Finally invested in an IB rig - the 10-year rig

[VirtualLarry]

As much as I like AMD, I have to admit, I was swayed by the possibilities regarding low power-consumption with an IB Celeron.

Plus, there is a current Hot Deal on Biostar mobos for 20% at the egg. So they have this B75 board with all solid caps, one SATA6G port, USB3.0 front/rear, four DDR3 slots, and VGA/DVI/HDMI, all for $56. Other places on the internet have it listed for $80-90. So I had to buy it.

And of course, what good is a mobo without a CPU? I had to buy the cheapest but best budget CPU for the mobo, and I had to get it with the mobo instead of waiting a month, so that I wouldn't be stuck with a bum mobo past Newegg's return period. So I also picked up the Intel Celeron G1610 (Ivy Bridge) CPU. Dual-core, 2.6Ghz, integrated HD2500 video, minus quicksync, etc.

As admirable as the current mobo in a relative's rig is performing (S775 Celeron 440 2.0Ghz C2D single-core), I figure it's due for a slight upgrade. I'm figuring, that unless CPU demands for basic web browsing and desktop software increase dramatically, that I should be able to get by with the Celeron for a long time. I'm planning on putting 8GB or perhaps possibly 16GB into the machine as well. The mobo has solid caps, and I'll throw in an SSD too. So the whole computer could potentially last 10 years. If, during that time, it ever gets "too slow", then I could still probably pick up a used 1155 quad-core CPU and drop it in, they are rated at 77W, and the board can handle up to a 95W IB CPU, so I should be good there.

Not that the relative has ever said that the computer is too slow. They are a light user.

So here's some ideas for discussion, the (low) power draw of an IB rig, and the possibility (and wisdom or lack thereof) of building a computer, and expecting someone to use it for 10 years. (A euphemism for a "really long time".)

 

[Sleepingforest]

The slowness probably actually comes from downloading crap and a highly fragmented hard drive if this is a tech-illiterate relative. I hate to be cynical, but I give it 3 years before it slows down again from an excess of junk, malware, and plain foolishness.

 

[VirtualLarry]

That's the thing, the current system isn't slow, nor is it bogged down by malware. Like I said, my relative is a light user. They just go to a few favorite sites (NOT facebook either). Some online video watching. No flash/Java games.

My main reason for upgrading them, is that the current PC's IDE HDD is getting old at this point (but no bad sectors as I know it), and that XP's support/patches expires in 2014.
Basically, I want to get them to Win7 64-bit, and an 865G mobo with 1GB of DDR memory is not going to get them there.

With the dual-core and SSD and plenty of RAM, I can install Win7 64-bit, and a decent A/V software too, without it bogging down the system.

 

[Tsavo]

8 and 16GB will be overkill for that box.

 

[Sleepingforest]

Oh yeah, an SSD helps quite a bit with AV scans because the read rate is so high compares to an HDD. The load is basically unnoticeable!

Your relative sounds like an excellent computer user. The less headache inducing calls for support, the better!

 

[VirtualLarry]

I don't know if they are really an excellent computer user, so much as they are barely a computer user. I want to encourage them to use their computer more, instead of bugging me on the phone to "look something up on the internet".

For them, searching the web and then browsing those search results when looking for something, is too complex. I had to create shortcuts to their favorite sites on the desktop, and they just click them to go to that site.

 

[SPBHM]

2GB with a SSD is probably better for basic usage than just 16GB of ram and some HD...

I see no reason to get so much ram for a basic PC like this, just stick with 4GB.

 

[VirtualLarry]

The reason for putting in 16GB of RAM, is not for now, but for 10 years down the road, assuming that programs and data types get larger (new media types? faster broadband leading to larger web pages?). The idea being, I would upgrade their computer once now, and then not touch it for 10 years. Given their usage patterns, and Windows 7's TRIM support, I think that one of my 80GB Intel X25-M G2 SSDs would probably last 10 years or more.

