I'm still toying with the idea of a new desktop PC as my Christmas present but I have no idea what the modern chipsets are or how the current CPUs perform against my i7-6700 @ 3.4 GHz.
Can anybody point me to a primer so I can bring myself up to date. I don't want to study a load of calculations, just practical reviews perhaps
rating them in order from top end gaming, video editing to Freecell! I
have been very impressed by the i5 1235U @ 1.3 GHz in my laptop.
I'm still toying with the idea of a new desktop PC as my Christmas
present but I have no idea what the modern chipsets are or how the
current CPUs perform against my i7-6700 @ 3.4 GHz.
Can anybody point me to a primer so I can bring myself up to date. I
don't want to study a load of calculations, just practical reviews
perhaps rating them in order from top end gaming, video editing to
Freecell! I have been very impressed by the i5 1235U @ 1.3 GHz in my
laptop.
I'm still toying with the idea of a new desktop PC as my Christmas present but I have no idea what the modern chipsets are or how the current CPUs perform against my i7-6700 @ 3.4 GHz.
Can anybody point me to a primer so I can bring myself up to date. I don't want to study a load of calculations, just practical reviews perhaps
rating them in order from top end gaming, video editing to Freecell! I
have been very impressed by the i5 1235U @ 1.3 GHz in my laptop.
Jeff Gaines wrote:
Can Windows 10 make use of those cores? Cinebench seems to give a higher >>benchmark for more cores (my HP Z630 with dual, but slow, Xeons
benchmarks quite highly for a clunker) but in practice can the OS make
use of them?
Do you want to run 200 copies of Doom at once?
<https://youtu.be/Ybw6djC90tw>
Can anybody point me to a primer so I can bring myself up to date. I don't >want to study a load of calculations, just practical reviews perhaps
rating them in order from top end gaming, video editing to Freecell! I
have been very impressed by the i5 1235U @ 1.3 GHz in my laptop.
Can Windows 10 make use of those cores? Cinebench seems to give a higher benchmark for more cores (my HP Z630 with dual, but slow, Xeons
benchmarks quite highly for a clunker) but in practice can the OS make
use of them?
So far it seems Jaimie's recommendation for my Z170K board has kept me
ahead of the pack for many years, even if I did scrunch the CPU pins up on >the first one!
On 27/11/2023 in message <xn0o9tupfge2adn00t@news.individual.net> Jeff
Gaines wrote:
Can anybody point me to a primer so I can bring myself up to date. I don't >> want to study a load of calculations, just practical reviews perhaps
rating them in order from top end gaming, video editing to Freecell! I
have been very impressed by the i5 1235U @ 1.3 GHz in my laptop.
Many thanks for the replies so far :-)
It seems to me that the method I got used to with my Android tablet -
several cores, perhaps running at different speeds - now applies to Intel CPUs. Can Windows 10 make use of those cores? Cinebench seems to give a higher benchmark for more cores (my HP Z630 with dual, but slow, Xeons benchmarks quite highly for a clunker) but in practice can the OS make use
of them?
So far it seems Jaimie's recommendation for my Z170K board has kept me
ahead of the pack for many years, even if I did scrunch the CPU pins up on the first one!
Jeff Gaines <jgnewsid@outlook.com> wrote:
On 27/11/2023 in message <xn0o9tupfge2adn00t@news.individual.net> Jeff
Gaines wrote:
Can anybody point me to a primer so I can bring myself up to date. I don't >>> want to study a load of calculations, just practical reviews perhaps
rating them in order from top end gaming, video editing to Freecell! I
have been very impressed by the i5 1235U @ 1.3 GHz in my laptop.
Many thanks for the replies so far :-)
It seems to me that the method I got used to with my Android tablet -
several cores, perhaps running at different speeds - now applies to Intel
CPUs. Can Windows 10 make use of those cores? Cinebench seems to give a
higher benchmark for more cores (my HP Z630 with dual, but slow, Xeons
benchmarks quite highly for a clunker) but in practice can the OS make use >> of them?
Of course. Question is do you use software that benefits from them.
Freecell doesn't count!
It you're not doing workflows which benefit from multitheeading I would
argue you don't need more than 4-6 cores.
Any thoughts? I think that may be a mini mobo so perhaps need to look of
an ATX size.
On 28/11/2023 18:38, Chris wrote:
Jeff Gaines <jgnewsid@outlook.com> wrote:
On 27/11/2023 in message <xn0o9tupfge2adn00t@news.individual.net> Jeff
Gaines wrote:
Can anybody point me to a primer so I can bring myself up to date. I
don't
want to study a load of calculations, just practical reviews perhaps
rating them in order from top end gaming, video editing to Freecell! I >>>> have been very impressed by the i5 1235U @ 1.3 GHz in my laptop.
Many thanks for the replies so far :-)
It seems to me that the method I got used to with my Android tablet -
several cores, perhaps running at different speeds - now applies to
Intel
CPUs. Can Windows 10 make use of those cores? Cinebench seems to give a
higher benchmark for more cores (my HP Z630 with dual, but slow, Xeons
benchmarks quite highly for a clunker) but in practice can the OS
make use
of them?
