Making Sense of CPU and GPU Model Numbers? 555
b4dc0d3r writes "How do you make sense of the various model numbers or naming schemes for CPUs, graphics cards, and the related chipsets? All I want is something that will run Oblivion and output full 1080 video to a TV. Last time I built my own computer I just went to Pricewatch, made a few easy choices, and everything came to my door. Do I really have to research the differences among Core i5, Core 2 Duo, Pentium 4, Pentium D, Sempron, Athlon, Phenom ...? And that's just the processor. Is there a reference somewhere? In short, how do you buy a computer these days?"
Set a budget (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Set a budget (Score:5, Interesting)
I second.
Heck, one can get decent GPU for $100-150, meaning that by going cheaper with the rest of components, one can also get himself a decent gaming machine for about $400-600.
Now I can't even name a single PC component which is a must have and can't be found new for less than $100.
Operating system (Score:2)
Now I can't even name a single PC component which is a must have and can't be found new for less than $100.
How about a Windows license so that apps and games that don't work in Wine still work?
Re: (Score:2)
How about a Windows license so that apps and games that don't work in Wine still work?
It isn't quite $100, and I'm not sure about the restrictions this time, but: Windows 7 Home Premium [newegg.com] is $104.
Re:Set a budget (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
http://backoffice.ajb.com.au//images/news/cpu-table-2010.jpg
if you know you want a feature for sure (dx11 for gpu, or vt for cpu, or anything) just filter parts by that feature and you still have their performance stated not only by names but mostly by prices
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Please refer to this link http://paulisageek.com/compare/cpu/ [paulisageek.com] if you want to see absolute CPU performance ranked by CPU and a ratio between cost and performance. Yes you do need to educate yourself some, but let's be honest - any modern CPU works great unless you want to do dual head 24" monitors running crysis. I would recommend you check out Tom's Hardware's guides to building balanced machines, and their guides to building $600/$1200/$1800 gaming machines. They explain their rationale for picking every
Finding guides to Build Your Own (Score:3, Informative)
The BYO guide is a bit out of date now, but it'll help you get up to speed on processor architecture, motherboard chipsets, etc. From there of course ars technica, tom's hell even just browsing newegg's offerings will get you the rest of the way there.
Good luck.
Re: (Score:2)
But if you want hardward virtualisation, either buy AMD, or check the Intel model numbers very carefully.
Only 2 components worth researching... (Score:5, Informative)
Motherboard and PSU. Don't try to save money on these two by buying cheaper.
Everything else is determined only by how much money you have to spend.
Also, everything else can be upgraded/replaced without having to replace other components.
Pay close attention to PSUs 12V amperage - don't buy cheap Chinese ones that have hundreds of theoretical Watts but give only about 20 Amps on 12V.
12V is for all of your coolers, hard-drives (including external ones), optical drives and anything else you attach to it that has a motor or movable parts.
Buy ULTRA or Corsair (if you can't afford a ULTRA).
With motherboards, pay extra for the Deluxe or Pro model - however they call it.
Compare it to the "regular" version of the motherboard.
If it looks almost the same with maybe another PCI or USB slot added - the pricier one is the one that actually works as intended/advertised.
The cheaper "regular" model probably couldn't quite cut it, so it got downgraded from the original intended specs.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
>>Buy ULTRA or Corsair (if you can't afford a ULTRA).
I had two ULTRA's blow up on me the first time they powered on. No thanks, won't be buying from them again.
I've had good experience with Thermaltake and Antec PSUs.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Dragon Age: Origins?
2006 called and wants its game back.
Its extremely simple (Score:5, Insightful)
Even if you know nothing about computers you go look at benchmarks at anandtech and find the one with the biggest bar on the graph that you can reasonably afford.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The problem is humans are not good at coping with
Re:Its extremely simple (Score:5, Interesting)
The problem is humans are not good at coping with decissions that involve more than three different factors. So in the end the best is to boil it down to the three things that are most important to you and rate the choices on those items. Or you can just ask for a fast one.
This is very true. First think about what's really important to you. Is it excessive amounts of raw power? Is it cost? Is it noise? (It was for me.) Is it low power usage? How important is compatibility with future components really? (Most likely you'll just buy a completely new PC again, right?)
What are you going to use it for? Web + mail? Programming? Some gaming? Heavy, state-of-the-art 3D gaming?
Most likely, you'll want a healthy balance of these things. People who assemble PCs for a living will probably know what you want, because they've sold the same PC to thousands of others already. If you have unusual wishes (noise is too often ignored IMO), then it's wise to do some research into that specific area.
