|
How bad of an idea is using an AMD A8-7600 for a Mom/Grandma build that occasionally gets used for light gaming? I know the recommendation thread is solidly Intel, which to be honest I'd prefer too, but if I'm not going to make a system with a mix-mash of parts if I can do away with a separate GPU I'd prefer that and the AMD seems "OK" as a general CPU but head and shoulders better than the intel on-die GPUs. Typically I would upgrade/split my system and use it in the Mrs. and my moms system, but it's still so drat strong (2500k & GTX 780) it's kind of a pity to upgrade it at this point.
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 14:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 18:44 |
|
|
I honestly don't think you'll be disappointed at all. I would for that kind of system.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 15:49
|
|
|
Yeah, Mom/Grandma builds can get by on significantly less hardware. As long as cost lines up and power consumption isn't a deal-breaker (and for a desktop, it almost never is), it'll work great and the CPU-side of the chip will be plenty. Heck, my mom is using a dual-core 1.1 GHz Haswell Celeron laptop and she's thrilled with it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
She's presently using an ancient Sempron & Nforce I built back in 2006 or so. Seriously. It's OK but I need to bring her into this decade and give her an SSD. So, here is where I am sitting. I'm debating about about putting this in the advice thread but I'll float it here first. If you guys think it's better placed there I'll move it. My system is still a reasonable powerhouse, 2500k & GTX 780. Not pushed, not overclocked. Mrs. Slidebites is a reasonable system too, i5-750 and a 4GB(!!) GTX 670. Rarely used and lots of life. Moms system is basically something that needs to be turfed. I think its' still IDE and on Vista or some drat thing. I have a budget of approx $600max  to slap together a system for her (she will reuse her display). I need that budget to include an OS too.Here is what I have to figure out: Put together a new econo system for Mom, likely based on the A8 (or i3) as mentioned above, OR, Upgrade my existing system somewhat, use my sloppy seconds to upgrading Mrs. Slidebites system, and put the i5-750 into service for Mom with a nice new SSD, power supply, case and maybe a GTX 750 if I keep the Video Cards in our existing systems. Thoughts? The only reason I'm debating this is my 2500k box really is pretty drat good as is Mrs. Slidebites, but it might be a good opportunity to put some cash into mine and give her a "better" system than an econo A8, or even if I go i3, box. e: The A8 and 750 pretty much seem to be a wash other than power. http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-750-vs-AMD-A8-7600 slidebite fucked around with this message at 18:23 on Mar 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 18:19
|
|
|
FYI, that i5 750 is ANCIENT and by no means a current processor. An Intel NUC with some RAM and an SSD would work here too. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16856102053
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
Yeah, I know it's old but they run drat well and from what I can tell will give still give a new A8 a run for its money... or am I completely missing something stupid obvious? I actually thought of an NUC but I thought by the time I equipped an NUC I'll be pretty close to the same $$ as a decent build so I kind of ruled it out. She'll want an optical (I know), more storage than the SSD has, wifi, etc. I guess a 240GB SSD might be big enough, but if not we'll have to go external HDD and the optical. Do they make NUCs based on the A8 or something so we can take advantage of the better on die GPU? That would make me feel better with not have a PCI for a video path if desired. e: Her display is (pretty sure) VGA and would rather not go down the road of a new monitor.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
Just get your mom one of those cheap $60 pentium dual core chips, and an SSD. Add videocard if needed. Seriously, those Pentiums absolutely loving fly, believe it or not.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
slidebite posted:Yeah, I know it's old but they run drat well and from what I can tell will give still give a new A8 a run for its money... or am I completely missing something stupid obvious? Yes, look up Zotac, they make a number of SFF boxen in varying flavors. But really, the Intel graphics have come a long way since (ugh, I'm getting ill just thinking about it), GMA 900 or whatever. Definitely would be okay with an Intel for a Grandma build.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
I think the key here is the definition of "occasionally gets used for light gaming". If "light gaming" means Solitaire and Candy Crush, then an Intel chip may be a good choice. For 3D gaming the AMD chip may be preferable (though as others said, Intel has made huge strides with their integrated graphics).