 

[monstercameron]

Maybe after getting >8gb ram, set the browser cache to a ram disk...aside, how would get ib processors 10 years from now?

 

[Piroko]

If that Celeron doesn't get HEVC acceleration then that system will start seeing limits a lot sooner.
The system you're replacing it with held what, 5 years? Just saying that aiming for 10 years on a Celeron is quite the gamble, even with an SSD.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Maybe after getting >8gb ram, set the browser cache to a ram disk

That's an idea. I'm not really sure how to do that transparently though.

...aside, how would get ib processors 10 years from now?

Well, at the 5-6 year mark I would go looking on the used market for a 3570K or 3770K (or possibly the non-K variety as well).

I mean, Q6600 came out when, 2006/2007? And those are now fairly plentiful and cheap on the used market.

 

[Tsavo]

Maybe after getting >8gb ram, set the browser cache to a ram disk...aside, how would get ib processors 10 years from now?

Browsers use cache to stick frequently used data, normal session data is stored in RAM.

Moving the cache to ram largely obviates the purpose of a browser's cache, and has no real practical benefit.

 

[R0H1T]

Browsers use cache to stick frequently used data, normal session data is stored in RAM.

Moving the cache to ram largely obviates the purpose of a browser's cache, and has no real practical benefit.

The browser itself can be easily moved to a RAM disk although one needs portable versions like this, you'll easily see an order of magnitude improvement especially if you have an SSD as boot drive !

 

[Tsavo]

The browser itself can be easily moved to a RAM disk although one needs portable versions like this, you'll easily see an order of magnitude improvement especially if you have an SSD as boot drive !

The browser already primarily uses ram for holding browsing data.

Moving a browser install to a ramdisk will only improve program load times. At this point it's click - loaded already, and this is on a slow SSD.

 

[R0H1T]

The browser already primarily uses ram for holding browsing data.

Moving a browser install to a ramdisk will only improve program load times. At this point it's click - loaded already, and this is on a slow SSD.

Well no you're wrong, the browser executable is loaded in the memory & while it runs it constantly polls the HDD/SSD where extensions & all associated local data resides, what you are saying is that the browser stores the current session data into the RAM, both are different ! It does not copy the local profile into RAM which is where the max lag comes from.

 

[Idontcare]

That's a nice inexpensive setup you assembled there, and I'd put 16GB in it too. It might be overkill but so too is the CPU in most cases.

 

[VirtualLarry]

If that Celeron doesn't get HEVC acceleration then that system will start seeing limits a lot sooner.
The system you're replacing it with held what, 5 years? Just saying that aiming for 10 years on a Celeron is quite the gamble, even with an SSD.

Assuming that we still have PCI-E video cards (maybe PCI-E 4.0 or 5.0) video cards in 10 years time, then I can likely adapt the system to whatever codecs are in vogue at the time.

As far as HEVC goes specifically, can a current dual-core Sandy/Ivy handle decoding that codec in software? I know that they can decode 1080P Blu-Rays in software.

Edit: According to wikipedia:
On February 29, 2012, at the 2012 Mobile World Congress, Qualcomm demonstrated a HEVC decoder running on an Android tablet, with a Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 dual-core processor running at 1.5 GHz, showing H.264/MPEG-4 AVC and HEVC versions of the same video content playing side by side.[29] In this demonstration HEVC showed almost a 50% bit rate reduction compared with H.264/MPEG-4 AVC.[29]

How much faster is a dual-core 2.6Ghz IB than a 1.5Ghz dual-core ARM Snapdragon? At least 2x, at the minimum, I estimate.

So even HEVC shouldn't be a problem.

 

[Arachnotronic]

How much faster is a dual-core 2.6Ghz IB than a 1.5Ghz dual-core ARM Snapdragon? At least 2x, at the minimum, I estimate.

You're off by, like, an order of magnitude.

 

[2is]

You're far more likely to be limited by your CPU choice than memory capaity in 10 years. Overall, I'd say it was a poor selection of componens based on what you're trying to accomplish.