Re: (Score:2)
But not terribly GPU heavy by current standards. Oblivion was a very heavy game when it came out, but nowadays any $100 GPU should be able to display it at the highest detail without any problems whatsoever.
The question is: what kind of games will he want to play after he finishes Oblivion? Will it be high-end shooters like Crysis, or will it be CRPGs which tend to be quite a bit milder with their graphics requirements?
Re:Its extremely simple (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is that this doesn't work when you want to find out if it is worth to upgrade or not, as benchmarks always only compare the newest stuff against the other newest stuff, not against your years old hardware at home. Even worse is the special OEM hardware that you sometimes get (Geforce 7600LE for example), as that doesn't show up in benchmarks at all. And on top of that there are of course also compatibility issues, like will this graphics card work with my old power supply and such.
Long story short: I have basically given, its to much trouble to search for updates, so instead I just run what I have till it breaks.
Re: (Score:2)
If your stuff is that old then it's usually pointless to compare it to new stuff because they wouldn't even be meaningfully graphable at the same scales.
Re: (Score:2)
GMA: Graphics My @$$ (Score:2)
if performance is the issue and your current machine is at least 4 years old, then the odds are you have to be pretty lucky to buy something that is less powerful than your current machine?
I thought a 4-year-old Radeon outperformed an Intel GMA.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The problem isn't buying something that is slower, but buying something that is noticeably faster. I am not going to invest $100 when all I get is a little bit more detail in the graphics, but I might care about investing $100 if I could play all the games I am interested in at high details with full resolution.
On top of that my current graphic card is passively cooled and I have a PCIe TV card sitting right next to it, which I would have to throw away when I want to insert an active cooled card that takes
Online benchmarks (Score:2, Informative)
graphics cards aren't that difficult (Score:2)
A decent graphics card costs about 70-140$ having dual DVI. Models follow up; mostly even with backwards-compatibility.
Just select one of the latest high-end (known brands like Radion) graphics adapters and you'll be set for the next few years.
Ars technica (Score:5, Informative)
Try the Ars technica system guide:
http://arstechnica.com/hardware/guides/2009/10/ars-system-guide-october-2009-edition.ars
Tom's Hardware (Score:5, Informative)
Ditto for CPUs: Best Gaming CPUs For The Money [tomshardware.com]
Two comprehensive lists (Score:5, Informative)
And If You Can Narrow It Down to Two ... (Score:2)
Quite Easy (Score:2)
It's quite easy, select your brand (intel/AMD or different) and choose according how hard you'll need your raw cpupower. Don't take your selection lightly; because you'll have a second vacuum cleaner in the house (core 2 duo vs dual core). Gamer machines/video and audio production stations need more raw cpupower than a PC being used for wordprocessing and Internet.
Most CPU models are categorized by date of production. The best advice I can give you when buying a system is to not buy the newest technology fo
Re: (Score:2)
It's quite easy, select your brand (intel/AMD or different) and choose according how hard you'll need your raw cpupower. Don't take your selection lightly; because you'll have a second vacuum cleaner in the house (core 2 duo vs dual core). Gamer machines/video and audio production stations need more raw cpupower than a PC being used for wordprocessing and Internet.
True, but at the same time, word processing and internet requires very little power nowadays. PCs could do that 15 years ago. Your phone has enough power to do all of that (it just lacks a decent interface). Heavy 3D gaming requires a lot more power, but still nowhere near as much as some people would make you believe. A single $100-$150 graphics card and a regular above-average dual core CPU is probably more than enough for most games.
People also tell a lot of bullshit about the power requirements for PCs.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Most PCs rarely use more than 200W. I'm using a 380W power supply, and it's more than enough.
Seconded. I have a rig that was fairly nice several years ago, with a 9800GT, core2 duo, 2 hard drives, and a mobo with onboard wireless. I was sure that it would need a 550 watt PSU, but i recently got a wattmeter and the PC only pulls ~160 watts while browsing the web. Fire up a benchmark program (futuremark) and it shoots up to an astonishing 230 watts.
Theres lots of misinformation out there when it comes to PSUs (although 550 watt isnt bad in this case, as it means energy efficiency is fairly good
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It is still advisable to get a high-end PSU with more power than you actually need since they are manufactured better.
The PSU is the unit to fail most often in my experience (and most spectacularly). I don't buy cheap ones anymore.
It's not 800W PSUs that are manufactured better, it's PSUs from quality brands that are manufactured better. Even a high-specced PSU can fail if it's made out of crap.
