Post your computer build!

tuco · 09-22-2015, 09:29 AM

Originally posted by kadajawi

... AMD aren't particularly fast...

I can't say about AMD's performance today but not long ago it was just as fast as Intel but you had to recompile your kernel with AMD's switches instead. Note with Open Source operating systems you could recompile the kernel with specific AMD switches or download and install a kernel with these done for you. Doing so would amp up the performance of that processor on some operations significantly. I don't recall what they are off the top of my head.

The last 20% costs 80% of your time and money on any project included sourcing your hardware to build a box. Doing so you're on top of the game today but it's rigged so that you'll have to spend all that money over again tomorrow.

VoiceOfReason · 09-22-2015, 10:25 AM

Originally posted by photolady95

Did you check the new 9 core AMDs? They're water cooled.

The water cooled 8 cored ones have a really high tdp for a processor due to the OC to ~5ghz and still get outperformed by the one I bought. The architecture for the newer FX processors is kinda crappy. AMD dropped the ball on it by not making them true individual cores, but making each pair share components. Their next set coming down the line is supposed to go back to true individual cores and even do hyperthreading. They also only have support for up to 32gb of DDR3 RAM, and since I was going for more RAM I needed something that would support more. The motherboard I have actually supports up to 128gb DDR4 RAM.

Previously all my personal builds have been AMD systems, but currently the best performance on the market by far comes from Intel on processors. I remember when AMD was in the lead by releasing 64 bit and multi core processors first, but they fell behind.

kadajawi · 09-22-2015, 10:37 AM

I've had an AMD 486, K6, Athlon XP, Athlon 64, 64 X2. But the performance of current AMDs is just not impressive. On the low end and mid range they are sort of competitive, but you pay for it with high power consumption, which given how long I tend to use CPUs isn't an option, the up front cost is easily offset.

The next generation of AMD processors hopefully brings some significant improvements.

Also isn't finding the last 20% where all the fun is? :P

tuco · 09-22-2015, 11:28 AM

Originally posted by kadajawi

...
Also isn't finding the last 20% where all the fun is? :P

Yes, it's fun. I built my first box in 1989 and had built subsequent boxes thereafter up to about 2005 or so where now I don't bother. They are plenty fast enough for me today. If you're using Windows or Mac you really can't max out the performance by customizing the kernel, I believe.

I have a ton of old computer gear collected over the years that I need to get rid of. And in each case I'd build my boxes with high-end parts. I kind of see it as a waste of money now.

**ChrisPlatt** · 09-22-2015, 03:06 PM

I was lucky enough to build boxes with other people's money and a long time ago got it out of my system.
Fortunately I've never been interested in gaming, which seems to drive the technology.
Now for myself I simply look for good value on something that will be adequate until the next resource-hungry OS upgrade makes it unusable.

The cutting edge is an expensive place to dwell.

Chris

kadajawi · 09-22-2015, 05:40 PM

Originally posted by ChrisPlatt

I was lucky enough to build boxes with other people's money and a long time ago got it out of my system.
Fortunately I've never been interested in gaming, which seems to drive the technology.
Now for myself I simply look for good value on something that will be adequate until the next resource-hungry OS upgrade makes it unusable.

The cutting edge is an expensive place to dwell.

Chris

It's good that since Vista every version of Windows has become less resource hungry than the previous version. 7 was more frugal than Vista, 8 more than 7, and 10 more than 8.

**jpzk** · 09-22-2015, 05:44 PM

This thread is turning into CBA (Computer Buying Addiction) ... !!

Seriously, I am going to have to take a hard look into my computer .... seems like it's getting "out of favour" !

JP

I'll soon post what computer gear I have. Compare to some people here ... could be painful to read.

VoiceOfReason · 09-23-2015, 12:10 PM

I look forward to seeing it.

**jpzk** · 09-23-2015, 02:24 PM

Originally posted by VoiceOfReason

I look forward to seeing it.

