Buddy needs a new PC - existing S939 dual-core rig with 4x 512MB DDR1

[whm1974]

I think he might be predicting a drop in 4K monitor prices if the Intel 300 series chipsets coming this month support HDMI 2.0 as standard.

With that noted, the MSI H110M-VD motherboard he was planing to use for the G4560 build only has VGA and DVI (no display port) so he would need to add a dGPU anyway if he eventually wanted 4K monitor support.

So I think the refurb was not a bad idea. (Would be interesting to find out eventually if the Core i5 2400 in the machine is able to decode AV1 should he add a 4K (but non AV1) capable card to it)

Hasn't HDMI been out more then long enough for it be a standard feature on everything by now? What is the hold up?

 

[cbn]

Hasn't HDMI been out more then long enough for it be a standard feature on everything by now? What is the hold up?

Some good news is that Gemini Lake has HDMI 2.0 as standard.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Yeah, Intel CPUs and iGPUs have been a bit laggard in supporting HDMI2.0. AMD and NVidia support it (4K60 over HDMI) since their 14nm cards, and AMD's APUs now support it too, apparently. At least, Raven Ridge supposedly does, from testing that users have done with some boards (mine thankfully included), even though the board's official specs are "HDMI1.4".

Even Intel's iGPUs on their recent chips (Haswell and up), will do 4K over HDMI1.4 with reduced color depth, in Linux. (The driver overclocks the hardware slightly.) Likewise, Nvidia's GT630 and 730 Kepler cards with officially HDMI1.4 support, will also do 4K60 at reduced color depth over their HDMI output ports.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I think he might be predicting a drop in 4K monitor prices if the Intel 300 series chipsets coming this month support HDMI 2.0 as standard.

I was just trying to think ahead. Many HDTV sets sold today, are 4K-capable now, even a $200 set from Walmart. (If you shop correctly.) It essentially carries very little price premium over 1080P. And Netflix, Blu-Ray, etc., are all moving to 4K.

 

[corkyg]

Was in Costco yesterday, and nearly every TV on display was 4K. It is now the standard.

 

[whm1974]

Was in Costco yesterday, and nearly every TV on display was 4K. It is now the standard.

Which why I am dumbfounded by the lack of HDMI 2.0 as a standard feature on iGPUs. Come on video cards had this for years now.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Was in Costco yesterday, and nearly every TV on display was 4K. It is now the standard.

Did you walk around the second aisle where are the <$200, <28" TVs are? Those are still all 1080p.

The big 4k TVs are still centerpieces for the living rooms of people who watch too much TV.

 

[corkyg]

I did indeed walk around to all the aisles - but the big boys on the top made one ignore the el cheapos. By design of course.

Dave, where I live, there are many octogenarians whose day is regulated by their TVs. Can't forget the lady I helped who was trying to change channels with her wireless phone.

And, I agree about HDMI.

 

[XavierMace]

Which why I am dumbfounded by the lack of HDMI 2.0 as a standard feature on iGPUs. Come on video cards had this for years now.

HDMI 2.0 (18Gbps) is necessary for 4k60p 4:4:4. You can do 4k30p 4:4:4 over HDMI 1.4 with 8 bit color depth. 12 bit color depth drops that down to 4:2:2 as HDMI 1.4 didn't support 4:2:0. For general desktop usage, you REALLY want 4:4:4. However, very few of the cheap TV's will do 4k60p 4:4:4 and most 4K computer monitors have Display Port which makes the inclusion of HDMI 2.0 somewhat moot. But for general desktop usage, some people are fine with 4k30p. So, the amount of people wanting 4k60p 4:4:4 via HDMI on onboard video is rather small.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

I did indeed walk around to all the aisles - but the big boys on the top made one ignore the el cheapos. By design of course.

Dave, where I live, there are many octogenarians whose day is regulated by their TVs. Can't forget the lady I helped who was trying to change channels with her wireless phone.