Another reason not to get an oversized PSU is energy usage. A PSU generally runs at peak efficiency at 50%. So if you have a machine drawing 150W, it will draw more power from the socket if it has an 800W PSU than if it has a 300W PSU. (And if the 800W PSU is so badly manufactured that it's really only a 500W PSU, don't count on that improving
techreport System Guide (Score:5, Informative)
I usually find the advice from tech report's periodical System Guide to be very useful and relevant.
Their latest report [techreport.com] came out a couple of weeks ago. They focus on a range of options at various price points and requirements.
sorry to attempt to answer your question and not shill Apple.
Buy a new Mac every 3 years (Score:2, Insightful)
> how do you buy a computer these days?
Every 3 years, just before the warranty expires, I sell my current Mac, get half of what I paid for it (outrageous resale value!) and then I buy the updated version of that same Mac at the Apple Store. 3 years later I do that again. They're always smaller and faster and more rugged.
I know Macs have model numbers and I know they have CPU's which also have model numbers. I don't know any of those numbers.
The numbers I am concerned with all have to do with my work, whi
Re: (Score:2)
"Mine's 'Grape'!" [penny-arcade.com]
Re:Buy a new Mac every 3 years (Score:5, Informative)
I know Macs have model numbers and I know they have CPU's which also have model numbers. I don't know any of those numbers.
You can hand in your five-digit Slashdot ID now.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It is quite true that they hold their resell value: the G5 towers are still trading hands for the cost of a new midrange PC...which is madness, since they are completely obsolete, and many models were prone to problems with their liquid cooling.
I've owned Macs since my first Quadra, but this year I'm ditching them for a PC. I feel that Apple is no longer committed to making good computers...they want to make consumer toys. The brand has eclipsed the product.
IF you take a closer look at the little model numb
For whoever tagged this "notanerd"/"doesntbelong" (Score:5, Insightful)
Remember that this shit completely changes every few years. I used to build PCs for myself and my school as a kid (386/486), then couldn't affort to for a few years, then had to start reading PC magazines when it finally came time to afford a new PC (Pentium 2/AMD equiv). Fast-forward a few years to my next major upgrade, and I'm reading Wikipedia instead of the mags, but I'm still pig-ignorant of the latest tech until I've figured out whether AGP is still current (nope) and which of DDR2/3 will be needed, how many cores are worthwhile, etc etc etc.
Maybe it's easier for those who do hardware support or deal with servers (I mostly deal with routers/switches/firewalls), but I get completely left behind if I ignore the PC components market for more than a few months.
Re: (Score:2)
besides, it's rude not to help a fellow time traveler nerd who just emerged from the Past and looks to establish a small base in our times.
Re:For whoever tagged this "notanerd"/"doesntbelon (Score:4, Informative)
And as the parent says, that was a long enough wait to have lost touch with motherboard, memory and graphics card technology.
Re: (Score:2)
But don't you at least follow the news a little? When new stuff (CPUs, graphics cards and so on) comes out there's generally a story here on slashdot with links to benchmarks. It's not difficult or time consuming to read a couple articles a month.
Re: (Score:2)
Same here. Between 2005 and 2009 I had no need to build a new PC (or even mess about with the innards of recently built boxes), and had to spend a couple of evenings familiarising myself with all the new acronyms and what they meant. AGP, IDE: all but gone. Yet more ram types. Mysterious new slots, with good old PCI going the way of ISA (relegated to a couple of token slots at the bottom). So many "cores" to think about. Gigs of RAM cheap as chips. Etc. etc. It was almost like being a time-traveller who's
Re: (Score:2)
I have the same experience - in fact I haven't bough a single desktop PC (as a whole) in 15 years - and I second this.
Before you start researching ask yourself this:
"Am I going to be playing 3D games on my PC?"
- If "Yes", then the price tag on your PC will make it worth the while to do a little research instead of just paying up for the best of the best. Go to the usual hardware review websites (such as tomshardware, anandtech) and start investigating CPU and Graphics Cards choices (typically most other dec
Just buy a complete machine (Score:5, Informative)
Just find a reputable computer seller and order a machine that fits your budget. It'll probably run whatever you need it to run. If Oblivion is the heaviest game you're going to run, you can be done for about $500 probably.
If you don't want the same boring standard machine that everybody else has, then you'll have to do some research. I did that 2 years ago. My main resource was Silent PC Review [silentpcreview.com] because I was tired of my old jet-engine-soundalike. AnandTech [anandtech.com] is also a good source, as is Tweakers [tweakers.net], if you happen to be Dutch. Lots of articles on those sites will refer to Tom's Hardware, which does benchmark graphs, but really, just get what everybody's recommending.