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 20:07
|
|
|
She certainly plays grandma games (seek and find, card games, etc) but I'd also be playing on it when I come and visit if I'm killing some time. I'd like a bit of real 3D performance but I am under no illusions it's going to give a modern card a run for its money. Could I play, say, Skyrim at 1600x900 with an on chip solution? I'm not against a super-small form factor like a NUC, I'm just not sure if it'll be any cheaper by the time I get it equipped. If I had to pick a way right now, I'd probably lean towards an econo build with an mATX factor and an A8. It would probably run me "around" $600 CDN.. and I'm not sure I could do one of those tiny form units ready to go for less than that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
Unless you pair the G3258 with a graphics card it can't compete with the A8. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/a10-7850k-a8-7600-kaveri,3725-7.html
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
slidebite posted:She certainly plays grandma games (seek and find, card games, etc) but I'd also be playing on it when I come and visit if I'm killing some time. I'd like a bit of real 3D performance but I am under no illusions it's going to give a modern card a run for its money. A NUC with Iris Pro graphics will rock Skyrim at 1080p. The lesser HD 4400 graphics on an i3 or whatnot are more 1366x768 Medium, though they have way more ability to do shader-based tasks than push pixels, so you might get 1366 High a lot better than 1600 Low. A-series APU graphics... A8 will be about like Iris Pro, maybe a bit under, but geared more to push pixels, so higher res at lower details will have a performance curve more like a desktop GPU.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 20:59
|
|
|
I don't think you can get a Iris pro NUC, ram, SSD, optical, and OS for around $600 CDN.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 21:11
|
|
|
Factory Factory posted:A NUC with Iris Pro graphics will rock Skyrim at 1080p. The lesser HD 4400 graphics on an i3 or whatnot are more 1366x768 Medium, though they have way more ability to do shader-based tasks than push pixels, so you might get 1366 High a lot better than 1600 Low. A-series APU graphics... A8 will be about like Iris Pro, maybe a bit under, but geared more to push pixels, so higher res at lower details will have a performance curve more like a desktop GPU. slidebite posted:I actually thought of an NUC but I thought by the time I equipped an NUC I'll be pretty close to the same $$ as a decent build so I kind of ruled it out. She'll want an optical (I know), more storage than the SSD has, wifi, etc. Current gen NUCs have built in wifi. Previous-generation NUCs took miniPCI wifi cards. Optical drive is an issue. Yes you're forced into USB. They're small and cheap and you can just shove em in a drawer so for a lot of people it's really just fine but for certain people it's going to be a big deal. Admittedly this would go a bit over budget. An i3 NUC with HD 5500 graphics is about $380 CAD - add in RAM, HDD, SSD, OS and you're somewhere around $700 before tax. Then the i5 NUC with HD 6000 graphics is like $500 by itself. For the usage described I don't personally think the i3 NUC would ever feel underpowered at all though and it's kind of cool how it's tiny etc. May or may not be your favorite option in the end but it seems pretty doable here. edit: whoa I thought I was in the PC building/parts picking thread this whole conversation should probably be in there but uh there you have it I guess Col.Kiwi fucked around with this message at 05:06 on Mar 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 04:59
|
|
|
Realistically, the only reason to buy AMD these days would be if you need tolerable integrated graphics and can't afford Iris Pro.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 07:07
|
|
|
I think it's ok to get an AMD for a momputer. I know my Mom likes hers. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 13:34
|
|
|
Thanks for the advice guys, Yes this is getting dangerously close to the "recommend me a PC thread" so I appreciate you humoring me, especially about the AMD solutions hence why I even posted here  .Normally, I wouldn't be so anal with budgets. If it were for me, I'll pay whatever it is and if it goes over I really wouldn't care less. This isn't on my dime it's on someone else's so I have to be pretty aware of it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 14:27
|
|
|
Leaked slides: http://wccftech.com/amd-gpu-apu-roadmaps-2015-2020-emerge/ Of note: 200-300W TDP APU.  For servers, of course, but still. Discuss.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 09:36
|
|
|
If the HBM Ram is as good as they are expecting then I think they could make some pretty stellar SOCs. All I want is one of those A10 APUs with a decent x86 processor and ok video performance. If I could get that I wouldn't really need a video card, I barely play games these days.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 12:12
|
|
|