 

[ALIVE]

That's an idea. I'm not really sure how to do that transparently though.

Well, at the 5-6 year mark I would go looking on the used market for a 3570K or 3770K (or possibly the non-K variety as well).

I mean, Q6600 came out when, 2006/2007? And those are now fairly plentiful and cheap on the used market.

well do as i did
download opera portable version and put it on the ramdrive
usually the ramdrive has a save and load image feature
i only use the load at startup option
so i get to have a clean browser with nothing cached
but when i am at the net the cache is on the ramdrive.

 

[escrow4]

10yrs is an eternity in PC land. When I was upgrading my desktop I decided to chuck it and just buy a mac mini instead (base i5 3210m, 4GB, 500GB HDD) for a basic office box. I expect it to last 5yrs max, by then I suspect the HDD will be on its last legs at the very least, so that will need to be upgraded, and the new mini models (if they are still around) I'll also consider.

I do agree that a G1610 will run anything on the internet in terms of basic flash and java (assuming they are still around too) based on the last decade. Hardware has plateaued and software hasn't exactly become more demanding.

 

[Hubb1e]

If you really want it to last 10 years, drop in an i5-3570 with 8GB of ram and two free slots. Intel CPUs never really go down in price, even used ones if they're the fastest ones available for their socket so you're just wasting money on the Celeron because it won't last 10 years. You'll end up getting a quad core for that thing in 6 years so you might as well get it now.

 

[tweakboy]

Your going to have to OC the heck out of that Celery. Like 4.8 or 5Ghz ,,,

gl

 

[Piroko]

Assuming that we still have PCI-E video cards (maybe PCI-E 4.0 or 5.0) video cards in 10 years time, then I can likely adapt the system to whatever codecs are in vogue at the time.

True.

As far as HEVC goes specifically, can a current dual-core Sandy/Ivy handle decoding that codec in software? I know that they can decode 1080P Blu-Rays in software.

Tough one, the encoder/decoders aren't finalized yet. I've read that one current decoder can push 1080p on an 2600k with some spare resources, but there were still compression options left unchecked.

Edit: According to wikipedia:
On February 29, 2012, at the 2012 Mobile World Congress, Qualcomm demonstrated a HEVC decoder running on an Android tablet, with a Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 dual-core processor running at 1.5 GHz, showing H.264/MPEG-4 AVC and HEVC versions of the same video content playing side by side.[29] In this demonstration HEVC showed almost a 50% bit rate reduction compared with H.264/MPEG-4 AVC.[29]

How much faster is a dual-core 2.6Ghz IB than a 1.5Ghz dual-core ARM Snapdragon? At least 2x, at the minimum, I estimate.

Well, Qualcomm demonstrated a 800*480 clip with low bitrate and unknown options. Leave enough options unchecked in h.264 and the original PSP can play 480p60 with its 0.33 Ghz dualcore Mips CPU. The BluRay profile ended up being a lot more demanding and murdered most Athlon XPs and P4s.

well do as i did
download opera portable version and put it on the ramdrive
usually the ramdrive has a save and load image feature
i only use the load at startup option
so i get to have a clean browser with nothing cached
but when i am at the net the cache is on the ramdrive.

Odd choice. Opera is one of the browsers that work great even with an USB2 5200rpm HDD as source...

 

[VirtualLarry]

If you really want it to last 10 years, drop in an i5-3570 with 8GB of ram and two free slots. Intel CPUs never really go down in price, even used ones if they're the fastest ones available for their socket so you're just wasting money on the Celeron because it won't last 10 years. You'll end up getting a quad core for that thing in 6 years so you might as well get it now.

Well, as long as the 3570 (non-K) drops $50 in price in five years on the used market, I'm golden.

I paid $200 for my Q6600 CPUs at MC, on sale, and now you can get them for $50 on ebay.

So I wouldn't say that Intel CPUs don't go down in price over time.