Two years ago, I went with:
All of this cost me about EUR 1000. Very happy with it. Dead quiet, too. Mind you, this is from 2 years ago. There's probably better, cheaper, quieter, faster stuff around now, but I'm not keeping up.
As for the dual core/quad core stuff: how many heavy CPU-using applications will you be running at the same time? Will your heaviest applications be able to make efficient use of multiple cores? If you don't know, go with dual core. One for the main app, one for everything else. No need to have to extra cores that are only idling all the time.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
A quad-core isn't necessarily more future-proof than a dual-core. A quad-core is only really better than a dual core when your most CPU-intensive application is multithreaded. Although chances are that the future will bring us a lot more multithreaded applications.
For servers it's easier. There, more cores is practically always going to be better.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Also stay away from their fans. That case is fitted with a "Tricool" fan. Called "tricool" because it got three settings: Hairdryer, Vacuum-cleaner and Wind-tunnel.
Could be. I replaced it with (probably) a Nexus Real Silent D12SL-12, which is pretty quiet yet not expensive.
Virtualization (Score:5, Interesting)
Hardware virtualization (Score:5, Informative)
Make sure that the CPU you buy supports hardware virtualization [wikipedia.org], for running virtual machines. Every computer enthusiast should want to run virtual machines!
I think all current AMD CPUs support hardware virtualization. But Intel in their infinite market segmentation wisdom has decided to randomly disable hardware virtualization on various CPUs in their lineup, so look before you buy. The funny thing is that very few computer salesmen know for which CPUs hardware virtualization is enabled, so the only result of Intel's market segmentation is confusion and dissatisfied customers.
Re:Hardware virtualization (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, Intel has gone and done something even more stupid than that: They even disable the virtualization extensions within processors of the same model number! Within a model, there may be multiple sspec numbers. Some sspecs may support virtualization and some may not. I don't have a specific example at hand, but I have seen it when using the Intel sspec finder tool on their website.
So you not only need to understand which models "may" support virtualization, you also have to qualify it with looking up the model's sspec. Utter stupidity on the part of Intel for that.
Re:Hardware virtualization (Score:4, Interesting)
Processor that faild virtualisation instruction are simply market with virtualisation disabled. Would you rather have them to trash all but perfect cpu, raise price and pollute more? If someone dont need virtualisation then this cheaper "defective" cpu will be good enough for his need. Everyone win.
No, the buyer looses because s/he can't reasonably know what the hell it is s/he is buying.
You want to remarket defective chips that can't support virtualisation. Fine. Give them a different name, so a reasonably intelligent and informed buyer can make an informed decision without being forced to research all the minutia of Intel product sub-codes.
As it is, this is deceptive market, and stupid of Intel. Wrapping it in a green blanket and calling it eco-friendly doesn't change this. And yes, if the choice is a binary one between having to ferret out if the chip I'm buying is defective and won't support virutalisation, or filling the landfill with the things, then please, fill up the damn landfill.
Better yet, take the third path: remarket the things, but be honest and label them clearly so people don't end up buying the wrong thing. We shouldn't all have to be experts in every technical detail of Intel chips to be sure we're getting the product we want, any more than we should all have to be experts in aviation in order to board an aircraft and know we'll reach our destination.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
My Experience (Score:4, Interesting)
I recently built my own computer for similar purposes. I needed a box that would download things all day and output via HDMI to my TV, but I placed an extra constraint on my system: Linux compatibility, or at least a reasonable degree of compatibility. So, I researched available parts, using price as the first method of siphoning all the dreck. I live in China, so, for example, the processor's price ranged from a few hundred yuan (about 50 bucks) to about four thousand yuan (closer to $500). I decided not to pay more than 400 yuan for my processor, and right there, I cut out about 90% of the processors I had to research. I decided from then that I wanted a 64-bit processor and I would only look at the top 3 FSB's out of those processors, and I chose Intel because my previous experiences with Linux and AMD procs was somewhat dubious. Everything else kind of fell into place after simply choosing the proc, save for the GPU, which I chose for it's Native HDMI port, high-ish (1GB) dedicated memory and driver support in Linux. So that part was even easier.
