Intel CPU question
-
I do okay on 8GB, but I only run two browsers, no apps, and do it on Linux.
-
@scottalanmiller I have 32GB on Windows 8.1 (will be getting a new system soon with 10) and I can get to over 55% with heavy browser usage. I use the hell out of this rig.
-
@wrx7m said in Intel CPU question:
@scottalanmiller I have 32GB on Windows 8.1 (will be getting a new system soon with 10) and I can get to over 55% with heavy browser usage. I use the hell out of this rig.
If I'm on windows, I need over 8GB. On Linux, 8GB does just fine.
-
@jaredbusch I am assuming the CAD computer is getting a decent video card correct?
-
@reid-cooper said in Intel CPU question:
Even an i5 is typically overkill today. What kind of workloads will these run?
I totally agree. Bottlenecks are hardly ever the cpu, they are almost always disk and memory. I have been going round and round with my management on this. They buy I7's but a mix of 5400/7200 hard drives. The i5 would be just fine for general use.
-
@wrx7m said in Intel CPU question:
@scottalanmiller I have been giving out 8 for several years now. Maybe it is time to check my users' utilization. I am sure that some people could benefit from more but I would be surprised if most were above 60%.
8gb memory has been just fine for us also as i do check people every once in a while. Someone else could have different needs than my community college though
-
I still standardize on 8 GB. But at our next upgrade I'll take a look to see if 16 is really needed.
I buy display port monitors now for display port machines.... love the single cable, no convertors.
-
@dashrender said in Intel CPU question:
I still standardize on 8 GB. But at our next upgrade I'll take a look to see if 16 is really needed.
I buy display port monitors now for display port machines.... love the single cable, no convertors.
yeah I do the same. been great
-
8GB, i5, SSD... tends to do the trick.
-
@jaredbusch said in Intel CPU question:
So this is what I am sending off to my preferred VAR.
Desktops: Quantity 9
Option A:
HP EliteDesk 800 G3 Tower
Windows 10 Pro
Intel Core i5 7600
16GB RAM
256 GB SSD
Intel 8265 802.11 ac with Bluetooth 4.2
No optical drive
HP Wireless Business Slim Keyboard and MouseOption B:
HP EliteDesk 800 G3 Tower
Windows 10 Pro
Intel Core i7 7700
16GB RAM
256 GB SSD
Intel 8265 802.11 ac with Bluetooth 4.2
No optical drive
HP Wireless Business Slim Keyboard and MouseFor the memory in both of these desktop options, if it is more cost effective to get 8GB and an additional 8GB separate, please quote it as such.
Laptop: Quantity 1
Make it the same as the one just ordered for IPMAMonitors: Quantity 13
Option A:
HP V273aOption B:
HP 27svSimilar model 27” monitors are acceptable. These were pulled from HP’s website.
Display port to HDMI needed per monitor as the EliteDesk has 2 Display Ports and both of these monitors have HDMII think that is a great lineup. It might be a little ram heavy depending on the users but at same time its future proofing some. Looks good
-
@dashrender said in Intel CPU question:
I still standardize on 8 GB. But at our next upgrade I'll take a look to see if 16 is really needed.
I buy display port monitors now for display port machines.... love the single cable, no convertors.
You can get dp to hdmi cables. I was using adapters from monoprice but had several cause intermittent issues so I decided to do the single cable solution and it seems to be much better so far.
-
@jmoore said in Intel CPU question:
@reid-cooper said in Intel CPU question:
Even an i5 is typically overkill today. What kind of workloads will these run?
I totally agree. Bottlenecks are hardly ever the cpu, they are almost always disk and memory. I have been going round and round with my management on this. They buy I7's but a mix of 5400/7200 hard drives. The i5 would be just fine for general use.
I have been buying SSDs, for users, exclusively, for about 6 months and it is by far the most noticeable improvement. Period.
I have personally been using SSDs for several years after the amazement of the massive performance increase. Nothing has improved performance so dramatically in the past 15+ years like SSDs.
-
@wrx7m said in Intel CPU question:
@jmoore said in Intel CPU question:
@reid-cooper said in Intel CPU question:
Even an i5 is typically overkill today. What kind of workloads will these run?
I totally agree. Bottlenecks are hardly ever the cpu, they are almost always disk and memory. I have been going round and round with my management on this. They buy I7's but a mix of 5400/7200 hard drives. The i5 would be just fine for general use.
I have been buying SSDs, for users, exclusively, for about 6 months and it is by far the most noticeable improvement. Period.
It's the one big leap we've had in the past fifteen years.
-
@wrx7m said in Intel CPU question:
@jmoore said in Intel CPU question:
@reid-cooper said in Intel CPU question:
Even an i5 is typically overkill today. What kind of workloads will these run?
I totally agree. Bottlenecks are hardly ever the cpu, they are almost always disk and memory. I have been going round and round with my management on this. They buy I7's but a mix of 5400/7200 hard drives. The i5 would be just fine for general use.
I have been buying SSDs, for users, exclusively, for about 6 months and it is by far the most noticeable improvement. Period.
I have personally been using SSDs for several years after the amazement of the massive performance increase. Nothing has improved performance so dramatically in the past 15+ years like SSDs.
Yep your absolutely right
-
I must be on seven years of SSD now. I could never go back.
-
I've spoiled myself with 16G of RAM and SSDs. I could never go back either.
-
IMO, an i-5 is fine for an office plodder and an i-7 is hard to justify.
Now with Coffee Lake dragging i-3 up to a quad core, that's where my recommendations for new PC's is going. (next year some time).@reid-cooper said in Intel CPU question:
8GB, i5, SSD... tends to do the trick.
^ that's what we're running and no complaints.
-
i7 has higher clock speeds, larger cache, and Hyper-Threading. Unless your applications can use Hyper-Threading there's no reason to consider i7
-
@jackcpickup said in Intel CPU question:
i7 has higher clock speeds, larger cache, and Hyper-Threading. Unless your applications can use Hyper-Threading there's no reason to consider i7
i5 has hyperthreading, doesn't it?
-
@scottalanmiller said in Intel CPU question:
@jackcpickup said in Intel CPU question:
i7 has higher clock speeds, larger cache, and Hyper-Threading. Unless your applications can use Hyper-Threading there's no reason to consider i7
i5 has hyperthreading, doesn't it?
Nope. i3 and i7 do. That's why i5 are so popular for gamers, games mostly don't utilise it
