|
When using this resource, please read the opening post. The Tech Support forum regulars have helped create countless of desktop systems without any compensation. The least you can do is provide all of the information required for them to help you properly. |
United Kingdom20326 Posts
Dammit! They need to make these things more obvious to the average poweruser In task manager, HT on shows my program uses only 14% of the CPU, whereas with HT off it shows 28%, but they actually get processed/run at the same speed! Today I learned...
Yea it's confusing to the uninformed and difficult for the informed looking to measure usage, the OS basically see's 8 threads. Actually, both of the people with i7's that i talked to IRL thought they had 8 cores in hardware.. hm, i don't actually know anyone near me with any kind of technical knowledge, other than a few old people who have upgraded basic systems
This actually scales really well, doesn't it? If you're running a program that only supports 1-4 cores, you get 100% speed, while if you run a program that supports all 8 you can (sometimes?) get up to 130%. Pretty cool solution, I'm actually really impressed right now haha. Yea it's nice! It's usually like 20 (x264) sometimes more, sometimes less
x264 isn't its own instruction set though, it's just an encoder right? Which instruction set does it use?
It uses a bunch of them including avx/avx2, that's why i mentioned because you said you didn't video encode 
^streaming is basically just three step process; grabbing screen image somehow (where a lot of the performance hit comes in) - running it through an encoder, usually x264 (where almost all of the cpu load comes in) and then uploading to server
I've used Cinebench before! It's pretty cool, but my results were kinda sketchy. My OpenGL test results were the same if I had my GPU core clock at 400MHz or 1200MHz, so I think that I was doing it wrong..
The opengl tests are terrible, everybody only uses Cinebench for the two CPU scores, that is, the regular CPU test, or if you go into advanced options, the singlethreaded test, Cinebench r15 version is pretty new and looks a little sweeter, different scores and aparantly less intel biased on the instruction sets etc
|
Haha, well I at least knew that they're only logical cores! And it has something to do with the bottleneck being in the OS actually giving commands to the hardware, but I can't even pretend to understand how it works I wish I did, and really look forward to studying CS at university starting next year. The stuff we do in high school is really simple.
It uses a bunch of them including avx/avx2, that's why i mentioned because you said you didn't video encode
^streaming is basically just three step process; grabbing screen image somehow (where a lot of the performance hit comes in) - running it through an encoder, usually x264 (where almost all of the cpu load comes in) and then uploading to server
Right, I guess encoding it beats uploading the raw image Just ran cinebench 11.5 and got nearly 7, which is closer to i7's I believe.
Time to test out single core: 1.51, which is apparently first place according to the default rankings? haha this is fun :p
|
United Kingdom20326 Posts
Just ran cinebench 11.5
Y u run old version!! D:
r15! :0
The stuff we do in high school is really simple.
My old high school tried to teach me visual basic, i got in trouble for refusing to take classes with other on it
|
I....I have no idea why I'm on the old version. Downloading R15 now!
Right, yeah we were taught QBasic/VBasic and it was *okay* because they actually taught us how to use it. Unfortunately, despite being one of the best maths/sciences schools in the country, we don't have a single teacher who knows how to program, so once we started being taught more advanced concepts like recursion and OOP (which are basic, I know), the teachers just gave us links to read and couldn't help us at all.
Kind of a nightmare, fortunately it's a skill that can be self-taught pretty well. Haha I feel like this is derailing a bit, I'll PM you!
|
I'm imagining the instructions flowing through the CPU core like these metal balls here: + Show Spoiler +
With HT, the core can work on two strands of code at the same time. It would be like the balls being dropped in pairs into that machine.
If the instructions need to use similar features, they have to take the same path through the core. They will have to go one at a time through those parts of the core, so HT can't be double the speed.
And when looking at a crappy core without HT, that core still always has a lot of instructions at the same time travelling through it. So it's not necessarily losing a lot from missing HT.
|
On October 21 2013 04:45 Ropid wrote:I'm imagining the instructions flowing through the CPU core like these metal balls here: + Show Spoiler +http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBs3xbz-QLM With HT, the core can work on two strands of code at the same time. It would be like the balls being dropped in pairs into that machine. If the instructions need to use similar features, they have to take the same path through the core. They will have to go one at a time through those parts of the core, so HT can't be double the speed. And when looking at a crappy core without HT, that core still always has a lot of instructions at the same time travelling through it. So it's not necessarily losing a lot from missing HT.