Lord Windy posted:If the HBM Ram is as good as they are expecting then I think they could make some pretty stellar SOCs. I agree with this in theory, but for what the nicer A10 APU & motherboards cost I could just get an Intel G3258 and Z97 mobo for $99 in the Microcenter bundle and have a way more effective CPU and some change left over for GPU.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 16:13
|
|
|
SwissArmyDruid posted:Leaked slides: http://wccftech.com/amd-gpu-apu-roadmaps-2015-2020-emerge/ If those are AMDs goals isn't this another indirect hint among many for HBM? Their projections seem to indicate that they can't use DDR4 or the 2017 processors will get bottlenecked. Lets say that AMD is able to cram enough HBM onto a processor to negate the need for system memory, in theory they could get away with ridiculously small form factors for boards, correct? Further, this is much less work for a mobo manufacturer, which drives the cost down, and if AMD can make the HBM APUs+Board cost less than CPU+RAM+Board, they might be able to make cost effective but still modular desktops that come in Nano-ITX size. In laptops the lack of need for RAM means such space could be used for additional cooling or to reduce size, yes?
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 16:43
|
|
|
FaustianQ posted:If those are AMDs goals isn't this another indirect hint among many for HBM? Their projections seem to indicate that they can't use DDR4 or the 2017 processors will get bottlenecked. It's actually a really fascinating plan. Let's just hope by the time a stacked APU from AMD comes along it doesn't have really uncompetitive CPU power.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
Twerk from Home posted:I agree with this in theory, but for what the nicer A10 APU & motherboards cost I could just get an Intel G3258 and Z97 mobo for $99 in the Microcenter bundle and have a way more effective CPU and some change left over for GPU. There are games nowdays that won't even load unless it detects a quad core CPU.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 03:13
|
|
|
sincx posted:There are games nowdays that won't even load unless it detects a quad core CPU. Which games.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 03:41
|
|
|
teagone posted:Which games. Far Cry 4, even though it turns out that it runs just fine on dual-core chips once people hacked out the check.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 03:47
|
|
|
Dragon age inquisition is another. These are devs deliberately blocking games from running on dual cores for no apparent reason.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 04:19
|
|
|
The Lord Bude posted:Dragon age inquisition is another. These are devs deliberately blocking games from running on dual cores for no apparent reason. Judging by the publishers/developers of the two named games, I can think of a reason.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 04:36
|
|
|
sincx posted:There are games nowdays that won't even load unless it detects a quad core CPU. Four thread. An i3 will work.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 10:37
|
|
|
HalloKitty posted:Four thread. An i3 will work. He was talking about the popular budget bargain option Intel G3258 though, which is a great gaming CPU if it weren't for the fact that some games nowadays are needlessly hardcoded to 4 threads. People can relatively easily hack Far Cry 4 and Dragons Age to support 2 core CPUs and reports are that they both run just fine on an overclocked G3258, save for the occasional choppiness.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 13:17
|
|
|
The Lord Bude posted:Dragon age inquisition is another. These are devs deliberately blocking games from running on dual cores for no apparent reason. There can be bugs on machines with lower numbers of cores that can sometimes manifest. For example if you have two threads of high priority busy-waiting for work to be finished by threads of lower priority the system can stop making forward progress as the operating system will not pre-empt the higher priority threads. On a four core system this situation wouldn't happen. Sometimes these hangs happen, sometimes they don't, I can't speak for those who set the system requirements but I would not be surprised if it is easier just to say "no dual-core processors even if it appears to work" than to deal with the prospect of making architecture changes that might not be feasible.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 06:22
|
|
|
ehnus posted:There can be bugs on machines with lower numbers of cores that can sometimes manifest. For example if you have two threads of high priority busy-waiting for work to be finished by threads of lower priority the system can stop making forward progress as the operating system will not pre-empt the higher priority threads. On a four core system this situation wouldn't happen.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 06:45
|
|
|
Professor Science posted:uh that is not how thread priority works, these aren't realtime OSes, a high priority thread does not prevent a low priority thread from running forever Ah, memories of Classic Mac OS back in the 1990s...