Describes my grandparents to a 'T'. Breakfast, newspaper, lunch, britcoms, maybe the netflix DVD, then bedtime, broken up by church and doctors' visits. But they have a 28" they bought several years ago to replace a 25" CRT from the early '90s, and aren't in a hurry to replace it, either.

Afaik, elderly folks aren't buying the giant 4k screens - at least according the the Black Friday market research I've read, the primary consumer for those things is men under 40. In my grandparents' case, they have a smallish house and anything over 32" wouldn't fit in the "tv spot" in the den.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Well, ok, so they primarily sell 4K sets in sizes 32" and up... but older folks primarily don't buy them. Got it.

The fellow this PC is for, is getting on in his years somewhat. He has a huge TV (projection), that he got for free, but wants to get rid of it. I actually gave him my "spare" 32" 720P LCD TV I picked up a few year ago, on sale online, at some obscure place, around BF maybe 3-4 years ago. Never been out of the box. But that should suit his as a living-room TV for his cable TV.

Just thinking of if he ever replaces it with something better. (Or I do.)

I guess his internet connection (when he gets it back) wouldn't likely support 4K anyways.

He also has a tablet.

I was hoping to hook him up, so that he could use the 32" TV as an HDMI monitor, and maybe with the wireless Logitech keyboard + mouse set I gave him too, would allow him to sit on his couch, and use his PC.

Edit: So he can play his "slots" games, and watch online streaming movies and YouTube. Should be a different, and hopefully better experience for him, watching full-screen 32" videos on YouTube on his couch, than on his 17" or 19" PC monitor, sitting in a chair.

Not sure if his vision is that great, or not. 720P 32" TVs aren't hard to read, though, really. I even prefer 1080P 32" at maybe 7-8 distance. Though I might up the text scaling factor to 1.25x.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I originally was going to give him the SFF with the i5-2400 I ordered, but now I'm pretty certain I'm going to be a tad selfish, and keep the i5-2400 CPU to throw into my other refurb Dell tower I picked up, and take the i3-2130 or whatever's in that one, and put it into this SFF, add 2x2GB DDR3, add a 120GB SSD, and do a fresh install of Windows 10 64-bit. But probably boot the installed 500GB HDD first, and make certain that Windows 10 is activated on this hardware first.

I don't think that the Sandy I3 CPUs were capable of 4K anyways, so it's probably just a moot point, although I have some half-height / LP GT710 video card(s), I could drop one of those in.

What do you all think, would that be an improvement over the Sandy Bridge i3 iGPU? If it would be significant, I'll do it, those video cards are already a sunk cost to me.

Or, I think that I have some Radeon R3 230 cards, would those be better than a GT710? (I'm not sure if the R3 230 are re-branded VLIW4/5 / aka 6450 cards, or if they are actually GCN. If they're not GCN, then of course, no new drivers for them, so I'm likely to opt for the Nvidia solution instead.)

He has an LCD montior, also rather old, a Dell UltraSharp, I think, that's not a widescreen. I have some BNIB VGA widescreen monitors, not sure if they are 900P or 1080P, would have to check the box. I've had them here for like 2 years in storage in my apt., would like to put them to good use if possible. So I would like a video-output solution, that can drive BOTH a VGA monitor, AND an HDMI TV. I think both that R3 230 and the GT710 would do that, although the VGA output port might be on a second bracket, making it a double-wide LP solution if I needed all three outputs.


--

Do you all think this this would be an actual upgrade, from an A64 X2 S939 dual-core, with 2GB of RAM, and Windows 7? (Unsure what video card that he has in it now.)

Would he be better off, with the FM1 quad-core, than the Sandy i3? Including if we dropped in a GT710 with the Sandy i3, for better graphics? The FM1 APU only clocks to 2.4Ghz, I think, and the Sandy i3 is like 3.3-3.4Ghz.

 

[XavierMace]

Max official resolution supported by the HD2000 was 2560x1600 as far as I recall. But again, 4K seems to be completely irrelevant here.

