dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
1669
share rss forum feed


47717768
Premium
join:2003-12-08
Birmingham, AL
kudos:2
reply to Subaru

Re: [Parts Check] What CPU would you considere to be old

Cool. I am looking forward...


Trihexagonal

join:2004-08-29
US
reply to BlitzenZeus
nevermind.


sk1939
Premium
join:2010-10-23
Mclean, VA
kudos:10
reply to 47717768
Anything older than a "iX" series CPU. No, I'm not kidding, I hit RAM limits with the Core 2 Duo/Quad for the most part.

BlitzenZeus
Burnt Out Cynic
Premium
join:2000-01-13
kudos:3
Ram limits are generally controlled by the motherboard, some p4 boards went more than 2GB not all, and the same goes for core 2 boards had this same limitation. Many of the core 2 boards supported at least 4GB, or more which for most people is more than they need for basic tasks. During the time when they still sold 32-bit windows with packages with 2-3GB of ram there was quite a mix of motherboards, many supporting p4, and core 2 processors however used ddr2 memory.

While it's hindsight now, so many of those core 2 systems capable of 8GB of memory are just held back by companies sticking 32-bit Vista on these systems, and now the memory isn't cost effective to upgrade at all, plus they also have to buy the os again. Except for high end games a core 2 is capable of hd video without gpu acceleration, but a budget core 2 duo might choke on hd video processing without gpu acceleration.

If the ram limits you're talking about is 4-8GB then most people still don't actually use more than 4GB on new systems, it's mostly used by the disk cache of the os.
--
I distrust those people who know so well what god wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires- Susan B. Anthony
Yesterday we obeyed kings, and bent our necks before emperors. But today we kneel only to the truth- Kahlil G.


sk1939
Premium
join:2010-10-23
Mclean, VA
kudos:10
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US
·Verizon FiOS
said by BlitzenZeus:

Ram limits are generally controlled by the motherboard, some p4 boards went more than 2GB not all, and the same goes for core 2 boards had this same limitation. Many of the core 2 boards supported at least 4GB, or more which for most people is more than they need for basic tasks. During the time when they still sold 32-bit windows with packages with 2-3GB of ram there was quite a mix of motherboards, many supporting p4, and core 2 processors however used ddr2 memory.

While it's hindsight now, so many of those core 2 systems capable of 8GB of memory are just held back by companies sticking 32-bit Vista on these systems, and now the memory isn't cost effective to upgrade at all, plus they also have to buy the os again. Except for high end games a core 2 is capable of hd video without gpu acceleration, but a budget core 2 duo might choke on hd video processing without gpu acceleration.

If the ram limits you're talking about is 4-8GB then most people still don't actually use more than 4GB on new systems, it's mostly used by the disk cache of the os.

I tend to use a lot of RAM, so even 8 GB is not enough. More and more people need at least 4GB now (preferably 8) though, as OS's get hungrier and hungrier for RAM.

BlitzenZeus
Burnt Out Cynic
Premium
join:2000-01-13
kudos:3
I agree more are using more than 2GB, but might not exceed four, however at current prices it's not expensive to have 8GB for ddr3. I can run a gpu accelerated game, and two active vm with 2GB of memory each without running out on my system with 8GB. Gamers tend to need at least 4GB these days with everything running at the very least. I don't generally do any video editing, or content creation, however I do play games once in a while. The gpu acceleration is nice also for non-gaming tasks.

My nix vm rarely goes over 1GB, but I gave it 2GB anyway. It's usually only using around 250MB of memory, but I don't use it for heavy tasks since I don't let it use all my processors.
--
I distrust those people who know so well what god wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires- Susan B. Anthony
Yesterday we obeyed kings, and bent our necks before emperors. But today we kneel only to the truth- Kahlil G.

pandora
Premium
join:2001-06-01
Outland
kudos:2
reply to 47717768
Any dual core, or I3 or older is too old for a primary desktop or laptop imo.
--
Congress could mess up a one piece jigsaw puzzle.

nonymous
Premium
join:2003-09-08
Glendale, AZ
said by pandora:

Any dual core, or I3 or older is too old for a primary desktop or laptop imo.

There is nothing wrong with an I3. I have one in a laptop nd compared to the way old laptop it replaced it is blazing fast. For general use, photo editing, school, etc it is fine.

