Best web-browsing desktop box out of these three, for friend's mom?

[VirtualLarry]

1) Newly-built i3-8100 Coffee Lake quad-core, 2x4GB DDR4-2800 @ 2400, 512GB Adata SX6000 PCI-E M.2 NVMe SSD, Win10, MSI H310 chipset, $400 + Win10
2) Recently-built A6-3670K FM1 unlocked quad-core, OCed to 3.2Ghz, 2x2GB DDR3-1600, Silicon Power S55 120GB SATA6G SSD, DVD-RW, ECS A55M chipset, $165 + Win10
3) Older, purchased refurb: Acer i3-4160 Haswell dual-core w/HT, 2x4GB DDR3-1600, 120GB SATA SSD, DVD-RW, Wifi, $236 + SSD + RAM, so like $300-320, Win7 COA included, Win10 upgrade installed

Prices are what it cost me in parts. (This is not a price-check thread.)

Friend's Mom's PC is acting up, I'm either going to fix it up, or try to sell her a new one.

Just wondering, in terms of price/performance, for browsing, not gaming, which one do you think would be better?

The FM1 rig is limited to 1080P output, the i3-8100 and the Acer Haswell i3 both do 4K30.

I'd prefer to sell the FM1 rig, and with the dual-channel RAM and SSD, it's really not too bad. The i3-8100 is the best, and most current rig, but I don't know if she can afford $400+.

Her malfunctioning rig is a Sandy Bridge Pentium, with a 500GB HDD, and 8GB of DDR3. So the FM1 would be kind of a side-grade, although she would be upgrading from 2 cores to 4. The Acer slimline is most like her current PC, in terms of form-factor. The i3-8100, could easily form the basis of a decent entry-level gaming rig, if I threw in the GTX 1050 3GB I've got on my desk that was a "pull" from another machine.

 

[scannall]

1) Newly-built i3-8100 Coffee Lake quad-core, 2x4GB DDR4-2800 @ 2400, 512GB Adata SX6000 PCI-E M.2 NVMe SSD, Win10, MSI H310 chipset, $400 + Win10
2) Recently-built A6-3670K FM1 unlocked quad-core, OCed to 3.2Ghz, 2x2GB DDR3-1600, Silicon Power S55 120GB SATA6G SSD, DVD-RW, ECS A55M chipset, $165 + Win10
3) Older, purchased refurb: Acer i3-4160 Haswell dual-core w/HT, 2x4GB DDR3-1600, 120GB SATA SSD, DVD-RW, Wifi, $236 + SSD + RAM, so like $300-320, Win7 COA included, Win10 upgrade installed

Prices are what it cost me in parts. (This is not a price-check thread.)

Friend's Mom's PC is acting up, I'm either going to fix it up, or try to sell her a new one.

Just wondering, in terms of price/performance, for browsing, not gaming, which one do you think would be better?

The FM1 rig is limited to 1080P output, the i3-8100 and the Acer Haswell i3 both do 4K30.

I'd prefer to sell the FM1 rig, and with the dual-channel RAM and SSD, it's really not too bad. The i3-8100 is the best, and most current rig, but I don't know if she can afford $400+.

Her malfunctioning rig is a Sandy Bridge Pentium, with a 500GB HDD, and 8GB of DDR3. So the FM1 would be kind of a side-grade, although she would be upgrading from 2 cores to 4. The Acer slimline is most like her current PC, in terms of form-factor. The i3-8100, could easily form the basis of a decent entry-level gaming rig, if I threw in the GTX 1050 3GB I've got on my desk that was a "pull" from another machine.

Probably the first one. 120 gig is pretty skimpy for storage. Not a lot of room for grandkids pictures etc. But any of them if they were 240 gig or more.

 

[CuriousMike]

She's likely not a gamer.
The Acer machine with 8GB of ram sounds like the sweet spot for her in terms of price and performance.

That 4GB FM1 system might feel challenging depending on how heavy of a web user she is.

 

[coercitiv]

1) good
2) junk
3) junk

As you said, this is not a price check thread.

 

[Hans Gruber]

Larry what happened to your 4560 builds? Something like that would make the most sense for a budget build.

 

[Charlie22911]

I’d rank them 1, 3, 2. Number 3 would do the business just fine for a browser box, number one would be overkill for that now but may become more necessary as webpages become more bloated in the future.

 

[Carson Dyle]

Why in the hell would anyone be thinking about overclocking a machine for some Mom's web browsing?

Just fix her computer.

 

[VirtualLarry]

But any of them if they were 240 gig or more.

That puts a slightly different spin on things, than I was expecting. So, the issue to you, is not the CPU/APU or RAM, it's the storage?

I do have a few Team Group SATA SSDs here BNIB, a couple 240GB and a 480GB.

