We made the SLOWEST NEW PC!

[indrora]

I'm going to have to disagree with Linus here. 

 

The Athlon 3000G wasn't built for Gamers™, it was built for web browsing, light day to day tasks, and shoots at the market that Pentiums and i3s shoot for. For reference, a good friend of mine built a machine around the 3000G. The requirements?

• Runs a browser, at least somewhat performatively. 
• Handles Word/Excel/Powerpoint
• Maybe runs Minecraft? 
• Fits in a mini ITX case. This case to be exact: https://www.amazon.com/WIN-150W-Mini-ITX-Black-BQ656T-AD150TB3/dp/B01LVV6WVU

That system is happily cranking along as the daily driver of a PhD student who has on average 20-30 PDFs open at a time. They got the case for free and scrounged $150 in parts up and even got a used m.2 SSD from a friend, adding it in on top of the 2TB hdd they had crammed in. 

 

What Linus and friends here did was

• Intentionally miss the point of the 3000G
• Kneecap the system with a card that was slow when it came out and which is Hella Slow compared to the baked in graphics on the chipset.
• Even with the integrated graphics, they compare it apples to apples with the mid-tier Rx570. They could have gotten supremely better performance out of a pair of 8G sticks. 
• Go "LOL AMD WHY???? "

I'd like to see a more reasonable "building a budget system for the non-gamer" -- your mom doesn't need a 2080Ti, or even an Rx570. 

[ImAskywalker]

To be honest the Athlon 3000g must be paired with reasonable specs like 2x4gb 3000mhz RAM and a 120gb SSD 450w PSU and a 500gb a HDD with that specs it can perform much better compared to the given specs on the video that the team Linus did.

 

[ImAskywalker]

Just now, ImAskywalker said:

To be honest the Athlon 3000g must be paired with reasonable specs like 2x4gb 3000mhz RAM and a 120gb SSD 450w PSU and a 500gb a HDD with that specs it can perform much better compared to the given specs on the video that the team Linus did.

 

also Low Spec Gamer would disapprove this LoL

 

[Nystemy]

I myself tend to use an EN210 from Asus every now and then. Though more to get a display output on motherboards that doesn't have integrated graphics. And usually in situations where graphics isn't actually important. (like in a server, since not all server motherboards have graphics.) Then the low powered nature of these low end GPUs are rather nice, since one just needs to drop it in, and then one can run a display for setting everything up.

 

For gaming or anything that remotely even uses the GPU for actual computing, then look elsewhere.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

11 hours ago, BlueChinchillaEatingDorito said:

Is no one where going to question the AMD cooler on that GT 210?

Came here just for this  

10 hours ago, Honik said:

 

Nope, because Linus did adress it in the video.

That's what happens when you come to the post before finish watching (talking to myself here )

 

8 hours ago, Zm1TDkSnQkY4KEqskCARSBpk said:

Why are they even using a GT210 at all when the point is to build the cheapest possible PC with just brand new parts? It doesn't make sense to me.

According to the title, it's not the cheapest, it's the slowest - so I guess you need to downgrade the graphics if possible.

If it was about the cheapest, then of course not buying any graphics card would always be cheaper.

[ssfdre_38]

For me if i was going to make this computer, i would install ubuntu server on it for a file server so i can move files between computers and my phone as well so i can have a central area. i wouldnt use it for major backup but for coding projects and minor stuff. 

[kakik09]

But the GT 210 isn't even in production anymore right? Who double checked the script for this video? They should have just cut the GT 210 altogether and went with the integrated graphics. 

 

EDIT: While we're at it. Since we're on the topic of sh*t entry level video cards, please do an extreme overclocking video with these cards. Let's see how far you can push them for the lols. 

[Spotty]

12 hours ago, BlueChinchillaEatingDorito said:

Is no one where going to question the AMD cooler on that GT 210?

Watch the video. Right after he shows the card he explains why it has an ATI Radeon fan (the fan failed on the card and they replaced it)

[StopLoctiteOnM.2Screws]

(Maybe) Mines slower:

 

https://www.3dmark.com/spy/12209531

 

(Bios modded £53 Radeon 550 64 bit for an extra 200 points).