Then, you'll have to call in the psych. !!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Build Me a Computer....	littledrawe	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	32	12-11-2013 10:46 AM
new computer advice & don't want to build my own	davidxgreen	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	17	04-27-2013 12:01 PM
How do you organize your photos on your computer?	stainsor	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	13	11-10-2011 11:28 PM
Computer Build: SSD and Photoshop question	noVICE	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	22	10-09-2011 02:04 PM

09-22-2015, 09:29 AM	#16
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,029	Originally posted by kadajawi ... AMD aren't particularly fast... I can't say about AMD's performance today but not long ago it was just as fast as Intel but you had to recompile your kernel with AMD's switches instead. Note with Open Source operating systems you could recompile the kernel with specific AMD switches or download and install a kernel with these done for you. Doing so would amp up the performance of that processor on some operations significantly. I don't recall what they are off the top of my head. The last 20% costs 80% of your time and money on any project included sourcing your hardware to build a box. Doing so you're on top of the game today but it's rigged so that you'll have to spend all that money over again tomorrow.

09-22-2015, 10:25 AM	#17
VoiceOfReason Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Mishawaka IN area Photos: Albums Posts: 6,124 Original Poster	Originally posted by photolady95 Did you check the new 9 core AMDs? They're water cooled. The water cooled 8 cored ones have a really high tdp for a processor due to the OC to ~5ghz and still get outperformed by the one I bought. The architecture for the newer FX processors is kinda crappy. AMD dropped the ball on it by not making them true individual cores, but making each pair share components. Their next set coming down the line is supposed to go back to true individual cores and even do hyperthreading. They also only have support for up to 32gb of DDR3 RAM, and since I was going for more RAM I needed something that would support more. The motherboard I have actually supports up to 128gb DDR4 RAM. Previously all my personal builds have been AMD systems, but currently the best performance on the market by far comes from Intel on processors. I remember when AMD was in the lead by releasing 64 bit and multi core processors first, but they fell behind.

09-22-2015, 10:37 AM	#18
kadajawi Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 2,799	I've had an AMD 486, K6, Athlon XP, Athlon 64, 64 X2. But the performance of current AMDs is just not impressive. On the low end and mid range they are sort of competitive, but you pay for it with high power consumption, which given how long I tend to use CPUs isn't an option, the up front cost is easily offset. The next generation of AMD processors hopefully brings some significant improvements. Also isn't finding the last 20% where all the fun is? :P

09-22-2015, 11:28 AM	#19
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,029	Originally posted by kadajawi ... Also isn't finding the last 20% where all the fun is? :P Yes, it's fun. I built my first box in 1989 and had built subsequent boxes thereafter up to about 2005 or so where now I don't bother. They are plenty fast enough for me today. If you're using Windows or Mac you really can't max out the performance by customizing the kernel, I believe. I have a ton of old computer gear collected over the years that I need to get rid of. And in each case I'd build my boxes with high-end parts. I kind of see it as a waste of money now.

09-22-2015, 03:06 PM	#20
ChrisPlatt Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Rockaway Beach NYC Posts: 7,696	I was lucky enough to build boxes with other people's money and a long time ago got it out of my system. Fortunately I've never been interested in gaming, which seems to drive the technology. Now for myself I simply look for good value on something that will be adequate until the next resource-hungry OS upgrade makes it unusable. The cutting edge is an expensive place to dwell. Chris

09-22-2015, 05:40 PM	#21
kadajawi Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 2,799	Originally posted by ChrisPlatt I was lucky enough to build boxes with other people's money and a long time ago got it out of my system. Fortunately I've never been interested in gaming, which seems to drive the technology. Now for myself I simply look for good value on something that will be adequate until the next resource-hungry OS upgrade makes it unusable. The cutting edge is an expensive place to dwell. Chris It's good that since Vista every version of Windows has become less resource hungry than the previous version. 7 was more frugal than Vista, 8 more than 7, and 10 more than 8.

09-22-2015, 05:44 PM	#22
jpzk Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Québec Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,251	This thread is turning into CBA (Computer Buying Addiction) ... !! Seriously, I am going to have to take a hard look into my computer .... seems like it's getting "out of favour" ! JP I'll soon post what computer gear I have. Compare to some people here ... could be painful to read.

09-23-2015, 12:10 PM	#23
VoiceOfReason Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Mishawaka IN area Photos: Albums Posts: 6,124 Original Poster	I look forward to seeing it.

09-23-2015, 02:24 PM	#24
jpzk Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Québec Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,251	Originally posted by VoiceOfReason I look forward to seeing it. Then, you'll have to call in the psych. !!