Pasi123

What does CPU-Z say about them?

Intel 2nd and 3rd gen had extra 4 multipliers on the locked CPU's. For example I have an i7-3770 @ 4.22-4.43GHz with 41-43 multiplier and 103 BCLK. The extra multipliers were removed on 4th gen

Why are you looking to upgrade RAM if it does everything you need it to do? I don't think the RAM speed would be such a big bottleneck on that slow CPU. I have an Asus P5KC (DDR2/DDR3 combo board) with Core2 Quad Q9550 @ 3.4GHz and haven't noticed much speed difference between 8GB DDR2 800MHz and 8GB DDR3 1280MHz

What are the specs of his PC? I highly doubt 64-bit Windows would make it any faster, it would probably get slower because of higher memory usage compared to 32-bit. It sounds like it might have a hard drive as the boot drive. Windows 8.1 was the last one that ran decently without an SSD. Depending on the test of the specs I'd recommend getting an SSD and more RAM. Going from 32-bit to 64-bit requires a reinstall.

As someone who still uses 2GB cards (GTX 960, 760 and 660) I can say 2GB VRAM hasn't been good for modern AAA games at 1080p in many years. Not that the cards would be powerful enough anyway. For lighter games it's still fine but I definitely wouldn't recommend buying one

I don't know about Mac's but at least PC workstations normally have an option in the BIOS to automatically power on after power loss

Better for what use? Intel would probably be the most powerful one because Sapphire Rapids platform supports up to 8 sockets, Xeon 8490H has 60c/120t so in a 8 socket config that would be 480c/960t (is that even possible?). AMD Genya is only up to 2 sockets for a total of 192c/384t

What you just said makes no sense at all. LGA1156 was 1st gen Nehalem/Westmere LGA1155 2nd/3rd gen Sandy/Ivy Bridge LGA1150 4th/5th gen Haswell/Broadwell LGA1151v1 6th/7th gen Skylake/Kaby lake LGA1151v2 8th/9th gen Coffee Lake

Intel 4th gen CPU's use a different socket, LGA1150. LGA1155 was for 2nd and 3rd gen. For gaming even a GTX 1050 (Ti) without 6-pin would be a HUGE upgrade from the GT 710

At stock the 2667 v2 is the fastest of the 3, but if you have a overclocking capable board then the unlocked 1650 v2 would be better for gaming. For OC capable board 1680 v2 would be the best but they can be quite expensive. The 2667 v2 is like the 1680 v2 but with 100-200MHz higher clockspeeds and locked so it can't be multiplier overclocked.

From those I'd take the 2689 because it has 700MHz higher all core turbo. The IPC different between Sandy and Ivy Bridge wasn't quite that big. Do you already have both CPU's? If not I'd recommend getting a 2667v2 instead, it has 1GHz higher clockspeeds than the 2660v2 and even though it has 2c/4t less it's still better in pretty much everything

Most boards have two sticks per channel. Quad channel is a thing only on high end (HEDT) systems, mainstream platforms don't have more than two memory channels (not counting the 2x 32bit channels per stick on DDR5)

Why GT 710? That's not a big upgrade over the iGPU at all. I guess it won't hurt anything if you already own one but if you don't it's just a waste of money. I'd just throw in a cheap SSD call it a day. The i3 should still be fine for basic web browsing which I assume you are going to use it for

Have you tried if you get artifacting with the integrated GPU too? And have you tried a different display cable?

My system with a X5670 @ 4.32GHz pulled 335W while running Cinebench R15. I tested that back in 2018 so I don't remember what voltage I used, I guess around 1.35v My board has a single 8-pin EPS. (Sorry for the dust and cat hair)

Mac Pro 4,1 uses delidded CPUs so you'd have to delid them which is quite risky. Unless they are meant for the Mac Pro and are already delidded. I don't think it's worth upgrading from a X5550 to a X5570 which is only slightly faster. I'd recommend upgrading the firmware to the 5,1 one and getting X5600 series Xeons instead.

B75, Q75 and Q77 were the last ones with native PCI

Version updates like going from 21H2 to 22H2 is a bit tricky but not that hard when following a tutorial. Because of that I wouldn't recommend average people to run Win11 on unsupported hardware

Those cheap new laptops usually have low amount of soldered memory and non-upgradeable slow eMMC storage. They also have Intel Atom based Celerons or Pentiums which don't use much power but are much, much slower than what used laptops have in the same price range.

Oh, it's that website. I last saw it few years ago and it's hilariously bad. For example a 2005 Pentium 4 vs the 12400: https://www.cpuagent.com/cpu-compare/intel-pentium-4-660-vs-intel-core-i5-12400/summary/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-ti "The Core i5-12400 targets mid-range customers while the Pentium 4 660 is a high-end CPU. The Core i5-12400 has 6 cores, while the Pentium 4 660 has 1. Having a higher number of cores improves running multiple applications and heavily multi-threaded tasks. Having an excellent base clock speed of 3.6GHz helps the Pentium 4 660 achieve better performance in most applications. The Core i5-12400 comes with an excellent boost clock speed for gaming and single-thread tasks. Core i5-12400 consumes less power at 65W. With an efficient 10nm manufacturing process, the Core i5-12400 has better thermals. The Core i5-12400 is relatively newer."

$104 is way too much for a 3770K. At least here in Finland you can even get a 3770K+Z77+16GB RAM for that price, 3770K alone goes for under 50€. How much cheaper is the non-K 3770? Even though it's multiplier locked you can up the multiplier by 4 so you get from the stock 39-39-38-37 to 43-43-42-41

That looks like mATX to me

The Dell GX520 was released in 2005 and Core2 Duo in 2006. OptiPlex 745 was the first one with Core2 Duo support. I ran a Minecraft 1.4.* server on an IBM ThinkCentre S50 with a Pentium 4 HT 3.0GHz a decade ago. It ran somewhat decently with 15-20 players but obviously Minecraft has changed a lot since then. Minecraft Bedrock is a completely different game so I have no idea how that would run on a P4. Last time I ran a Bedrock server it was still called Pocket Edition and that was on a Core2 Duo E8400 which is much faster than anything the GX520 supports

Your PC was released before Core2 even existed, the VRM on the motherboard isn't compatible with any Core2 CPUs. Neither is the BIOS. Some boards with the 945G chipset are compatible with early Core2 Duo's but not that one. You can get a much newer and more powerful system for $50

You seem to already have the fastest CPUs for it. I guess by gaming you mean Windows XP retro gaming? It's not the fastest for that but should be fine. For modern things? No, those CPUs are netburst based (Pentium 4). Even a Core2 Duo or Quad would beat the hell out of those CPUs