Your situation seems a lot simpler than mine though, since you only have two constraints: Oblivion (don't know what it is) and 1080 video to a TV. Basically, what you need is any computer matching the requirements for playing Oblivion (I would go a little beyond recommended specs for running it) and with a NATIVE HDMI port. If you spend time worrying about complex names for different series of nanometer sized pieces of wire hypersolderized together, you will drown in the hopelessness that is marketing and advertizing and general rhetorical BS. Find out what specs you need to do what you want, if you're using Linux then check for compatibility issues in the forums of the distro you use or plan on using, and what you need to buy should pretty much be spelled out for you in pretty simple choices. If you're using Windows, you have a lot less to worry about since you don't really have control over those sorts of things, just take whatever has an HDMI port and enough RAM and cycles per second to run your game.
AMD's don't confuse (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:AMD's don't confuse (Score:4, Informative)
I hate to say it (being an AMD fan) but the Athlon part numbers are confusing if you don't know what you're looking at. The older K8 family processors go as "Athlon 64 x2" with a 4 digit part number. The newer K10 family, derived from the higher performance Phenoms, go by "Athlon II x2" with three digit part numbers.
They have become more consistent recently; but, if you haven't been following along you might confuse the difference between 3 and 4 digit part numbers. I have seen numerous examples where the vendor will leave the "64" or "II" out of the description and simply call it a "2.8GHz Athlon", for example, so it's not immediately obvious it's a K8 or a K10
Oblivion has been out for a while (Score:2)
Oblivion has been out for a while. my game box is build out of friends left overs. the graphics card is a ati hd 3870. not a sloucher, but rather out dated. btw, i have two but oblivion doesn't benefit from crossfire.
anyway most new cards will crunch it just fine.
how do you buy a computer these days? (Score:3, Insightful)
"how do you buy a computer these days?"
- Set myself a minimum requirement (run this app, boot up in this amount of time, perform so-many I/O operations per second, etc.)
- Look at the specifications available from a range of my usual suppliers. Don't bother to look elsewhere - if you can't buy it, it doesn't exist. If you have to hunt for it, it'll be rare, expensive, not as well supported and probably far too specialist for your needs.
- Narrow things down by a sensible budget.
- Compare the specifications there against each other and, by looking them up on the net if necessary, find out which one is more suitable and best value-for-money for your needs (Is an Atom faster than whatever is in the other machine? Can my game take advantage of a second core?).
Basically, look at the "recommended" spec on those games you want to play, then go on about 10-12 large websites that sell computers to the market you're in (e.g. gaming) and see what they offer. The chances of being able to build anything comparable for the same / lower price are minimal - those days have gone and you're more likely to balls things up if you don't know what processor socket or PSU you need to run things properly.
Seriously, how hard is it? Ignore ALL of the marketing... see what you can afford, see what you need, see where they match (if at all), then do your research on those 2-3 models of machine (including their major components) that are good for you instead of trying to research every component that's currently available in every model that ever existed. I've managed to sort through a hundred models of PC to get to three in a few minutes, and then I just researched those three and actually spent nearly five times as long doing that last bit of thorough research properly.
If you want to know, I do this for a living for mainstream businesses / schools and that means everything from high-end CAD-stations to netbooks. It's *still* cheaper to buy the right thing from a large retailer's website than it is to mess about trying to cobble things together, whether you're buying one or hundreds. I have no idea what "name" processor is in 90% of the desktops I've bought... I can barely remember if they were Intel or AMD. It really doesn't matter at all what the codename is, I have no idea what the latest interfaces, cache sizes, socket-sizes, memory technology etc. even are. I just look it up when I have already narrowed things down to models with those components and make a decision based on what I can easily buy, how much I want to spend and what I *need* the computer to have / do.
You don't *need* to know all that rubbish, it's all just marketing anyway. What you need to do is see what's available and then check how well it's likely to run your games (e.g. benchmarks on similar games for the individual components, whether the processor is multi-core or not and whether the game can benefit). Let the assembly guys at a large company worry about whether the sockets are compatible, whether the memory timings are right, whether the PSU is powerful enough etc. If they mess it up, it costs them money. If you mess it up because you built it yourself or deviated from their normal bundles, it costs you money.
And no, you do *not* end up paying a premium to do things this way. You save money even before the things arrive on your doorstep due to the wonders of bulk-buying (Ever wonder *why* those bundle deals are so cheap? Mass purchasing by ordinary businesses, usually, if you ignore the holiday seasons), let alone the savings in not having to worry about destroying a card or PSU because you ordered a standard bundle and a "Super Duper Turbo Hyper Fighting" graphics card and put them together yourself because you heard it gets 1fps better on some random website.
Set yourself a specification (e.g. dual-core or not, speed in GHz, whether you are worried about the power it saps, X amount of RAM, etc.). Set yourself a budget. Find out how much stuff matches those. If it's a lot, set yourself a st
Tom's Hardware BestConfigs (Score:2)
All I want is something that will run Oblivion and output full 1080 video to a TV.
