What platform / CPU / APU do you recommend for people you build for?

[myocardia]

...

 

[hojnikb]

That's correct, at least according to AMD and the guy in this thread who either owns one, or built and tested one for someone, Shivansps.



I never said the A4-7300 had any number of cores. It has dual modules, which means it has 4 AMD 'cores'. Both of these CPUs are based on the Steamroller µarch, as far as I know, and every one of their modules is two AMD 'cores'.

Nope, A4s are single module, two core APUs. Basically A8/A10 split in half.
Physical die obviously has 2 modules and full gpu/l2, but its disabled.

 

[TeknoBug]

It's just me, but I'll take A8-3870K before i3-6100, assuming I find one with A75 chipset. i3-6100 is really only a dual-core with four-threads, on top of the hefty price here.

More cores isn't always better, an i3 6100 is much better than the A8 3870K is.

 

[cbn]

He never mentioned an A4-7400. The A4-7300 that he did mention has two modules that turbo to 4.0 Ghz, while the A6-7400k has one module, that only turbos to 3.6 Ghz. That's the epitome of an easy choice, if you ask me.

My mistake on the typo of "A4-7400". I did mean A4-7300 which is a single module dual core based on the Piledriver architecture.

http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldozer/AMD-A4-Series A4-7300 - AD7300OKA23HL - AD7300OKHLBOX.html

 

[cbn]

Just curious. I know that some people have criticized my choices of building entry-level rigs, and some people have mentioned building rigs for other people.

Do you have a "Go to" platform or CPU that you like to recommend to people? Even if you're helping someone pick out a PC at BestBuy and not building, what CPU do you recommend?

I'm curious if everyone else here really recommends i7-6700K to all of their friends and relatives and moms and grandparents.

Or are you willing to go lower on the product stack?

Do you try to perform a needs analysis for the person, to determine the CPU / platform? Or is that too much work to get into, and you just recommend a 6700(K)?

Just curious how many of your customers use Cable TV?

The reason I am asking is because I know you like Windows 7 and that OS has a really awesome and easy to use DVR built into it capable of legally recording DRM protected content. (with the aid of a device like HDHomeRun Prime).

 

[SpaceBeer]

An i3 is a dual-core that tries so hard to be more. Buy a higher clocked i5 if you want something to last (not the abortion that is the i5 6400). The minimum I recommend for a desktop is an i5, the minimum for a laptop is a mobile i5, latest gen. Most would use tech near every day and its a part of their life so saving a $100 or $200 meh.

That makes no sense. Laptop CPUs are basically i3 with lower TDP/clocks. So how can you say poorly clocked i3 (e.g. i5-6200U or even i7-6500U) is good, and much faster i3-6100 (or 6300) is bad and slow? Of course, you can buy those i7 HQ laptops, but those are mostly workstations and gaming laptops, taking only few percent of total shipments. Even Core M and Silvermont based CPUs are more common.

I've been using many PCs (CPUs) in last 2 years (i3-2330M, Atom Z3735, A6-5400K, A10-7850K, i5-3437U, i5-4440, i7-4810MQ, i7-5500U...) and for ordinary home/office tasks, I could barely notice the difference. I know every benchmark will show huge differences between them, but I don't need benchmark software to finish my tasks. Of course, when there is a need for some demanding work (3D modeling and rendering, computation, virtualization, gaming...) you can never have enough power But even in those cases some "slow" processors (A10 or i3) can do very good job. And there is always possibility your bottleneck is not CPU, but some other part of your PC (RAM, storage, GPU...). Plus, some programs that can be used for same tasks, have totally different behavior when it comes to hardware usage (WinRAR vs 7zip, Excel vs Libreoffice Calc, Inventor vs Catia...). So you have to choose your hardware according to software you plan to use (or vice versa).

So saying some products are slow or fast (bad or good) without taking in consideration what are they going to be used for, is more or less meaningless.

Regarding opinion that SSD is a must - I think that one also depends on your usage. Some of PCs I'm using have HDD (5400rpm or 7200rpm), some have SSD. And I haven't noticed those with SSD are faster or more convenient to use. I like to keep opened all the programs I often use (mail client, media player, browser, IM client, CAD software, IDE, Steam...). And with 16 GB of RAM, that is not a problem. So time needed to "start" one of those is 0s. Also, I don't turn off or restart my PC so often, and therefore don't care about Boot time and how much it takes to start all the applications. The only time I notice my storage is slow is during large file/saved game loads, but that rarely happens in my case. So for me, RAM is much more important than SSD, but I know other users have different demands. And with these prices of SSDs, it's hard not to recommend them

 

[frozentundra123456]

I agree. For average light use, or even light productivity like Office, some posters in these forums vastly overstate the cpu requirements. For the average user, a Haswell or newer i3 is more than adequate, and should last for a long time. I even feel that a big core pentium or even celeron are adequate, but to err on the side of caution, I would recommend at least an i3 because of generally higher clocks and hyperthreading. I also agree about SSD. Clearly they make the computer feel faster, but in reality, my desktop has a 7200rpm HDD, and it does not feel slow in the slightest in light usage. Again, the only times I feel the lack of an SSD is gaming, where games such as FO4 thrash the hdd mercilessly, and take forever to load. Actually, I feel the biggest advantage of a SSD would be the lack of hard drive noise.

