Re: [gentoo-user]Computer build, was PCIe x1 or PCIe x4 SATA controller card

[Dale]

Frank Steinmetzger wrote:
> 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.)
>


This is all good info.  I went to Tom's Hardware and found their list by
computing power.  I try to find a generic power rating since what I use
my rig for is more generic.  No need looking at a chart for gaming. 
;-)  Anyway, I was looking at a somewhat costly Ryzen 7 5800x3d or a
Ryzen 7 7700.  I need to look at the details because I like having my
own video card.  That way I can use Nvidia but switch to something else
if the need should arise.  Plus, if the video stops working, replace
card instead of whole mobo.  I also have to have two outputs.  One for
desktop, one for TV.  Based on your info tho, I could go down more in
price and still have a much better CPU than the current one.

One other thing, the mobos I keep finding have few PCIe slots.  Some
have 2 maybe 3.  That's getting to be to few for me.  I have a ethernet
card, SATA expansion card plus a couple other things in mine that I
use.  Then my next thing, a case.  The cases I find have a ton of
lights, which I hate, but as far as layout and such, they suck.  Some
cost a arm and leg and they are worthless to me.  I found one the other
day that is fairly plain, holds 8 or 10 hard drives and has reasonably
good cooling.  I'm hoping I can get it.  I don't think even Cooler
Master makes a case like what I got anymore.  I need more drive space
but I love the cooling of my current case.  The fans don't spin very
fast but they move a LOT of air, quietly. 

Usually I look forward to building a new rig.  Trying to find things I
like takes the fun out of it.  I'll get there tho.  Eventually. 

Thanks for all the info.  It helps me to know if I build a new rig, I
will see a benefit speed wise.  I want to get something out of it.  lol

Dale

:-)  :-)