BlitzenZeus
Burnt Out Cynic
Premium
join:2000-01-13
kudos:3
reply to pandora
I consider an i3 3220 minimal these days for a new computer, but it's far from already being obsolete. Many people game with them as most games are not demanding of the cpu, and are mostly demanding of the gpu.

Also to be clear the amd fx 4xxx performs worse than the i3, as they just made four smaller cores than making two normal cores on the die so just judging by the number of cores alone isn't a good method.
--
I distrust those people who know so well what god wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires- Susan B. Anthony
Yesterday we obeyed kings, and bent our necks before emperors. But today we kneel only to the truth- Kahlil G.


Mike
Premium,Mod
join:2000-09-17
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:1
reply to 47717768
Anything Core2 is officially old. i3 is just underpowered


pnjunction
Teksavvy Extreme
Premium
join:2008-01-24
Toronto, ON
kudos:1
Underpowered for what though? The single-thread speed is pretty much the same as the i5's and i7's. Even games typically (with some exceptions) don't run much faster on an i5 or i7 than an i3, let alone office work or web browsing that most people are doing.

BlitzenZeus
Burnt Out Cynic
Premium
join:2000-01-13
kudos:3
reply to Mike
Judging by the usage of my i5 I would say that the majority of applications the average person might use, even hd video processing without gpu acceleration can easily be processed by the i3 with room to spare even if it didn't have the intel gpu. I think I've seen my processor go turbo only a couple times for a short period otherwise it's been running underclocked most of the time even with a gpu accelerated game running.
--
I distrust those people who know so well what god wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires- Susan B. Anthony
Yesterday we obeyed kings, and bent our necks before emperors. But today we kneel only to the truth- Kahlil G.

pandora
Premium
join:2001-06-01
Outland
kudos:2
Reviews:
·ooma
·Google Voice
·Comcast
·Future Nine Corp..
reply to nonymous
said by nonymous:

There is nothing wrong with an I3. I have one in a laptop nd compared to the way old laptop it replaced it is blazing fast. For general use, photo editing, school, etc it is fine.

There is nothing wrong with an 8080 if it suits your needs.
--
Congress could mess up a one piece jigsaw puzzle.

pandora
Premium
join:2001-06-01
Outland
kudos:2
Reviews:
·ooma
·Google Voice
·Comcast
·Future Nine Corp..

4 edits
reply to BlitzenZeus
said by BlitzenZeus:

I consider an i3 3220 minimal these days for a new computer, but it's far from already being obsolete.

We may have differing ideas about minimum. For me, an I5 is minimal for a laptop, an I7 minimal for a desktop. In the future, there will be new minimums.
--
Congress could mess up a one piece jigsaw puzzle.


Krisnatharok
Caveat Emptor
Premium
join:2009-02-11
Earth Orbit
kudos:12

1 recommendation

Why? You can't gkick kids any quicker with 8 threads over 4.

You don't need an i7 as a desktop gaming CPU until you go SLI/Crossfire on a high-end card anyways.

coma9

join:2013-02-05
United State
reply to 47717768
I wouldn't be willing to even work on a computer that doesn't have at least 2 physical cores running at 2.6ghz or faster.
My main desktop is an AMD FX8350 @ 4.8ghz, water cooled. I've got two media servers running core2duos at 3.0ghz and 4gigs ram each. Hell, my cell phone has two cores, why should a computer have any less?

pandora
Premium
join:2001-06-01
Outland
kudos:2
reply to Krisnatharok
It's an opinion.


Dissembled

join:2008-01-23
Indianapolis, IN
reply to Krisnatharok
said by Krisnatharok:

Why? You can't gkick kids any quicker with 8 threads over 4.

Doh!!! One last punch huh?


Ghastlyone
Premium
join:2009-01-07
Las Vegas, NV
kudos:5
said by Dissembled:

said by Krisnatharok:

Why? You can't gkick kids any quicker with 8 threads over 4.

Doh!!! One last punch huh?

haha...if the knife is still stuck in there, you might as well twist it a little huh?

coma9

join:2013-02-05
United State
reply to sk1939
said by sk1939:

Anything older than a "iX" series CPU. No, I'm not kidding, I hit RAM limits with the Core 2 Duo/Quad for the most part.