I could re-build and re-install with the bigger SSD.

Edit: Adata SU650 DRAM-less SATA SSDs for $28.99 @ Newegg tonight. I guess there's no excuse for not using at least a 240GB SSD these days.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Why in the hell would anyone be thinking about overclocking a machine for some Mom's web browsing?

Just fix her computer.

Kinda, because FM1, like Core2Quad, really needed a touch of overclocking to give them an acceptable clockspeed, in comparison with modern CPUs and PCs?

And yes, fixing her PC is the other option, but what if it's not just the storage that is flaking out, what if it's the PSU or mobo? It would be a lot easier to sell her a new (to her) PC, even at a slight loss to myself monetarily, so she wouldn't be without a PC for a few weeks, while I ordered replacement parts for her slimline Gateway Sandy Bridge Pentium off of ebay or somewhere.

Edit: I talked with an older friend of mine, that is a retired tradesman, that had his own business for a while, and he told me that he wouldn't sell any customers an overclocked PC. I can see his points. But he's not an overclocker nor a gamer. He is an enthusiast, though, as he built his own PC, after I helped him and showed him how to build his prior PC.

 

[Markfw]

Number one. a 512 gig ssd should be fine.

 

[scannall]

That puts a slightly different spin on things, than I was expecting. So, the issue to you, is not the CPU/APU or RAM, it's the storage?

I do have a few Team Group SATA SSDs here BNIB, a couple 240GB and a 480GB.

I could re-build and re-install with the bigger SSD.

Windows takes up so much room. Unless you are over there all the time freeing up space, it will fill and bog down the drive causing problems. Leave a bit of breathing room for photos, and for staying under %80 used.

 

[escrow4]

2 is a dog, 3 doesn't have enough space, 1 would be the best option. I have no idea why manufacturers insist on those tiny 128GB SSDs for a number of prebuilts either, including laptops. You need at least 240GB, preferably 512GB. Windows and Office are fat bastards and with all the other crap that comes with the modern web and apps 240/256GB is the minimum. That i3 also has enough puff to last the difference both CPU wise and GPU wise.

 

[whm1974]

@VirtualLarry Number 1 is fine, number 3 would be fine with a larger SSD. The second one is pretty much junk.

Anything less then 500GB of storage is fairly unless you ask me.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Are you all heavy downloaders? Just curious.

My friend, and his GF's PC, both have 120/128GB-class SSDs, with Windows 7, and neither of them have come to me in the last 3 or so years, complaining about lack of space or warnings from Windows about lack of space, or crashes from lack of space.

Most people, I think, just stream TV and movies online. I think that only "enthusiasts" are data-hoarders, and may have a somewhat distorted view of how much space you need. (*Or "gamers", who need space for a steam library. But these are desktop PCs, and it's easy enough to add a 1TB or larger 3.5" HDD, if need be.)

 

[whm1974]

Well in my case I do have a large amount of pictures and videos, and quite a few PDFs and other documents as well. You don't have to be an "enthusiasts" to hoard data.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Well in my case I do have a large amount of pictures and videos, and quite a few PDFs and other documents as well. You don't have to be an "enthusiasts" to hoard data.

Well, OK, but then, why isn't the answer "Add a secondary HDD", rather than "increase the size of the SSD?

 

[whm1974]

Well, OK, but then, why isn't the answer "Add a secondary HDD", rather than "increase the size of the SSD?

For Linux a ~128GB SSD with /home on a larger HDD/SSD would be fine. However Windows 10 and its applications take up more space.

 

[CuriousMike]

Are you all heavy downloaders? Just curious.

I think a lot of people either miss, or ignore, this: "Friend's Mom's PC "

I bought my Mom a Chromebook 3 years ago. It came with 16GB of space. People send her photos. She loads photos from her phone onto it. Google photos automagically uploads them to the cloud for her.
She surfs the internet. Writes emails. Watches the youtubes and netflix.
And hasn't had a single issue in those 3 years.

My Mom isn't doing video encoding or playing call of duty - she prizes "it just works" and internety tasks above all else.

 

[whm1974]

I think a lot of people either miss, or ignore, this: "Friend's Mom's PC "

I bought my Mom a Chromebook 3 years ago. It came with 16GB of space. People send her photos. She loads photos from her phone onto it. Google photos automagically uploads them to the cloud for her.
She surfs the internet. Writes emails. Watches the youtubes and netflix.
And hasn't had a single issue in those 3 years.

My Mom isn't doing video encoding or playing call of duty - she prizes "it just works" and internety tasks above all else.

I wonder if if a ChromeBox would be perfect for Larry's friend's mom?