I'd take the Sandy i3 over the FM1 or S939 in a heartbeat. You haven't specified model numbers for the FM1 or the original S939 in question, but if I take a guess on the high side and assume it an A8-3870K and an Athlon 64 X2 4800+.... The i3 has the edge in both single thread and multithread performance (per Passmark). About a 12% lead over the A8 in multithread and about 50% single thread. The i3 is over double the X2 4800+ in both categories. So far nothing has been mentioned that would make me want to toss a dGPU in it.

Did you walk around the second aisle where are the <$200, <28" TVs are? Those are still all 1080p.

I don't know what your Costco is like but the ones around here it's 1.5-2.5 rows of 4K TV's. Then a half row at best of 1080p's of any size. <28"? They've got like one shelf worth off to the side. They aren't even with the rest of the TV's at Sam's Club.

4K TV's are standard at this point. $300 gets you a 43" 4K. Being able to find a couple that aren't doesn't change that. My grandparents (on both sides) passed away in the last few years. The one had a 38", don't recall if it was 720p or 1080p. The other had an old CRT that never got used but it was a pretty good sized one. My parents are in their 60's and have a 70". So, YMMV.

 

[cbn]

Did you walk around the second aisle where are the <$200, <28" TVs are? Those are still all 1080p.

28" (or smaller) flat TV (or monitor) is what someone want for close placement on a desk.

But today I did find out that affordable 40" curved 4K TVs are showing up.

(Below is a Samsung UN40KU6290FXZA)

Below is the Youtube video I got that image from:

P.S. I couldn't find that exact model currently being sold, but this one (also sold at Walmart and Best Buy) has almost the same model number (UN40MU6290FXZA) and looks just like it.

 

[cbn]

I wonder if that guy can even afford a 4K monitor and the internet to go with it.

@VirtualLarry I'm not sure what your current focus on 4K video is about, but what is wrong with sticking with 1080p for budget or low end machines? And besides I'm not sure if there is enough 4K content to bother anyway.

Regarding Internet speed requirement, AV1 should help.

But another thing to consider is ATSC 3.0 which will bring 4K broadcast content (ie, over the air).

With that mentioned I don't know if that curved 40" Samsung TV has a ATSC 3.0 tuner. Might have to wait for a newer version.

 

[whm1974]

Regarding Internet speed requirement, AV1 should help.

But another thing to consider is ATSC 3.0 which will bring 4K broadcast content (ie, over the air).

With that mentioned I don't know if that curved 40" Samsung TV has a ATSC 3.0 tuner. Might have to wait for a newer version.

What is with the hype with curved TV/Displays? I'm quite sure I wouldn't want one myself.

 

[cbn]

What is with the hype with curved TV/Displays? I'm quite sure I wouldn't want one myself.

After doing some Google searching it appears the trend for curved TVs is dying.

But I think if the screen is going to be used up close and by only one person curved would work better. (Think about how folks with triple monitors usually (if not always) have the two end monitors angled inwards if sitting close to them).

In fact, using my own triple monitor set-up (21.5" 1080p with 17" 1280 x 1024 and 19" 1440 x 900 side monitors) if I place my 17" side monitor flat (rather than angled) it is harder to see the text (I find myself wanting to move over a bit to read it).

 

[XavierMace]

28" (or smaller) flat TV (or monitor) is what someone want for close placement on a desk.

But today I did find out that affordable 40" curved 4K TVs are showing up.

(Below is a Samsung UN40KU6290FXZA)

No, that is a picture of his LG monitor he's getting rid of. Maybe you should watch the video again? LOL. The Samsung 6290's are flat panels. The 6490's are curved and they're not great TV's for the price.

 

[cbn]

Thanks for pointing out that mistake (mixing up the LG and the Samsung).

My apologies.

 

[whm1974]

After doing some Google searching it appears the trend for curved TVs is dying.

But I think if the screen is going to be used up close and by only one person curved would work better. (Think about how folks with triple monitors usually (if not always) have the two end monitors angled inwards if sitting close to them).