Of course. Question is do you use software that benefits from them.
Freecell doesn't count!
It you're not doing workflows which benefit from multitheeading I would
argue you don't need more than 4-6 cores.
And many jobs that do require a high degree of parallelism are better
done on graphics cards, or maybe even specialist chips like AI processors.
I lost interest in shiny new PCs about a decade ago, when I realised
they made little difference to me. I mainly play with low power Arm ones
now, which really are bleeding edge, not for people who don't have too
much time on their hands.
 From a programmer point of view, 16GB RAM looked underspeced, for such
a powerful CPU. It is possible that distributing a job over so many
cores has a memory cost. Given current prices, I would start with at
least 32GB and consider 64GB. (I've never had a RAM amount so big I
couldn't squander it.)
I'm still toying with the idea of a new desktop PC as my Christmas present >but I have no idea what the modern chipsets are or how the current CPUs >perform against my i7-6700 @ 3.4 GHz.
I just hope I'm still up to building a PC.
Gigabyte Z790 D DDR4 ATX Motherboard
which would have taken a couple of weeks from Amazon and price was
uncertain since it was coming from the USA, I used eBuyer for that.
Jeff Gaines wrote:
Gigabyte Z790 D DDR4 ATX Motherboard
which would have taken a couple of weeks from Amazon and price was >>uncertain since it was coming from the USA, I used eBuyer for that.
Odd, I could get one here from Amazon tomorrow, if I order before 9pm >tonight, or an Amazon warehouse return item for about £70 cheaper.
Perhaps they have more stock, all they offered me was:2Caps%2C99&sr=8-3&ufe=app_do%3Aamzn1.fos.23648568-4ba5-49f2-9aa6-31ae75f1e9cd&th=1
https://www.amazon.co.uk/ASUS-B760-PLUS-motherboard-Ethernet-DisplayPort/dp/B0BNQDVLGN/ref=sr_1_3?crid=1VNNC9CI3NF6G&keywords=ASUS%2BPRIME%2BB760-PLUS%2BDDR4%2BATX%2BMotherboard&qid=1701424127&sprefix=asus%2Bprime%2Bb760-plus%2Bddr4%2Batx%2Bmotherboard%
Andy Burns wrote:
Jeff Gaines wrote:
Gigabyte Z790 D DDR4 ATX Motherboard
which would have taken a couple of weeks from Amazon and price was
uncertain since it was coming from the USA
Odd, I could get one here from Amazon tomorrow, if I order before 9pm
tonight, or an Amazon warehouse return item for about £70 cheaper.
Perhaps they have more stock, all they offered me was:
ASUS-B760-PLUS
I searched for "Gigabyte Z790 D" as you originally mentioned ...
Oh wow, I think I accidentally saved myself from making a mistake. I was >going for the Asus board but after a lot of dithering decided I needed
more SATA ports (and there were a couple of negative points in reviews)
so went tor the Gigabyte Z790 D. I very nearly ordered the wrong board :-(
Jeff Gaines wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:
Jeff Gaines wrote:
Gigabyte Z790 D DDR4 ATX Motherboard
which would have taken a couple of weeks from Amazon and price was >>>>uncertain since it was coming from the USA
Odd, I could get one here from Amazon tomorrow, if I order before 9pm >>>tonight, or an Amazon warehouse return item for about £70 cheaper.
Perhaps they have more stock, all they offered me was:
ASUS-B760-PLUS
I searched for "Gigabyte Z790 D" as you originally mentioned ...
I am not quite as mad as I first thought, this was what I found:49f2-9aa6-31ae75f1e9cd&th=1
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Gigabyte-Z790-DDR4-Multi-Key-Motherboard/dp/B083R7PHMX/ref=sr_1_2?crid=2EZIJAJEPGQC5&keywords=gigabyte%2Bz790%2Bd%2Bddr4&qid=1701513956&sprefix=Gigabyte%2BZ790%2BD%2BDDR4%2Caps%2C93&sr=8-2&ufe=app_do%3Aamzn1.fos.23648568-4ba5-
I wish I knew how Amazon's algorithms worked when they decide what to
offer and how much for.
Jeff Gaines wrote:49f2-9aa6-31ae75f1e9cd&th=1
I am not quite as mad as I first thought, this was what I found:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Gigabyte-Z790-DDR4-Multi-Key-Motherboard/dp/B083R7PHMX/ref=sr_1_2?crid=2EZIJAJEPGQC5&keywords=gigabyte%2Bz790%2Bd%2Bddr4&qid=1701513956&sprefix=Gigabyte%2BZ790%2BD%2BDDR4%2Caps%2C93&sr=8-2&ufe=app_do%3Aamzn1.fos.23648568-4ba5-
I wish I knew how Amazon's algorithms worked when they decide what to
offer and how much for.
That's about £10 cheaper and slower delivery than I found
<https://amazon.co.uk/Z790-D-DDR4-790/dp/B0BL3ZGMH9>
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 300 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 39:40:46 |
| Calls: | 6,708 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 12,241 |
| Messages: | 5,353,642 |