Here, check this out
Makes sense, I'm not sure why I misunderstood it in the first place but c'est la vie
|
On September 30 2013 19:49 Blaec wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2013 19:21 tyr wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Hi. My old motherboard recently fried so I guess I need a new everything. It's alright though, it was something like a 7 year old motheboard and CPU so I don't mind an upgrade. I have a fairly recent low-end GPU so I won't need that (I believe it's a GeForce 630 or so, it's good enough for me. I might upgrade down the line but it's reaaally not a priority), or HDDs for that matter. I will need a motherboard, a cpu and ram. here goes What is your budget?250-300 euros What is your monitor's native resolution?1376x768 (good enough for me) What games do you intend to play on this computer? What settings?dota2, random everything. I don't really care about the settings as long as it works. What do you intend to use the computer for besides gaming?Internet browsing, photo editing, maybe some video editing Do you intend to overclock?no Do you intend to do SLI / Crossfire?no Do you need an operating system?no Do you need a monitor or any other peripherals and is this part of your budget?no If you have any requirements or brand preferences, please specify.I have grown to like Intel stuff What country will you be buying your parts in?France If you have any retailer preferences, please specify.I don't know, last time I bought stuff was from a local store, so I would really appreciate advice on where to buy stuff in France. I guess amazon ? Are there others ? I thought something along the lines of MSI H81M-E33 Motherboard Intel Micro ATX Socket 1150 57€ Intel Haswell Processeur Core i5-4430 / 3.00 GHz 4 coeurs Socket-LGA1150 6 Mo 167€ Corsair CMZ8GX3M2A1600C9 Mémoire RAM DDR3 1600 8Go COR CL9 Vengeance 70€ I somewhat know what I'm doing but my knowledge of the the parts and everything is absolutely out of date, which is why I'm asking. I guess the CPU is a bit overkill compared to the rest of my stuff but I don't mind that. I know video editing/streamind requires a lot of processing power and I might do those. Of course if you guys think a cheaper CPU would fit my needs without losing too much power, I'd be happy to hear your thoughts. I'm really not sure about the motherboard or the ram. Thanks for the help, really appreciate it. If your focus isn't on playing sc2 and other strategy games then have a look at getting an AMD fx6300. 6300 and an AM3+ mobo should set you back less than 200 euros. If you are playing strategy games then what you picked is good, but try stretch to a 4570, its well worth the money. RAM looks good, any 2x4gb cl9 1600mhz is the most cost efficient choice.
So I think this is what I'll end up getting :
fx6300
Gigabyte GA-78LMT-USB3
and either of those two rams : this or this. I have to say I'm not sure what the difference is.
The only thing is that according to the gigabyte page for the mobo, it doesn't have the first one listed as accepted ram. I don't really understand why the first one wouldnt be accepted but I figured I would ask here just to be sure.
Also, anything else that could be a problem with what I picked ?
|
Motherboard manufacturers don't have the time to verify hundreds of kits on dozens of boards. RAM incompatibility is very very rare.
|
It's basically "these are what we've tested that work," not to be confused with "these are what work."
|
Right, that's what I figured.
Thanks.
|
That RAM is 1.65V. I'm not sure why others haven't pointed this out yet so I'll just ask my own questions.
Why is 1.65V RAM considered shit compared to 1.5V?
The motherboard tyr chose supports 1.5V RAM, wouldn't it be a bad call to buy 1.65V RAM for that motherboard? Stability issues?
Also the motherboard chosen by tyr supports 1333 MHz RAM? The RAM tyr is going to buy is 1600 MHz RAM. I understand that 1600 RAM will probably just downlock to 1333 MHz but I guess he might as well just get 1333 from the get go?
I'm just asking questions here, lul, I'm not saying anything is wrong. xD
|
Because it requires 0.15v more to be stable at x specs? Just like how DDR3 at 1.8v to 2v are shit now and don't exist on market anymore?
Memory controller is on the CPU and Piledriver supports up to 1866MHz. Most motherboards allow for this.
|
United Kingdom20326 Posts
Yea, same reason a 4670k that clocks to 4.5ghz @1.15vcore is better than one that takes 1.4v
it's just different RAM IC's, or better binned
If you have one kit rated for 1600mhz 9-9-9-24 @1.5v and another one rated for 1600mhz 9-9-9-24 @1.65v, the first kit would probably be able to achieve 1866mhz on the same timings and voltage that the second one needs for 1600, and if you add 0.25v to the 1.5v kit and 0.1v to the 1.65v kit (so they are both at 1.75) then the one that needed 0.15v more for the 1600mhz stable at same primary timings will scale significantly worse
|
On October 22 2013 00:47 Incognoto wrote:
The motherboard tyr chose supports 1.5V RAM, wouldn't it be a bad call to buy 1.65V RAM for that motherboard? Stability issues?
Good question actually I guess. The motherboard will just downclock the RAM by 0.15v or something ? Are there any issues with this except a bit of performance (I suppose ..) ?
|
|
|
Haha no I don't have any special feeling for EG. I suppose they do their job of advertising their sponsors pretty well. I kinda just stumbled upon those and didn't pay enough attention to the voltage.
Those two you linked look good.
|
United Kingdom20326 Posts
Intel's memory controller spec is ~1600, so over that you are technically overclocking it (the memory controller) but Haswell can hit like 4000. Low to mid 2k's or even 3k no problem for 24/7 use, often, but a tight 2400mhz can perform better than a lose 3000mhz
|
Both AMD and Intel conforms to JEDEC standards. Intel just decided to take the more conservative 1600MHz route I guess.
|
Does the memory controller overclock itself when you overclock the CPU or do you have to fiddle with that as well when you overclock?
|
Overclocking memory is separate from CPU with base clocks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
