How exactly to know what to look for in a CPU/MOBO/RAM?

[ScaryFatKidGT]

23 hours ago, Strike105X said:

AMD's cpu's are not well seen here, some like to exagerate regarding them, for general work load having 4 threads will smooth things out better then having just 2 cores, i can say that from experience, as i had an FX4300 and a G3258, generally while the G3258 was indeed faster for single tasks since it had a much stronger IPC, due to the increased core count the FX4300 let me deal with way more apps at the same time, having loads of chrome tabs while working without issues in photoshop, a decent quad core APU would give you a decent quad core solution with a decent IGPU solution to do what you described in your post, it will do better in gaming as well, even when compared with an i3 or i5, while those intel's it might have much stronger cores, the IGPU will drag things down in gaming generally, so for your specific workload AMD apu are better balanced. The basic idea is this you got to pic out what works best for the things you do, sure intel might have better per core performance but if it bottlenecks you in other tasks its pointless, the AMD APU wont have as much processing power, but it will be able to handle more things of interest due to better IGPU and core count.

I Just remember the video where Linus did comparing the processor vs a cpu and gpu vs the apu cross-fired with a gpu and the cheaper 4 core CPU with the more expensive GPU was better than the crossfire set up. They just didn't seem to make much sense to me. AMD was cool 3-4 years ago but now hasn't done much on the processor side of things. I'm not an AMD hater however and will be waiting for ZEN benchmarks, it just seems like a lot of there stuff it to little to late like the Fury-X vs 980ti and the RX480 vs 1060.

 

I also think the OP was under the impression that only APU's had integrated graphics, when actually most processors do.

 

HOWEVER I will admit I thought the 6400 and 6500 were significantly cheaper than the 6600k but they are not, I also thought the lower end i3's had worse integrated graphics and they don't all HD530 so my new recommendation for the office computer would be a i3 6100, the 6300 is $40 more and at that point you might as well get the 6500. Then if you need more graphics power in the future get s 1050 GPU.

[Itayush]

On 12/28/2016 at 11:03 AM, Strike105X said:

Not quite, the max is turbo:

 

Overclocking means taking the CPU frequency control in your own hands and tunning it even more then what turbo does, for instance my FX4300 had a turbo frequency of 4.2 Ghz i on the other hand took it all the way to 5 Ghz for my FX8300 i went ahead and overclocked to 4.55Ghz while experimenting up to 4.8 Ghz. Here is more about overclocking: 

 

 

Yes and no, more cache does indeed help with how much it can be stored for the CPU to pick up, but if the CPU has a strong IPC then it doesn't need that much cache.

 

January, from my understanding. As for a product page I just thought i checked to be sure about prices since what i may have choosed might have not reflected the prices where you live.

 

On 12/29/2016 at 5:07 AM, ScaryFatKidGT said:

I Just remember the video where Linus did comparing the processor vs a cpu and gpu vs the apu cross-fired with a gpu and the cheaper 4 core CPU with the more expensive GPU was better than the crossfire set up. They just didn't seem to make much sense to me. AMD was cool 3-4 years ago but now hasn't done much on the processor side of things. I'm not an AMD hater however and will be waiting for ZEN benchmarks, it just seems like a lot of there stuff it to little to late like the Fury-X vs 980ti and the RX480 vs 1060.

 

I also think the OP was under the impression that only APU's had integrated graphics, when actually most processors do.

 

HOWEVER I will admit I thought the 6400 and 6500 were significantly cheaper than the 6600k but they are not, I also thought the lower end i3's had worse integrated graphics and they don't all HD530 so my new recommendation for the office computer would be a i3 6100, the 6300 is $40 more and at that point you might as well get the 6500. Then if you need more graphics power in the future get s 1050 GPU.

Thank you  both for all the explanations and patient!
I learned a lot from you guys and I hope I'll continue learning about computer parts. 
I am gonna wait about 2 months to see if the prices changes or going to, then I will probably have easier time to decide my build for the Office computer and for the Gaming one (I might just upgrade my current gaming computer, not sure if it's worth/possible since it's came prebuild and it's 4 years old.)

[ScaryFatKidGT]

Thank you  both for all the explanations and patient!
I learned a lot from you guys and I hope I'll continue learning about computer parts. 
I am gonna wait about 2 months to see if the prices changes or going to, then I will probably have easier time to decide my build for the Office computer and for the Gaming one (I might just upgrade my current gaming computer, not sure if it's worth/possible since it's came prebuild and it's 4 years old.)

Prices are always changing

 

If it was like a Dell or HP it's probably not worth it, you could maybe upgrade the GPU but they usually have wacky proprietary motherboards that don't allow much customization.