 

[VirtualLarry]

@VirtualLarry Number 1 is fine, number 3 would be fine with a larger SSD. The second one is pretty much junk.

Anything less then 500GB of storage is fairly unless you ask me.

Should I re-install the A6-3670K @ 3.20Ghz with a larger (240GB or 480GB) SSD? Do you think that I would get my money back out of it if I did? Or should I just throw in a 500GB SATA 3.5" HDD too, for pictures and things?

Edit: Oh, and I fell asleep last night with OCCT : PSU Test running. Said it had clocked 6+ hours when I woke up. That's kind of a relief, considering it has a Logisys "case PSU" in it. (I think it's stable though.)

 

[whm1974]

Should I re-install the A6-3670K @ 3.20Ghz with a larger (240GB or 480GB) SSD? Do you think that I would get my money back out of it if I did? Or should I just throw in a 500GB SATA 3.5" HDD too, for pictures and things?

Edit: Oh, and I fell asleep last night with OCCT : PSU Test running. Said it had clocked 6+ hours when I woke up. That's kind of a relief, considering it has a Logisys "case PSU" in it. (I think it's stable though.)

Since the A6-3670K is basically junk, then no I wouldn't put the larger SSD in it.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Since the A6-3670K is basically junk, then no I wouldn't put the larger SSD in it.

Well, that was basically my line of thinking when I threw the 120GB-class SSD into it. It was basically, yeah, needs an SSD for a browser box, only have some 2x2GB kits of DDR3 to throw in (only two DIMM slots on the ECS A55 board), but the quad-core APU should at least allow watching nearly all 1080P video formats. Too bad that the HDMI port is limited to 1080P on it.

I wouldn't quite say "junk", but they really don't overclock well, like the Core2Quads did. But I compare these nearly like-for-like with Core2Quads, but I probably shouldn't, as I think that the Core2Quads are more powerful. These have a (surprisingly-decent) iGPU for browsing and browser games, though.

Heck, I don't even consider Bay Trail Atoms to be "junk". (Although they would be the minimalist CPU I would use, and I wouldn't pay a lot for a rig using one.) I might consider Brazos or anything lower-performance or single-core to be "junk".

But an APU (a quad-core, even), that uses DDR3, and can play back 1080P H.264 videos full-screen no problem, is still not quite in the "junk" category, at least as far as browser-boxes go. Neither is a Core2Quad, with a discrete GPU. (Onboard Intel chipset iGPUs of that era are basically "junk" though.)

So, maybe, "almost-junk"?

 

[whm1974]

Well, that was basically my line of thinking when I threw the 120GB-class SSD into it. It was basically, yeah, needs an SSD for a browser box, only have some 2x2GB kits of DDR3 to throw in (only two DIMM slots on the ECS A55 board), but the quad-core APU should at least allow watching nearly all 1080P video formats. Too bad that the HDMI port is limited to 1080P on it.

I wouldn't quite say "junk", but they really don't overclock well, like the Core2Quads did. But I compare these nearly like-for-like with Core2Quads, but I probably shouldn't, as I think that the Core2Quads are more powerful. These have a (surprisingly-decent) iGPU for browsing and browser games, though.

Heck, I don't even consider Bay Trail Atoms to be "junk". (Although they would be the minimalist CPU I would use, and I wouldn't pay a lot for a rig using one.) I might consider Brazos or anything lower-performance or single-core to be "junk".

But an APU (a quad-core, even), that uses DDR3, and can play back 1080P H.264 videos full-screen no problem, is still not quite in the "junk" category, at least as far as browser-boxes go. Neither is a Core2Quad, with a discrete GPU. (Onboard Intel chipset iGPUs of that era are basically "junk" though.)

So, maybe, "almost-junk"?

For something that uses anything like pre-Ryzen APUs, why would you even use higher then 1080p resolutions anyway? That deosn't make any sense to do.

 

[JWade]

I dont see an issue with #2, with the SSD it will be plenty fast for any friend's mom for internet usage, daily usage. Someone mentioned a bigger SSD/faster system for grand kids, um, kids dont need to be playing games when visiting grand parents, definitely dont need a gamer. I think for the intended person and intended usage, system #2 is more than enough. Is it the "best" system out of the three? definitely not, is it the cheapest? definitely is. Will it be more than adequate? Definitely. Myself personally, I would upgrade ram to 8gb. I have a similar speed amd apu hooked to my 17 year old daughter's TV, more than does everything she does on it (displays 1080P on her TV)

 

[VirtualLarry]

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=1VK-0003-03WC4&ignorebbr=1

Here's a refurb Lenovo SFF, with an A8-5500B (Trinity quad-core, 3.2Ghz base, 3.7Ghz turbo), 500GB HDD, Win10 Home, for $105.

Hard to compete against something like that.