Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

It is worth it to buy the fast CPU

blog.howardjohn.info

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 522 posts

Re: It is worth it to buy the fast CPU

#511

Post by fmajid »

dontlaugh wrote: post #463
fmajid wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Beelink GTR9 Pro. It has dual 10G Ethernet interfaces. And get the 128GB RAM version, the RAM is not upgradeable. It isn't quite shipping yet, though. The absolute best would be a 9005 series Threadripper, but you will easily be pushing $10K+. The mainstream champ is the 9950X but despite being technically a mobile SOC the 395 gets you 90% of the real world performance of a 9950X in a much smaller and power efficient…

And this would be something cheaper https://www.bee-link.com/products/beelink-ser9-ai-9-hx-370?v... Similar single core performance, less cores, less GPU. Depends what you’re doing.

It only goes up to 96GB RAM (54GB usable for the GPU) vs 128GB/96GB on the 395. I have a 370 on a Minisforum AI X1 Pro and on an Asus Vivobook S, but to be frank I've found the performance disappointing.

Re: It is worth it to buy the fast CPU

#513

Post by bullen »

DanielHB wrote: post #484
mwpmaybe wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I bought a geforce RTX 3080 at launch and boy was I surprised at the power draw and heat/noise it pumps out. I wonder why anybody bothers with the 90 series at all. More VRAM, and NVLink (on some models). You can easily run them at lower power limits. I've run CUDA workloads with my dual 3090s set as low as 170W to hit that sweet spot on the efficiency curve. You can actually go all the way down to 100W!

Oh well, for GPU programming sure as VRAM is king depending on task. But for gaming I won't go high end again.

I'm all in on 1030, the last passively coolable GPU.

But had to upgrade to 3050 because 2GB VRAM is to little for modern titles.

Fun fact: One 6600 core can saturate the 1030 for skinned mesh animations.

But only saturate the 3050 50% = perfect because the world takes much less CPU (you upload it to the GPU and then it's almost one drawcall; more like one drawcall per chunk but I digress) = OpenGL (ES) can render on it at lower motion-to-photon latency without waste = one core for rendering, one for gameplay, one for physics and one for the OS, audio and networking.

So 14nm 6600 + 8nm 3050 is actually the combination I would use for ever.

HL:A runs at 90 FPS with that combo too on the low res Vive 1.

Not that VR is going anywhere, but still peak demanding application.

Re: It is worth it to buy the fast CPU

#514

Post by bullen »

mwpmaybe wrote: post #506
bullen wrote: post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I probably replied there too I do not want to build hardware that can burn my house down if the wares are crap and decide to reset for some reason.

It will simply throttle.

Which is not good for longevity.

Re: It is worth it to buy the fast CPU

#515

Post by bullen »

TacticalCoder wrote: post #334
bullen wrote: post #293

Is it worth to keep your old CPU? I still run a 6600 (65W peak) from 2016 as my daily driver. I have replaced the SSD once (MLC lasted 5 years, hopefully forever with SLC drive from 2011?), 2x 32GB DDR4 sticks (Kingston Micron lasted 8 years, with aliexpress "samsung" sticks for $50 a pop) and Monitor (Eizo FlexScan 1932 lasted 15! years RIP with Eizo RadiForce 191M, highly recommend with f.lux/redshift for exception…

> Is it worth to keep your old CPU? I just "re-cycle" them. Bought a 7700X two years ago. My 3600X went to my wife. Previous machine (forgot which one it was but some Intel CPU) went to my mother-in-law. Machine three machines before that, my trusty old Core i7-6700K from 2015 (I think 2015): it's now a little Proxmox server at home. I'll probably buy a 9900X or something now: don't want to wait late 2026/2027 for Ze…

Yep me too:

Thinkpad X61s(45nm) DDR2 / D512MO(45nm) DDR2 / 3770S(22nm) DDR3 / 4430S(22nm) DDR3

All still in client use.

All got new RAM this year and when the SSDs break (all have SLC) I have new SLC SSDs and will install headless linux for server duty on 1Gb/s symmertic fiber until the motherboards break in a way I can't repair. Will probably resolder caps.

Re: It is worth it to buy the fast CPU

#516

Post by snvzz »

fmajid wrote: post #510
snvzz wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Standard Ryzen chips also support ECC (minus the monolithic G models). I run 2x48GB ECC with my 9800x3d.

Yes, but it's not tested or certified.

It's certainly less untrustworthy than running non-ECC anything.

Re: It is worth it to buy the fast CPU

#517

Post by DanielHB »

mrheosuper wrote: post #503
DanielHB wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bought a geforce RTX 3080 at launch and boy was I surprised at the power draw and heat/noise it pumps out. I wonder why anybody bothers with the 90 series at all. I actually run it ~10% underclocked, barely affects performance, but greatly reduces heat/noise. These cards are configured to deliver maximum performance at any cost (besides system instability). My next GPU I am probably going mid-range to be honest, th…

When i bought the 3080ti, it really made me to rethink about my setup. I'm using space heater in an Air-conditioned room, wasting more energy for nothing.

Underclock it, it helps a lot.

Re: It is worth it to buy the fast CPU

#518

Post by fmajid »

snvzz wrote: post #516
fmajid wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but it's not tested or certified.

It's certainly less untrustworthy than running non-ECC anything.

Perhaps, but computer makers talk about "(engineering) workstations", they mean powerful machines that are meant to run professional apps like CATIA, and are certified by the makers of said software. If you're Airbus, you are not going to take chances running mission-critical design software on anything less. AMD's product for that market niche is Threadripper or EPYC, and Intel's is Xeon-W.

Re: It is worth it to buy the fast CPU

#519

Post by brokenmachine »

myaccountonhn wrote: post #426
joshka wrote: post #315

At my former job at a FAANG, I did the math on allocating developers machines with 16GB vs 64GB based on actual job tasks with estimates of how much thumb twiddling waiting time that this would save and then multiplied that out by the cost of the developer's time. The cost benefit showed a reasonable ROI that was realized in Weeks for Senior dev salaries (months for juniors). Based on this, I strongly believe that if…

I think those working on user-facing apps could do well having a slow computer or phone, just so they can get a sense of what the actual user experience is like.

Same for internet.

I've had the misfortune of being in a phone signal dead spot at times in my life.

On slow connections sites are not simply slow, but unusable whatsoever.

https://danluu.com/slow-device/

Re: It is worth it to buy the fast CPU

#520

Post by brokenmachine »

bullen wrote: post #513
DanielHB wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh well, for GPU programming sure as VRAM is king depending on task. But for gaming I won't go high end again.

I'm all in on 1030, the last passively coolable GPU. But had to upgrade to 3050 because 2GB VRAM is to little for modern titles. Fun fact: One 6600 core can saturate the 1030 for skinned mesh animations. But only saturate the 3050 50% = perfect because the world takes much less CPU (you upload it to the GPU and then it's almost one drawcall; more like one drawcall per chunk but I digress) = OpenGL (ES) can render on…

>1030, the last passively coolable GPU.

Check out the new AMD RX 7400 https://youtu.be/jNfmz0BowxM&t=997

Post reply on HN