 nm ( CAD 220 , 2 in |
21 |
>>>> stock). |
22 |
>>>> |
23 |
>>>> How do you compare cores vs nm ? |
24 |
>>>> How far is cache size important ( 6 vs 8 MB )? |
25 |
>>>> |
26 |
>>>> When I built my current machine 2007, the CPU cost CAD 213 , |
27 |
>>>> so both look as if they're in the right ballpark. |
28 |
>>>> |
29 |
>>> If you're building new, performance-oriented box, you should take latest |
30 |
>>> intel with AVX because of AVX. As I recall, recent gcc has support for |
31 |
>>> avx, |
32 |
>>> so some performance gain may be achieved. |
33 |
>>> If you want home box, you may be interested in AMD A8 and similar chips, |
34 |
>>> as |
35 |
>>> they are reasonably fast and very chip |
36 |
>> |
37 |
>> AMD parts have had AVX since the Bulldozer core release in Q3 2011. |
38 |
> |
39 |
> Are they already available in reasonable numbers on market? |
40 |
|
41 |
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+FX-8120+Eight-Core |
42 |
|
43 |
At $150, fitting into existing Socket AM3+ boards, that looks like the |
44 |
best part for my money right now. |
45 |
|
46 |
>>> In any case, I'd put most of my money in 2-4 big 3Tb HDD's for media and |
47 |
>>> 8+ |
48 |
>>> Gb fast memory, as modern browsers eat memory like crazies and CPU is |
49 |
>>> usually fast enough. Decoding HDTV mkv's should occur on gpu block in any |
50 |
>>> case, so general performance for most uses is irrelevant, as it was fast |
51 |
>>> enough four yesrs earlier. Simply check, that you can offload HDTV |
52 |
>>> decoding |
53 |
>>> to GPU in your config. |
54 |
>> |
55 |
>> Here, you're talking about either VDPAU or VAAAPI support. VDPAU is |
56 |
>> only offered by nVidia cards, and even then you need to run the |
57 |
>> proprietary driver. VAAPI is supported by Intel graphics and ATI's |
58 |
>> proprietary driver. |
59 |
> |
60 |
> I do not see any problems with this. A blob in system is not best practice, |
61 |
> of course, but it does not need any configuration and is not a performance |
62 |
> bottle-neck, so there is no reason to care. |
63 |
|
64 |
I only bring it up because some people do care. I'm running fglrx at |
65 |
home right now. When I run nVdia, I run the nVidia drivers. In part |
66 |
because I like accelerated video decoding (which a Geforce 210 does |
67 |
wonderfully), in part because the nv, nouveau and radeon drivers |
68 |
historically worked very poorly for me in 2D performance when faced |
69 |
with multiple 1080p displays. They're always getting better, of |
70 |
course. |
71 |
|
72 |
> |
73 |
> I personally would prefer AMD A8 if I can offload decoding to GPU unit there |
74 |
> (not sure if I can, so won't change my box till next summer), but discrete |
75 |
> video card will not be the most costly part in good non-gaming box, hard |
76 |
> drives will, so again, what the matter? |
77 |
|
78 |
Computer usage breaks down into more than gaming and non-gaming. My |
79 |
"non-gaming" boxes at home tend to have their CPU, RAM or NICs as |
80 |
their most expensive components, because that's where I need them to |
81 |
perform better. |
82 |
|
83 |
|
84 |
-- |
85 |
:wq |