 

[Shivansps]

Shivansps, both the A6-7400K and the A4-7400 are single module processors.

P.S. A4-7300 can use DDR3 1600---> http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldozer/AMD-A4-Series A4-7300 - AD7300OKA23HL - AD7300OKHLBOX.html

I said A4-7300, the A4-7300 is Richland, its actually a rebranded A6-6400K with different clocks, but at least is a real dual core.

You are right about memory trought, the Haswell Pentiums are the ones limited to 1333.

 

[cbn]

I wanted to report back on this, i just tested the A6-7400K for more of a light gaming oriented starter PC... its AWFUL, a TOTAL AND COMPLETE CRAP, STAY AWAY.

Its seems good, on paper, until you realise its actually a single core with 2 int units, even Windows 10 reports it like that... and 1 float unit for anything reasembling a game is just not enoght, CPU limited on everything...

(snip)

The A4-7300 is better, there is no way around it, a true dual core is needed for light gaming, its a shame that its limited to just 1333.

Shivansps, both the A6-7400K and the A4-7400 are single module processors.

P.S. A4-7300 can use DDR3 1600---> http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldozer/AMD-A4-Series A4-7300 - AD7300OKA23HL - AD7300OKHLBOX.html

I said A4-7300, the A4-7300 is Richland, its actually a rebranded A6-6400K with different clocks, but at least is a real dual core.

????

P.S. My mistake on the A4-7400 typo. I meant to write A4-7300.

 

[Shivansps]

????

P.S. My mistake on the A4-7400 typo. I meant to write A4-7300.

I have no idea why i belived the A4-7300 was a true dual core... i think i had in my head the haswell Celeron and Pentiums...

 

[Sheep221]

Interesting thread!
What I do recommend most of the time is celeron, pentium or i3, and i5 both for laptops and also on desktop in case heavy workload and gaming is required, however I don't recommend or build i7 and AMD systems. As much as I liked AMDs in the past, I'm still better off with giving someone refurbished core2 system rather than APU or FX, because it will be much more reliable and i7 is overkill.

 

[crashtech]

An i3 is a dual-core that tries so hard to be more. Buy a higher clocked i5 if you want something to last (not the abortion that is the i5 6400). The minimum I recommend for a desktop is an i5, the minimum for a laptop is a mobile i5, latest gen. Most would use tech near every day and its a part of their life so saving a $100 or $200 meh.

Couple things come to mind when reading your post. Though I don't necessarily disagree with the general sentiment, it should be pointed out that the i3 has demonstrably higher throughput in most MT applications; it doesn't just try to be more than a 2C/2T, it succeeds, though it obviously is not a 4C CPU. Also, mobile i5s are generally 2C/4T but with Turbo, and many of the latest "U" CPUs are in fact poorer performers than earlier "M" CPUs, though they achieve well for ~15W TDP. People wanting certain mobile performance characteristics need to ignore the "i3 i5 i7" designations and look up some benchmarks based on the model number instead.

 

[cbn]

I have no idea why i belived the A4-7300 was a true dual core... i think i had in my head the haswell Celeron and Pentiums...

Well, Performance is not bad for a low cost chip:

2215 CPU marks http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+A4-7300+APU

About the same as my E8500 (which is a true dual core I use to browse this forum):

2313 CPU marks https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core2+Duo+E8500+@+3.16GHz

With that mentioned, the E8500 needs a small dGPU though to match the A4-7300 iGPU. And something like the HD6450 (which is slower than the 192sp VLIW4 A4-7300 iGPU) costs $19.99 AR shipped and the GT 710 which is probably as fast or a bit faster costs $29.99 shipped.

 

[myocardia]

...

 

[Shivansps]

Well, Performance is not bad for a low cost chip:

2215 CPU marks http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+A4-7300+APU

About the same as my E8500 (which is a true dual core I use to browse this forum):

2313 CPU marks https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core2+Duo+E8500+@+3.16GHz

With that mentioned, the E8500 needs a small dGPU though to match the A4-7300 iGPU. And something like the HD6450 (which is slower than the 192sp VLIW4 A4-7300 iGPU) costs $19.99 AR shipped and the GT 710 which is probably as fast or a bit faster costs $29.99 shipped.

Remember that A4-7300 and 7400K are mostly CPU limited in games because of a single float unit, what its really a shame, so a HD6450 on a C2D will probably be better.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Too bad that AMD doesn't even have enough money to host a website that gives actual, honest specifications for every CPU that they sell, like Intel. It would actually be very nice to be able to see what the manufacturer says about any certain CPU, instead of having to scrounge for opinions, or reviews, especially when these cheapie commodities are rarely reviewed by real hardware sites.

cpu-world functions as an effective equivalent to ARK. They're usually accurate.

 

[myocardia]

...

 

[DrMrLordX]

Glad to be of service. They've only failed me on a few rare occasions, and only on minor stuff (example: they don't document how some Athlon II x2s can come from CPU stepping code CACDC. I bought one off eBay and it was a legit CACDC).