They do the legwork already. Pick a budget [tomshardware.co.uk]
how do you buy a computer these days? (Score:2, Insightful)
By informing yourself. Use search engines, find reviews, read hardware sites. The more time you invest on improving your awareness, the better your system will be for the money and the better use you'll make out of it.
More GPU bound than CPU bound nowadays (Score:3, Informative)
Any CPU with more than 2 cores, should be able to handle most of what you want... I've been testing a dual core Atom 330 at work, and it's actually easy to forget it's not a "real" CPU (unless some FPU-intensive screensaver comes on).
For mid-to-low-end systems, GPUs are really the discriminator ... what makes a difference with running games at decent resolutions and playing back video. The model numbers are nuts, but I tend to cross-reference a few places:
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/ [videocardbenchmark.net] - a good comprehensive list that boils down and ranks just about every card out there into a single (artificial) benchmark number.
Wikipedia also has surprisingly good coverage of every family of chip, and what products are based off of them and tables of supported features - crucial for system building. So I use it primarily to figure out things like: which nVidia Geforce is equivalent to which Quadro FX branded model, what is the fastest memory my "Barton" core Athlon would support, what the hell is the difference between a 2.2Ghz "Williamette" vs. a 2.2Ghz "Prescott", etc.
I've also taken a liking to checking with http://www.phoronix.com/ [phoronix.com] for Linux benchmarks and support for new hardware features and drivers... such as nVidia vs. ATi vs. Intel, which distribution has better VPDAU or audio support, etc.
And definitely once in a while read up on http://anandtech.com/ [anandtech.com] and http://tomshardware.com/ [tomshardware.com] if it's been a while and you need a comprehensive explanation of new tech, such as SSDs or long-term price vs. performance investment strategies... those can really help you plan ahead (Intel & nVidia's tick-tock release cycle, finding the best value, and just generally knowing which buzzwords are important and which are just marketing rubbish.
These helped me (Score:5, Informative)
I have found these resources indispensable in figuring out how modern CPUs and GPUs compare to each other:
... primarily because these tables are dynamic: find the part you're currently using (or want to use as your baseline for comparison) in the table, click on it, and then all the other parts in the table are immediately color-coded as to how much of a step forwards or backwards they are from that part, based on a normalized performance rating.
(It's pathetic that the marketing departments at the companies that make these things are so incompetent that we need tools like these to sort out what exactly they're selling us, but until they get on the ball I'm glad these tools exist.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:It can be confusing... (Score:5, Insightful)
Clear as mud. Thanks for your help!
Re:It can be confusing... (Score:5, Insightful)
A Core i5 750 costs more than any current AMD desktop processor, so that makes no sense. I can get a quad-core Athlon II for half the price of an i5 750. Sure, it's slower, but it's not slow. Also, it drops straight into my old AM2 motherboard (with a quick BIOS upgrade). Try doing that with Intel.
Re: (Score:2, Redundant)
Also, it drops straight into my old AM2 motherboard (with a quick BIOS upgrade). Try doing that with Intel.
Thanks for the advice, you turd. Now my computer's on fire. Literally!
Re:It can be confusing... (Score:5, Insightful)
The Core i5-750 is only $200. If you're not willing to spend $200 on your CPU, you have no business building a PC instead of buying one.
$200 is too much for a CPU. Unless you're eager to waste money to get more power than you can possibly use, $100 gets you everything you need.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It can be confusing... (Score:5, Insightful)
But if you're looking at the long term, wouldn't it make even more sense to buy a processor at the optimal price point rather than a high-end one? In a couple of months, there'll be cheaper processors that are just as fast as the i7-860.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Doesn't that mean you're basically buying a new PC every year?
Re:It can be confusing... (Score:5, Funny)
If you're playing hot new games, a hot CPU is handy. So is a hot video card.
Not true. You need a better cooler.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
There's a point where $20 can get you quite a bit more punch, and then there's a point where you need to pay $100 more to get a significant boost. I like my CPUs (and GPUs) between those points: at the top of the mid-range or the bottom of the high-end.
But you're right. The vast majority of people don't even need that.
Re:It can be confusing... (Score:5, Informative)
Wow, what nonsense!
I personally build almost all my family's and my company's PC's, from simple $300 desktops to $5000 servers and the only cases where I have bought pre-built (hence the "almost all") were towards the latter ($5k) category. I find it much more important to built a cheap pc yourself, because you control exactly where the limited budget goes and you end up with a much better pc for your intended use for the money.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Huh? I don't get it. I did not mention laptops, is there some reasoning you have that puts $5k laptops within the $300 desktop $5k server space that I talked about?