[Spotty]

49 minutes ago, CircleTech said:

For starters, what is your definition of new?

I believe their qualification was anything they can still buy "new" from retailers (Newegg, Amazon, Best Buy, etc). The GT210 was released more than 10 years ago.

If it's still being made then it's probably because there's some old machines out there deployed running Windows XP or some custom Linux distro that need a dGPU for display outputs which have the GT 210 in them and when something goes wrong they just want to replace it with the exact same part because troubleshooting any problems that a newer model might cause isn't worth the headache (and cost).

The $40 spent on the GT 210 would have been better spent on getting 2x4GB RAM kit instead of the single 1x4GB and using the APU for graphics. Would likely perform better, and has the added benefit of if you do decide to upgrade the system later with a discrete GPU the money spent on the GT210 wouldn't be a lost cost, and like Linus said that GT 210 would likely just end up as ewaste.

Though I don't think LTTs intention was to show a sensible cheap PC configuration, rather what someone who doesn't know anything about computers might build if they just grab the cheapest "new" parts they can find on the shelf at their local Best Buy or Micro Centre - and demonstrate why that is not a good idea.

[StopLoctiteOnM.2Screws]

36 minutes ago, Spotty said:

The $40 spent on the GT 210 would have been better spent on getting 2x4GB RAM kit instead of the single 1x4GB and using the APU for graphics.

Isnt the APU better than a GT210 anyway?

 

This isnt worth its current price, but until quite recently it was £53:

 

https://www.scan.co.uk/products/sapphire-amd-radeon-rx-550-pulse-oc-2gb-gddr5-graphics-card

 

The issue being that for £69 you can get the 4 Gb 128 but version instead. Based on that I wouldnt even think that the 2 Gb 64 bit version is worth £53, but people buy it just for the monitor outputs as was my reason for getting one because my G4560 setup didnt have a display port output.

 

There would be a huge market for <£50 GPUs that simply offer modern outputs for monitors no matter how much better a £70+ one is but neither AMD nor Nvidia seem interested in offering anything at that price point, finding a display port output for anywhere close to £50 was even a struggle, and its now also been increased in price to £60 because of the demand for it, even as mentioned when you can pay £10 to get double the Vram at double the bandwidth.

[Haro]

2 minutes ago, StopLoctiteOnM.2Screws said:

Isnt the APU better than a GT210 anyway?

 

I think your missing the point of the video 

The video is made to showcase the worst value pc that you could buy not the cheapest but still decent pc that you could buy 

[StopLoctiteOnM.2Screws]

3 minutes ago, TofuHaroto said:

I think your missing the point of the video 

The video is made to showcase the worst value pc that you could buy not the cheapest but still decent pc that you could buy 

But it would cost less without the GPU? If the APU is better then why bother with paying for a GPU?

 

Thats purposefully paying more to make it worse, a highly unrealistic situation that nobody is going to do.

[Haro]

2 minutes ago, StopLoctiteOnM.2Screws said:

 

 

Thats purposefully paying more to make it worse.

Yes that's the point 

[Spotty]

10 minutes ago, StopLoctiteOnM.2Screws said:

Isnt the APU better than a GT210 anyway?

 

4 minutes ago, StopLoctiteOnM.2Screws said:

But it would cost less without the GPU? If the APU is better then why bother with paying for a GPU?

 

Thats purposefully paying more to make it worse.

Yes the Vega 3 graphics in the 3000G APU should perform better than the GT 210, however there can be some downsides to using the APU, which Linus mentioned in the video such as it using the system memory. The GT210 has its own dedicated VRAM while the APU uses the RAM. If you only have 4GB of RAM and the APU uses 500MB-1GB of that then that takes away from what can be used for the system, and 4GB itself is already quite low for Windows 10 once you start loading up a few programs. When you take a decent chunk of that away for the APU then it can potentially make performance worse if it's constantly hitting pagefile (especially since it was using a HDD).
This is why I suggested that it would have been better to spend the money on a 2x4GB kit of RAM so you can use dual channel mode (memory speed is also important for APUs and dual channel makes a difference) as well as doubling your memory capacity.