I recently sold my Core2Quad machine. Had a QX6850 (Core2Extreme) clocked at 3.6ghz water cooled. The board had a maximum of 8 gigs of ram, and I was only running 4. 4x1gig sticks. Ran great, was a beast of a gaming machine, but the money I sold it for, and used towards my new 8core was to good of a deal to pass up. Made $1800 on that rig, with 2xATI-HD4670 video cards, and the water cooling setup, I think they got an OK deal. I'm sure that rig is still kicking ass online. Upgrade the video cards and it should keep up with most rigs no problem.


pnjunction
Teksavvy Extreme
Premium
join:2008-01-24
Toronto, ON
kudos:1
$1800! A 3570k machine with a 7790 can spank that machine for less than half the money. For that money you can get into 16gb ram, a big SSD and a 7970 and probably still afford to watercool it.


Ghastlyone
Premium
join:2009-01-07
Las Vegas, NV
kudos:5
said by pnjunction:

$1800! A 3570k machine with a 7790 can spank that machine for less than half the money. For that money you can get into 16gb ram, a big SSD and a 7970 and probably still afford to watercool it.

LOL, I was thinking the same thing. Whoever paid 1,800.00 for that is a fuckin' moron.

pandora
Premium
join:2001-06-01
Outland
kudos:2
Reviews:
·ooma
·Google Voice
·Comcast
·Future Nine Corp..
reply to Ghastlyone
said by Ghastlyone:

haha...if the knife is still stuck in there, you might as well twist it a little huh?

OT but no knife, a GM can gkick.
--
Congress could mess up a one piece jigsaw puzzle.

coma9

join:2013-02-05
United State
reply to Ghastlyone
said by Ghastlyone:

said by pnjunction:

$1800! A 3570k machine with a 7790 can spank that machine for less than half the money. For that money you can get into 16gb ram, a big SSD and a 7970 and probably still afford to watercool it.

LOL, I was thinking the same thing. Whoever paid 1,800.00 for that is a fuckin' moron.

People are willing to pay a pretty penny for those Extreme Edition CPUs, I'm not agreeing they were the brightest person I've ever met, but I honestly think the machine was easily still worth $1000-$1200. The case with the watercooling setup it had, was easily still a $300 bill. 1200watt powersupply, board maxed with ram, a 120gb raptor and a 1tb 7200rpm. A legal copy of Win7pro 64bit as well The old 2x4670s were a bit dated, but this was almost a year ago, so not to bad.


Ghastlyone
Premium
join:2009-01-07
Las Vegas, NV
kudos:5
said by coma9:

said by Ghastlyone:

said by pnjunction:

$1800! A 3570k machine with a 7790 can spank that machine for less than half the money. For that money you can get into 16gb ram, a big SSD and a 7970 and probably still afford to watercool it.

LOL, I was thinking the same thing. Whoever paid 1,800.00 for that is a fuckin' moron.

People are willing to pay a pretty penny for those Extreme Edition CPUs, I'm not agreeing they were the brightest person I've ever met, but I honestly think the machine was easily still worth $1000-$1200. The case with the watercooling setup it had, was easily still a $300 bill. 1200watt powersupply, board maxed with ram, a 120gb raptor and a 1tb 7200rpm. A legal copy of Win7pro 64bit as well The old 2x4670s were a bit dated, but this was almost a year ago, so not to bad.

Not even worth $1,200. Not only are those used electronics, they're outdated also.

But hey...more power to you, if you actually found a person willing to pay that amount of money for that PC.


sk1939
Premium
join:2010-10-23
Mclean, VA
kudos:10
The QX6850 goes for $180, which is way overpriced I would say, given that is what a 2500K goes for.

n_w95482
Premium
join:2005-08-03
Ukiah, CA
reply to coma9
Yep, the top-end CPUs for pretty much any socket in the last few years are still expensive, even if they are completely obsolete. I paid a decent amount for my Opteron 185 less than two years ago, but I'm still attached to my Socket 939 machine. It runs quite well, 2.8 GHz with a slight undervolt (~1.26v).

I used it for 5 days while my main PC was out of commission, and it ran fine. Granted, it's a rather abnormal 939 build (GTX 460 1 GB, 4 GB RAM, Win7 x64, SSD).

Last year, I found an old Dell XPS tower at the dump. It was mostly gutted, but the heatsink was still mounted to the motherboard. I took it off and found a QX6700 . I ran it in my work PC for a few months, worked great. It'll be going in my new secondary PC at work once I build it (current one is a Dell Optiplex 740 with an Athlon X2 5050e).
--
KI6RIT