CPU for possible new build - now, when or Zen?

[Giraffe]

Having thought about a new box to replace my nearly 8-year old one that is getting a bit slow when loading several tabs, especially if many images, my first decision will be the CPU.
I've always used AMD but I'm now considering Intel.
The use is mainly browsing, office stuff (a small spreadsheet takes 12s to open in LibreOffice Calc) and a small amount of video encoding. The present set-up still works well but of course all of the software has got 'heavier' - especially AV and firewall.

I'd like a nice quiet, low-powered system, so looking at Core i5 4690T or i5 4690S in Haswell or I like the look of Broadwell i5 5675C. Can't really see that Skylake would offer much extra as the video, even on Haswell, would be sufficient for my needs.
AMD chips are getting a bit past it now, so Zen (when?) would be the one to go for I guess - that would mean waiting for at least 6 months.

What do y'all think? I'd like the new box to last for several years but don't want to go OTT.

Cheers,
Peter.

[EndlessWaves]

Don't go for the S or T suffix models unless you're building it in a really tiny case. They're no more efficient so you're just throwing away performance for a guaranteed maximum heat output you don't need.

Skylake's biggest benefit isn't the GPU power - none of the good Skylake GPUs are available in desktop chips anyway - but the newer technology support. For example it'll be much faster when encoding certain video formats due to a newer version of quicksync.

CPU performance increases are currently moving at a crawl and the mainstream is in substantially slower laptop chips so it would be hard to build a desktop that wasn't good for years. i5s are good value if you're using the CPU power but I would certainly consider them your top of the range option.

On the other hand, Windows for self-builders is a fixed price unlike windows for pre-built systems so because that's a fairly hefty cost it doesn't make a lot of sense to self-build a cheap system.

Personally I would work out the rest of the system cost and then make the decision based on what looks like the best value for money.

Although I certainly wouldn't dismiss AMD's FM2+ chips if you do consider Haswell as they are similar ages.

[Giraffe]

Thanks for the reply.
I'll be using W7 Pro SP1 - purchased a proper COA form an acquaintance who was scrapping his machine.
I don't go for cheap - I prefer reliability and a cool, quiet system. This one is now 8.5 years old and the last one I built, for a friend, is a year younger; no electrical or mechanical glitches at all.

I'd use a mobo towards the high end, e.g. H97, a Seasonic PSU and Crucial RAM. I consider the PSU to be the most important - if it emits magic smoke it's probably fubar'd the rest of the system.

I've been looking at performance v power a bit (where I can find any on non-whizzbang CPUs) and the Broadwell seems pretty good. My present system, idling, is 45W input so, that low on a 330W PSU's curve, isn't much more than 35W. I'd aim for lower but suspect it's hardly worth it.

[DanceswithUnix]

Budget?

Compared to your x2 3800 system, *any* modern machine will feel rocket powered. An A8-7600 would be a cheap option that sounds like it would do you nicely. That gets OK integrated graphics and a reasonably fast quad core that is easy to make silent.

If you want to go for longevity, have you considered a Xeon? http://www.scan.co.uk/products/intel...80w-cpu-retail

You do have to watch for motherboard compatibility, but otherwise you get an i7 with all the options enabled and supposedly better testing.

I consider the PSU to be the most important - if it emits magic smoke it's probably fubar'd the rest of the system.

Sort of, a well designed PSU should detect the rails going out of spec and "crowbar" them which basically means short circuiting it's own outputs long enough to force a fuse to blow so protecting the rest of the machine. So yes, worth reading some Jonny Guru reviews and getting a good one.

One consideration, your 3800 really needed to be in an mATX sized box at least to cool it. These days you can make powerful machines in some tiny boxes thanks to the better efficiency.

[Giraffe]

Budget is semi-open - not silly, but, for Intel, £500ish and less for AMD of course.
The Xeon would need a separate graphics card and I prefer the 'APU' way as my video requirements aren't heavy.
I've not considered TDP above 65W as overclocking isn't needed - just the opposite. On this system cool 'n' quiet is enabled.
As for the box, I go for a mATX at least - considering something like:
http://www.scan.co.uk/products/antec...b-fans-w-o-psu
It's difficult nowadays to find a case that is simple and plain.

[DanceswithUnix]

There are cheaper Xeons that do have integrated graphics, but I think they are all 4 thread though.