 

 

As for it being a bad configuration; That was the point of the video.

45 minutes ago, Spotty said:

Though I don't think LTTs intention was to show a sensible cheap PC configuration, rather what someone who doesn't know anything about computers might build if they just grab the cheapest "new" parts they can find on the shelf at their local Best Buy or Micro Centre - and demonstrate why that is not a good idea.

[StopLoctiteOnM.2Screws]

Ok I get it now, but as you said they should have gone with 2x4 Gb and no GPU.

 

I really wanted a 3000G and no GPU for my lounge PC, but I would have needed a new motherboard too with display port output, so the RX 550 was cheaper.

[pApA^LeGBa]

So why use a card like that? Wasn´t there that "rule" that parts are still beeing produced and beeing for a current generation? Feels like a it was used to get the worst result possible so the message about cheap new generation hardware beeing a bad thing can still stand valid.

 

Would have been way more interesting with a modern low budget card

[Haro]

Just now, pApA^LeGBa said:

So why use a card like that

Read what was said above .

[pApA^LeGBa]

But he said at the beginnig they use parts still beeing produced and are considered somewhat new. Wich doesn´t go for that card. I can buy a single core CPU new from a retailer. A Celeron M520 with a whooping 1.6Ghz.

 

He wanted to show that entry level hardware even from the newer generations doesn´t make sense. But used that GPU. Doesn´t make sense to me

[Ashley MLP Fangirl]

16 hours ago, Wyzzy Moon said:

The GT210 is just not a good example for a bad value card because it is so cheap that it is your only option if you just need a display.

uuuuuh no, you can literally go on ebay and buy a gpu for $5 if you just need a display output. iirc the GeForce 8000 series still has Windows 10 drivers, so you can just buy an 8500GT for literally $5, i've done that before, and have extra outputs. 

[Haro]

Just now, pApA^LeGBa said:

But he said at the beginnig they use parts still beeing produced and are considered somewhat new. Wich doesn´t go for that card. I can buy a single core CPU new from a retailer. A Celeron M520 with a whooping 1.6Ghz.

First quote people please 

Second of all when did he say  that they were still being produced ? 

He just said "new" parts 

[pApA^LeGBa]

@TofuHaroto  At 2:25 mins the part with still in prodcution starts. Right after he even uses the term brandnew. "The slowest brandnew parts and techically modern parts you can find" Wich doesn´t count for this card. It really feel like they figured that a modern cheap GPU wouldn´t deliver for the results they where hoping for.

[Haro]

Just now, pApA^LeGBa said:

@TofuHaroto  At 2:25 mins. Even uses the term brandnew. "The slowest brandnew parts and techically modern parts you can find" Wich doesn´t count for this card. It really feel like they figured that a modern cheap GPU wouldn´t deliver for the results they where hoping for.

Brand new doesn't mean modern

It means it wasn't used and that it is in it's retail box never opened

[pApA^LeGBa]

Jeez really? @TofuHaroto Brandnew doesn´t mean modern, true. But the "technically modern" part exactly means that. Also still beeing produced doesn´t matter? He did say that. Read all of my post and watch the video again maybe?

[Egg-Roll]

2 hours ago, TofuHaroto said:

Yes that's the point 

They never stated that was the point, hence all the confusion, they only said the slowest computer. Not to mention the whole video had the "cheapest computer" build feeling more than the slowest. If they proposed a better build like what is shown on the first page for basically the same amount of money then that would be different (and compare the 3), but instead they basically made a cheap under $350 computer sound like pure . Which it doesn't have to be with the right setup.

 

2 hours ago, Spotty said:

I believe their qualification was anything they can still buy "new" from retailers

2:30 in the video Linus stated in production. Personally I think they stopped making the 210 when they released the 710 which is basically the same price now, just 3x better, which invalidates the whole video.

I do agree with the whole aging computer aspect, but equally the x10 cards imo are more for extra displays or cheap cuda power for applications more than gaming. Back in the day I knew that when I was buying it, but as stated I didn't buy it for gaming(it was also $50 back when I bought it too)