Re: [gentoo-user] new machine : CPU : 22 nm vs 32 nm

[Michael Mol <mikemol@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 10:18 AM, Евгений Пермяков <permeakra@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 07/26/2012 05:50 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Евгений Пермяков <permeakra@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 07/26/2012 12:05 AM, Philip Webb wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I've listed what's available at the local store,
>>>> which I trust to stock reliable items, tho' I wouldn't ask their advice.
>>>>
>>>> All the AMD's are  32 nm , while the Intel recommended by one commenter
>>>> -- Core i5-3570 4-Core Socket LGA1155, 3.4 Ghz, 6MB L3 Cache, 22 nm --
>>>> is  22 nm : it costs  CAD 230  & they have  3  in stock,
>>>> which suggests demand, but not the most popular ( 9  in stock).
>>>>
>>>> Isn't  22 nm  going to be faster than  32 nm  ?
>>>>
>>>> In the same price range, AMD offers  Bulldozer X8 FX-8150 (125W)
>>>>    8-Core Socket AM3+, 3.6 GHz, 8Mb Cache, 32 nm  ( CAD 220 ,  2  in
>>>> stock).
>>>>
>>>> How do you compare cores vs nm ?
>>>> How far is cache size important ( 6 vs 8 MB )?
>>>>
>>>> When I built my current machine 2007, the CPU cost  CAD 213 ,
>>>> so both look as if they're in the right ballpark.
>>>>
>>> If you're building new, performance-oriented box, you should take latest
>>> intel with AVX because of AVX.  As I recall, recent gcc has support for
>>> avx,
>>> so some performance gain may be achieved.
>>> If you want home box, you may be interested in AMD A8 and similar chips,
>>> as
>>> they are reasonably fast and very chip
>>
>> AMD parts have had AVX since the Bulldozer core release in Q3 2011.
>
> Are they already available in reasonable numbers on market?

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+FX-8120+Eight-Core

At $150, fitting into existing Socket AM3+ boards, that looks like the
best part for my money right now.

>>> In any case, I'd put most of my money in 2-4 big 3Tb HDD's for media and
>>> 8+
>>> Gb fast memory, as modern browsers eat memory like crazies and CPU is
>>> usually fast enough. Decoding HDTV mkv's should occur on gpu block in any
>>> case, so general performance for most uses is irrelevant, as it was fast
>>> enough four yesrs earlier. Simply check, that you can offload HDTV
>>> decoding
>>> to GPU in your config.
>>
>> Here, you're talking about either VDPAU or VAAAPI support. VDPAU is
>> only offered by nVidia cards, and even then you need to run the
>> proprietary driver. VAAPI is supported by Intel graphics and ATI's
>> proprietary driver.
>
> I do not see any problems with this. A blob in system is not best practice,
> of course, but it does not need any configuration and is not a performance
> bottle-neck, so there is no reason to care.

I only bring it up because some people do care. I'm running fglrx at
home right now. When I run nVdia, I run the nVidia drivers. In part
because I like accelerated video decoding (which a Geforce 210 does
wonderfully), in part because the nv, nouveau and radeon drivers
historically worked very poorly for me in 2D performance when faced
with multiple 1080p displays. They're always getting better, of
course.

>
> I personally would prefer AMD A8 if I can offload decoding to GPU unit there
> (not sure if I can, so won't change my box till next summer), but discrete
> video card will not be the most costly part in good non-gaming box, hard
> drives will, so again, what the matter?

Computer usage breaks down into more than gaming and non-gaming. My
"non-gaming" boxes at home tend to have their CPU, RAM or NICs as
their most expensive components, because that's where I need them to
perform better.


-- 
:wq