bmichaels556

used i5 4th gen for gaming is sufficient
they are very cheap

No point of going used i5 4th gen when ryzen 5 2600 offers better performance for $117

branding is common
product loyalty is a thing
 
ok i get it @bmichaels556
 
i will edit this post - there is billions of dollars spent for branding, it is how companies make their money. no need to buy a ferrari when a subaru will do

It's tough to explain, and I'm sure someone could do it better. But it's this sort of idea that one brand or line of products is "better" because of the name / reputation, rather than for practical reasons.
 
For example, think about the RX 480 and GTX 1060. Both nice cards, and really neck and neck with each other in just about all situations, certainly in gaming. Yet, despite both products being extremely close, the 1060 vastly outsold the RX 480 because "it's Nvidia", rather than "It's the better product" if that makes sense.
 
People perceive Apple as, let's say, being higher quality than other manufacturers, but this is debatable. But because "It's Apple!", 9 year old laptops with half the performance still go for many hundreds of dollars, when a newer production laptop would of course perform much better, have better battery life, and the list goes on.
 
Point being, a product is perceived as "better", but not based on practicality, but maybe brand recognition and so on. 

So I was really lusting after the 1950x but of course didn't have the budget. But I got to really looking, and when you look at something like an E5-2650 V2, it looks to have very similar single-core performance to a first gen Threadripper, and go dual socket and you're basically just under a 1950x from what I can tell. And they're pretty darn cheap. And comparing to price of Threadripper 1950x and TR4 motherboards and so on, I feel like for my uses, the older Xeon option would be sufficient.
 
I do game, and I'm using an RX 480 right now on a dual Xeon X5675 rig. The bottlenecking is minimal, other than on games that are heavy on single core, or of course on high framerates. But other than that, it's been great. I'm thinking of maybe upgrading to an RX 5700, maybe an XT. I feel like at the 1440p I'd be using it for, even what I have now would be sufficient. But then to add 8 more threads with two generations of IPC increase at similar clockspeeds... It seems like a no-brainer for what it would cost to get it all set up.
 
What are your guys' thoughts on this? Thanks!  

I think it has a lot to do with "mindshare". Same situation with old macs. Excellent construction is nice, and they sure look great. But there's no reason a 2011 laptop should be going for $500+. And yet they are. It's insane.

Hmm... You could probably be looking at something like a few Dell Optiplex compact models with i3's for example. If just a basic media PC for YouTube, watching some movies in 1080p (can't attest to 4K video performance), they'll be very adequate. I'm currently rocking one as a simple file server and it works just fine! 
 
Check out Optiplex 3020's on Ebay, especially the small form factor "SFF" ones. 4GB of RAM on a lot of those... Hm.. I mean I think if you're literally just looking to open a handful of tabs in chrome, do some basic office-type tasks, watch movies or whatever the case may be, it should be fairly adequate, even with 4GB of RAM and the integrated graphics.
 
Would love to hear what others have to think. And yeah, these can be had for WELL under $100 each. In fact, you can often find them with hard drive, Windows already installed, the 4GB of RAM installed, and you're basically off to the races for $75, maybe even less. MAYBE upgrade to some cheap 128GB SSD's for added speed? Trust me, it'll help A TON if you're hitting that 4GB RAM limit and start going into the page file. On a HDD, that will slow your system to a CRAWL. On an SSD, it'll still be adequate generally.

as said above they have cut down IPC to save on power consumption

I would. I remained an X58 devotee to the end. My favorite PC ever, an HP Elite 170f, was an i7-920 system. I can't even justify X58 in the age of Ryzen anymore. I get what Phil and the Yes Man are up to with X79 Xeons, but I don't see it anymore. Not with first-gen Ryzen, first-gen AM4 boards and DDR4 where they are.

Definitely not... But since it does well in most games without a huge bottleneck on the GPU, I just kind of accept it. The other weak point is having to upgrade to SATA3 and USB 3 using PCIe cards. Not ideal ha. So yeah, definitely some downsides, but all things considered, I never felt it had any dealbreakers or major weak points. 
 
It all depends on what you're looking for though. A lot of people would be disgusted by lack of native SATA3 and USB 3, but overall, I was willing to accept somewhat gimped SSD performance and having to add it in. But I would totally understand the criticism by those who would want to avoid the hassle, even if doing the upgrades themselves was no big deal. 

you could maybe look at a E5 2680, it clocks up to 3,5 Ghz singlecore or 3,0Ghz on all 8 of em. and they are pretty cheap, better value for money than a 2690 imo
if you can get a good deal on maybe one of those chinese huanan boards you can have a pretty hefty workstation for a relatively cheap price.
if you don't want to go for something chinese and potentially sketchy though, X79 or C602 boards still don't come cheap.

Not super sure about that one, on the single threaded front

No, first-gen Ryzen is. The price/performance on first-gen Ryzen CPUs is batshit crazy and you can land 16GB of DDR4 for $50 on the used market. Consider that X58 boards still cost north of $100, there's no comparison anymore. Ditto that for X79, even the old reliable Ivy Bridge/Haswell i5 combos. If you're building an entry-level system today, there's absolutely nothing out there worth considering aside from first-gen Ryzen imo.

3.9ghz

You can get it from Maxon here:
 
https://www.maxon.net/en/support/downloads/

8750H locked to 45w: 2400cb multi thread, 392cb single thread (roughly)
2600k at 4.75GHz with 2200 CL10 memory: 1799cb multi-thread, 357cb single thread

2687 on my OC'd 1600x

I just clicked "run" and got this. Mind you, this is an OCed Ryzen...

i'll come back to this thread if i install r20, won't be tonight tho ?

i don't test single thread but best i got on my 2700x was an 1850 with a slight overclock at around 4.3 ghz and memory OC'd to 3400 cl14
 
Edit: nevermind this was on R15

Fans when they become noisy
Case when it’s broken
CPU when it bottlenecks the GPU
MoBo when I need a new CPU
PSU when it stops working or hasn’t got the power for my rig
RAM when I change MoBo
GPU every 2-3 years

I build a new system every 3ish years. I completely rebuild, as it generally has the best ROI for me.

Sorry I'm late to do this you guys, but thanks so much for both of your help @Captain Chaos and @SSD Sean. I gained a ton of performance and overall, it didn't take terribly long and was definitely worth it.
 
I think I'm more than satisfied with my gains until I build a Ryzen 3000-series rig, but if it weren't for you guys, I might have had to go out and buy a bunch of stuff and maybe even end up with mixed results anyway...
 
That's huge, you guys. Thanks again.  

Wow... Some very decent gains.
 
Before disable C-States and Speedstep (High Performance is already on):
 

 
After disabling C-States and Speedstep:
 

 
Interesting that even my initial test a few minutes ago showed better numbers than a couple days ago, but either way, disabling C-States and Speedstep seemed to lead to pretty big percentage gains in Q1, and some marginal improvements anywhere else... Not too shabby.  

Wow... Some very decent gains.
 
Before disable C-States and Speedstep (High Performance is already on):
 

 
After disabling C-States and Speedstep:
 

 
Interesting that even my initial test a few minutes ago showed better numbers than a couple days ago, but either way, disabling C-States and Speedstep seemed to lead to pretty big percentage gains in Q1, and some marginal improvements anywhere else... Not too shabby.