In fact, using my own triple monitor set-up (21.5" 1080p with 17" 1280 x 1024 and 19" 1440 x 900 side monitors) if I place my 17" side monitor flat (rather than angled) it is harder to see the text (I find myself wanting to move over a bit to read it).

I can imagine that a curved display can make it harder to do work.

 

[XavierMace]

I can imagine that a curved display can make it harder to do work.

Not really. Like @cbn said, for anyone already used to running 3 monitors, it's the same general feeling. My desk at work is 3x24" monitors with the ends angled in.

 

[cbn]

What is with the hype with curved TV/Displays? I'm quite sure I wouldn't want one myself.

After doing some Google searching it appears the trend for curved TVs is dying.

But I think if the screen is going to be used up close and by only one person curved would work better. (Think about how folks with triple monitors usually (if not always) have the two end monitors angled inwards if sitting close to them).

In fact, using my own triple monitor set-up (21.5" 1080p with 17" 1280 x 1024 and 19" 1440 x 900 side monitors) if I place my 17" side monitor flat (rather than angled) it is harder to see the text (I find myself wanting to move over a bit to read it).

I can imagine that a curved display can make it harder to do work.

Not really. Like @cbn said, for anyone already used to running 3 monitors, it's the same general feeling. My desk at work is 3x24" monitors with the ends angled in.

I think the only way I could imagine a curved display making it harder to work is if it were placed far enough away (with the text size scaled up). In that particular case a flat panel could be better.

But for up close curved all the way.

In fact, I can't really imagine myself being able to use 4K (without scaling) unless it was curved.

P.S. Here is my tentative plan for 4K (which I eventually plan for video editing):

1.) 24" 4K Monitor (text scaled 200%).

or

2.) 28" 4K monitor (text scaled 150%)

or

3.) 40" 4K Curved Monitor or TV (text not scaled).

Alternatives:

40" 4K flat monitor or TV (text scaled 150%) and wall mounted behind desk (ie, further distance away than mounted on desk)

 

[cbn]

Thinking about this more....

If I have to scale text 150% on both the 28" 4K flat screen and 40" 4K flat screen.....what is the advantage of 40"?

The way I see it:

1. Increased space on desk (due to wall mounting).

2.) The larger size lets more people easily view the screen due to a smaller viewing angle.

(It can work, but I don't get extra text real estate like I would with multiple monitors with ends angled in or a single large curved monitor)

The place I see the biggest disadvantage to 40" 4K (text scaled 150%) vs. 28" 4K (text scaled 150%) is if I wanted triple monitors. Then I would need a very strong stand for the 3 x 40" 4K whereas the 3 x 28" could use a much weaker stand. 3 x 24" 4K could be placed on the desk without a stand.

 

[cbn]

As an alternative to 4K monitor(s) for desktop how about augmented reality headsets (or glasses) that could result in some kind of virtual screen or screens?

How good is this tech becoming?

Ideally it would be able to replace multiple 4K monitors (text scaled 150%) on a wall mounted stand which in turn allows for complete use of a desk.

EDIT: Check this out (particularly the video @ 6:27 to ~9:33). That is pretty amazing (I like the part where he is working on the CAD of the car and has the Gmail open at the same time)

 

[hoorah]

Do you all think this this would be an actual upgrade, from an A64 X2 S939 dual-core, with 2GB of RAM, and Windows 7? (Unsure what video card that he has in it now.)

Would he be better off, with the FM1 quad-core, than the Sandy i3? Including if we dropped in a GT710 with the Sandy i3, for better graphics? The FM1 APU only clocks to 2.4Ghz, I think, and the Sandy i3 is like 3.3-3.4Ghz.

Give him the FM1. Something something beggars and choosers. I mean, come on, the guy didn't even turn the computer on for 4 months!

I have a friend that often gets some of my older tech. He sometimes has to remind me that he's not a power user like me and that once it works, its off his mind, and by the time he needs to think about the 'future', I'll have new throwaway systems thats are 2-3x as fast as the one he has. So, I get it, but still. You're overthinking it. And seriously, you buy a lot of low end parts....