First PC build

[JEFFgoldwing]

5 minutes ago, Queen Chrysalis said:

Yeah, I did this on my bf's PC, and got the intel wifi 6 BT/wifi combo chip for like $25, whereas a PCIe card of similar spec would have been like $50.  Do this if you can.  A lot boards will call it 'm.2 wifi'.

is there a specific budget mobo with an ekey that you know of, i'll keep looking for mobos with that part

[Queen Chrysalis]

Just now, JEFFgoldwing said:

is there a specific budget mobo with an ekey that you know of, i'll keep looking for mobos with that part

The Gigabyte DS3H seems to be the cheapest b450 board with ok heatsinks on caps and vrms and built in wifi, It's pretty iffy finding that port on low-end boards.  You might be better off just getting that with onboard wifi.  You might even find a liquidator selling them new for cheap.

[Bombastinator]

16 minutes ago, Queen Chrysalis said:

Sure, but the point I'm getting at is that the total computational power of a 6/12 that ran a multicore workload as fast as a slower architecture 8/16 should be equivalent, right? 

Should is not always is.  It depends on how things are coded.  The problem is the difference between multithreading and multitasking.  Multithreading only ever existed because microsoft at first flatly refused and then resentfully dragged its feet over real multitasking for windows.  The machines that wouldn’t multitask could still multithread though.  Programming for multithread is a lot more expensive because 80% of it is making the multithread not thread crash.  Usually because of memory overwrites.  It was discovered though that multi threaded apps often have much lower overhead than multitasked ones, so a multithreaded app can be faster than a multitasked one even if it’s much more expensive to develop.  The issue developed that there weren’t any young multitask game  programmers anymore and the only way these programmers knew how to program was multithread.  The multitask people moved to *nix stuff where multitask never had that problem and though now windows multitask is fine, it’s not done for games anymore. It’s a major reason why games are so incredibly expensive to develop.  They spend a couple moths making the game and then another couple years making it work.

Edited August 29, 2022 by Bombastinator

[Bombastinator]

23 minutes ago, Queen Chrysalis said:

Yeah, I did this on my bf's PC, and got the intel wifi 6 BT/wifi combo chip for like $25, whereas a PCIe card of similar spec would have been like $50.  Do this if you can.  A lot boards will call it 'm.2 wifi'.

Well that explains why card based wifi is dying. It’s twice as expensive.

[Bombastinator]

1 hour ago, Queen Chrysalis said:

Sure, but the point I'm getting at is that the total computational power of a 6/12 that ran a multicore workload as fast as a slower architecture 8/16 should be equivalent, right?  The 12400f does better on cinebench than the 1700x.

Multicore benchmarks will only run as many threads as there are threads on the cpu.  Doesn’t get into multitask overhead at all.  The app can check to see how many threads are available for it.  For core count to be a problem it has to not do that.  If games were carefully coded it wouldn’t even be a thing, but they’re often very hastily coded.  Many cores is just insurance about the possibility of asshat devs.

Edited August 29, 2022 by Bombastinator