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 12:34
|
|
|
Professor Science posted:uh that is not how thread priority works, these aren't realtime OSes, a high priority thread does not prevent a low priority thread from running forever Not to mention that a basic livelock like he's describing would be easily fixed by a competent developer through any number of locking and concurrency primitives.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 15:20
|
|
|
Most operating systems do let you set thread priorities that will grind the system to a halt. REALTIME_PRIORITY_CLASS on Windows and using SCHED_RR or SCHED_FIFO on POSIX systems will let you make "realtime" threads that take priority over everything, even system tasks. I know that Linux and FreeBSD won't let you use those schedulers without being root as a security measure to prevent Joe Schmoe from hanging the whole system, but I don't think that Windows or OSX prevent a normal unprivileged program from doing this.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
The_Franz posted:Most operating systems do let you set thread priorities that will grind the system to a halt. REALTIME_PRIORITY_CLASS on Windows and using SCHED_RR or SCHED_FIFO on POSIX systems will let you make "realtime" threads that take priority over everything, even system tasks. I know that Linux and FreeBSD won't let you use those schedulers without being root as a security measure to prevent Joe Schmoe from hanging the whole system, but I don't think that Windows or OSX prevent a normal unprivileged program from doing this. Sure, but a well written program should put itself to sleep if it's waiting for something from another thread. There's a number of APIs on both Windows and Unix for a thread to say "wake me up when resource X is free/thread X finishes running" and so on. Purposely locking out systems that run less than 4 threads says to me that the game developer didn't want to debug a locking issue, not that it's impossible to make the game run on two threads.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 18:24
|
|
|
The_Franz posted:Most operating systems do let you set thread priorities that will grind the system to a halt. REALTIME_PRIORITY_CLASS on Windows and using SCHED_RR or SCHED_FIFO on POSIX systems will let you make "realtime" threads that take priority over everything, even system tasks. I know that Linux and FreeBSD won't let you use those schedulers without being root as a security measure to prevent Joe Schmoe from hanging the whole system, but I don't think that Windows or OSX prevent a normal unprivileged program from doing this. In Windows a user thread can't be given a priority boost above a kernel thread, also the scheduler will also temporarily boost a starved thread's priority.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 18:25
|
|
|
Having played Inquisition on a hard drive that is well beyond its prime, it's not like the developers knew nothing about managing resource bottlenecks - you can actually keep playing despite having your file I/O being hung for the last twenty seconds and it'll pop in all the missing assets once things recover. Looked pretty strange the first time I saw that, but I was impressed that the game didn't outright freeze like 99% of games that run into the issue.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
mmkay posted:In Windows a user thread can't be given a priority boost above a kernel thread, also the scheduler will also temporarily boost a starved thread's priority. Is this something new? MSDN still says: quote:You should almost never use REALTIME_PRIORITY_CLASS, because this interrupts system threads that manage mouse input, keyboard input, and background disk flushing. Raymond Chen says the same thing: setting a thread to realtime priority basically means that it owns the processor until it stops itself.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 18:47
|
|
|
HalloKitty posted:Four thread. An i3 will work. Apparently some games won't work even with an i3!
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 18:44 |
|
|
LeftistMuslimObama posted:Not to mention that a basic livelock like he's describing would be easily fixed by a competent developer through any number of locking and concurrency primitives. ...are we calling EA/Bioware competent developers, now?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 19:03
|
|