In case I was not clear, no, I do not build laptops, nor would I recommend it and it is a rather OT issue.
Re:It can be confusing... (Score:5, Insightful)
The Core i5-750 is only $200. If you're not willing to spend $200 on your CPU, you have no business building a PC instead of buying one.
B.S.
What the point of wasting $200 on CPU when you can get for >$100 a CPU which performs in real world >5-10% slower?? And most applications (even games) are pretty happy even with half/quarter of the performance???
I'm not per se against the Intel CPUs. Some of their CPUs are cheaper and faster than the AMD ones. But for whatever reason, at least in Europe, the MBs for Intel CPUs are on average 10-25% more expensive than those for AMD CPUs. And upgrade-ability of the AMD systems is magnitudes better: one can get cheap CPU today and upgrade it few years later.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The i3 530 is $125 at NewEgg, while the Athlon II X2 245 is $61 for maybe 2/3 the performance. Whether that's worth it to you depends on what you're doing and whether you're on a budget, obviously, but there's very little that the cheaper chip won't handle easily.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Radeon 4790? Where do you suggest he finds that?
I assume you mean Radeon 4890, which is at around $200 although at limited availability.
Still, I would suggest he gets the cheaper but more future-proof Radeon 5770. He might want to run DX11 in the future, or eyefinity.
Actually, if he really means Oblivion-level games only, and does not expect to start playing any newer stuff, even the 5770 is overkill and he should go for the $80 Radeon 5670 I see on NewEgg right now, or lower still...
Next on, your answer su
Think about the motherboard (Score:5, Insightful)
AMD capable motherboards tend to be a lot cheaper, that can easily save you enough money on a highly capable gaming system to replace the HD with an SSD, and that will have far more influence on game performance then the Intel chip will. In gaming, AMD performs a lot better. Always make sure to read the entire review of a CPU for the stats that are relevant to you. For instance, if you once in a blue moon use Office and never use a database on your PC, what do you care about how fast/slow your CPU is at them?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Why would you get a 920 and not overclock it? I run mine at 3.6GHz with ease, no voltage adjustments, no special cooling arrangements.
Re:It can be confusing... (Score:4, Informative)
The only Intel chips that are competitive with AMD's on this metric are the Q8300, the i5-750, and the Q8400.. in that order, with only the Q8300 ranking better than ANY of the AMD chips on this value metric.
Here is the actual list I made up. Score is the PassMark score, the price is the NewEgg price, and the calculated value is score/price. Higher is thus better.
The Intel linup:
Core2 Quad Q8200, score = 3255, price = $184, value = 17.69
Core2 Quad Q8300, score = 3570, price = $150, value = 23.80
Core2 Quad Q8400, score = 3668, price = $170, value = 21.58
Core2 Quad Q9400, score = 3756, price = $190, value = 19.77
Core2 Quad Q9505, score = 4016, price = $240, value = 16.73
Core2 Quad Q9550, score = 4291, price = $260, value = 16.50
Core2 Quad Q9650, score = 4559, price = $330, value = 13.82
Core i5-750, score = 4219, price = $195, value = 21.64
Core i7-860, score = 5570, price = $280, value = 19.89
Core i7-870, score = 5871, price = $540, value = 10.87
Core i7-920, score = 5590, price = $289, value = 19.34
Core i7-950, score = 6309, price = $570, value = 11.07
Core i7-960, score = 6727, price = $590, value = 11.40
Core i7-975, score = 7101, price = $970, value = 7.32
The AMD lineup:
Phenom II x4 940 "Black", score = 3645, price = $156, value = 23.37
Phenom II x4 945 "Black", score = 3500, price = $150, value = 23.33
Phenom II x4 955 "Black", score = 3876, price = $160, value = 24.23
Phenom II x4 965 "Black", score = 4253, price = $180, value = 23.63
If you dont need the horsepower, then the Q8300 is the best at $150. The i5-750 makes a strong showing ay $195, but it is NOT a better processor for the money than AMD's Phenom II x4 965, which is both cheaper at $180 and scores better.
Note that these are also the "Black" edition AMD's which have unlocked multipliers, so they are also an overclockers dream if thats the route you might want to take.
Re:It can be confusing... (Score:4, Interesting)
As part of some Vista capable lawsuit a while back, it was found that NVIDIA drivers caused the most BSODs. Even if you scaled ATI's marketshare at the time (I forget the month, but I looked it up- the Steam Hardware survey is as reasonable of a guess as you're going to get) to make the crash percentages ceteris paribus, NVIDIA drivers still crashed on Vista 50% more.
On Windows 7, I haven't had any driver related issues...
Re: (Score:2)
I can attest to this. I ran NVidia cards for years and they ran every game I threw at them, if not always perfectly. Then I switched to an ATI 48xx and I can't run literally half the games I buy. I bought Red Faction: Guerrilla and have to wait until I buy a new video card, because it simply won't work. Sure, if I wait half an hour for the intro videos to play, I might be able to smack rocks with a crowbar for about 5 seconds before it crashes without even an error message, but that's not exactly ideal.
So,
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Anonymous (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
You mean, AMD if you want something that works well.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You haven't heard of http://www.ifixit.com/ [ifixit.com], eh?
I haven't built a PC in 10 years. I probably won't ever again. Too much effort; too expensive due to getting sucked in to going for higher-end components; too much effort with unreliability; too expensive to buy an OS (no, I don't want to us Linux any more either); and for games, a dedicated console is a better choice.
I'm quite happy to buy a mid-range Dell if I'm worrying about price... at least everything has been tested, and it's one place to go if someth
No mods on consoles (Score:2)
for games, a dedicated console is a better choice.
A console like a PS3 or Wii isn't the best choice if you like to play mods [wikipedia.org], or if you like to play video games developed by microISVs [wikipedia.org] that are too small to have a "secure business office" [warioworld.com].
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I would recommend looking at your requirements and then maybe buying a Mac if appropriate.
If you want to play games (which the OP does) then Windows is currently the way to go.
If you want to do programming/development (excluding for the iPhone/iPod) or if you like getting under the hood and tweaking things then Windows/Linux is the way to go.
If you want to do pro audio/video/graphics or if you want a computer that you don't need to look under the hood, then Mac is probably the way to go.
Yeah, Macs are 'dumb
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sillier than you know... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's sillier than you realise. Now we can't even RTFA, as it just forwards you straight to pricewatch shopping. What a waste of screenspace ... this is one article Slashdot should just retroactively shitcan (or at least edit out the misleading link).
Re:Sillier than you know... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Pricewatch wanted to test their servers against brute force attacks. The site's still up, so if it can survive /. it can survive anything.
If you can dodge a slashdotting, you can dodge a DDOS.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Right, because it's so damned hard to figure out? Spend a day or two at some nice hardware review sites and you will figure out very quickly what's good and what isn't. Anandtech, Tom's Hardware, and 3DGuru are good sites imo.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Unfortunately you are still limited to comparing variations of the same apple, so if you want to see if it's a Xeon, Sempron or i7 you want/need many hardware reviews are just too limited.
Obscurity seems to be the life-line for the manufacturers these days and there is no simple way to compare the devices.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Yes there is. Intel revised their system quite well, you start at the bottom with the Core i3 and move up to the Core i7. Where they messed up is by calling the i7 8xx and 9xx series i7s... They should clearly be separate since they are on a different socket.
Nvidia is fairly similiar, go from the bottom of the barrel GT210 upto a GTX295. It gets confusing however if you try to use current model numbers to reference previous gen parts...
Re:Steps... (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps the point of his question to slashdot....you know, a technical news/information site, with a technically savvy audience...is to get an answer, not to get excoriated for having the question?
You know, your point "3. Research what components will achieve the expected result."
I think his question is valid - it used to be a fairly simple task to equate processor speed with power, to come up with a reasonable expectation of performance for a task. But to everyone (except, apparently, you), it perhaps isn't intuitive that a quad core at a lower speed will or won't perform better than a duo core at a higher speed. (Answer: sometimes it will perform better, sometimes it won't. How is he supposed to know, oh swami of computer tech?)
So you could offer actual advice or click through to the next news article, instead of bitching that someone asked a very valid question.
Re: (Score:2)
Hear hear. Somehow that comment was +5 insightful, too.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
When I bought my first computer, I had a choice of an Intel Pentium, Intel Pentium MMX, AMD K5, Cyrix 686 and the IBM branded version of the Cyrix 686. Within each of those models, I could chose different clock speeds.
Now, I have a choice various types of Atoms, Celerons, Pentium Dual Cores, Core IIs, Core i5s, Core i7s and Xeons, and that's just from Intel. Do we really need that many different product lines from the one company?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Your comment is soooooooo 1:48 PM
Wake up and smell the coffee of 2:07 PM
Re:What about CPU Coolers? (Score:4, Insightful)