Budget option:

£70 A8-7600 APU http://www.ebuyer.com/657970-amd-a8-...-ad7600ybjabox
£60 Motherboard: http://www.ebuyer.com/611200-asus-a8...rboard-a88xm-a

If you want something desktop based then going ITX allows cases like http://www.ebuyer.com/720520-fractal...ca-core-500-bk

If you want old school floor standing then mATX is probably better and more flexible.

[Giraffe]

I'd looked at the A8-7600 as it seems to be the sweet spot for AMD.
I'd like the mobo to have DisplayPort as I'll be getting a Dell 16:10 monitor and I've just seen in a news group that the Dell's HDMI input doesn't support its own native resolution! (haven't checked, BTW).
The mobo that I'd like for AMD is
http://www.scan.co.uk/products/msi-a...ga-dvi-dp-hdmi
but it's not available!
As for the case, it'll be on the desk and, as per the link above, a mid-tower.

The AMD route is tempting as it is a couple of hundred+ less than the Intel one.

[DanceswithUnix]

I may have looked at that monitor or at least one like it. The one I saw could only do 30Hz at full resolution over hdmi, pretty useless.

Displayport is certainly the way to go.

[EndlessWaves]

I'd use a mobo towards the high end, e.g. H97

I've never found the theory that an expensive chip in the centre of a motherboard makes the rest of it more reliable. To me it seems that at similar prices it would seem like going for a cheaper motherboard chip would result in higher quality components and better long term prospects.

I've been looking at performance v power a bit (where I can find any on non-whizzbang CPUs) and the Broadwell seems pretty good. My present system, idling, is 45W input so, that low on a 330W PSU's curve, isn't much more than 35W. I'd aim for lower but suspect it's hardly worth it.

AMD and Intel define TDP differently, so a 65W A8-7600 draws 10-20W more power than a 95W i5-6600k. And the power input corresponds to the heat output.

The AMD route is tempting as it is a couple of hundred+ less than the Intel one.

You're hardly comparing like with like there. The competitor to the A8-7600 would be Intel's Pentium-branded chips, the new G4500 coming closest if you wanted the GPU power. That's a bit faster on the CPU side, a bit slower on the GPU side and almost exactly the same price.

[Giraffe]

I may have looked at that monitor or at least one like it. The one I saw could only do 30Hz at full resolution over hdmi, pretty useless.

Displayport is certainly the way to go.

The post that I saw was for 2560x1440 (3,686,40px); the 16:10 is 1920x1200 (2,304,000px) so HDMI might do it as it's not much more tha HDTV (2,073,600). I guess that there's a threshold for the HDMI on mobos and the high resolution is too much.

[DanceswithUnix]

The post that I saw was for 2560x1440 (3,686,40px); the 16:10 is 1920x1200 (2,304,000px) so HDMI might do it as it's not much more tha HDTV (2,073,600). I guess that there's a threshold for the HDMI on mobos and the high resolution is too much.

I would have thought that would be fine. I run one of those at work over DVI-D which is basically the same as hdmi these days. Only exception is that DVI-D has two channels so it can handle more, but at 1920x1200 I would expect single channel to be enough.

[Giraffe]

Well, boards usually have both, so that should be OK. The one that I'd (almost) settled on
http://www.scan.co.uk/products/msi-h...-d-hdmi-micro-
is "end of life" and the alternative with DP is Z90 - bit OTT for what I need.
Not needing DP also opens up the AMD route, although I feel that the current AMDs are getting a bit out of date.
Is it worth waiting for Zen? It's another year yet and that'd make this rig 9.5 years old!

[scaryjim]

Kaveri is pretty current tech. Displayport on FM2+ is possible, but rare: for instance http://www.ebuyer.com/658042-asrock-...2a88x-extreme6 will do the job but is full ATX so pushes you towards a larger tower case. IMNSHO if you're not specifically looking for a tiny machine there's no great loss in going ATX if it gives you the features you want, and you save so much money going for an A8 7600 that it's a compromise I'd be willing to make (plus extra space means easier cooling, more expandability in the future, etc.).

As to Zen ... well, how long is a piece of string? Whether it's worth waiting is something only you can answer, I'm afraid.

in the mean time, though, here's some alternative thoughts:

1) Get a business-class machine from someone like Dell, HP, etc. Dell have an outlet store for refurbished machines that's usually good value. They're built for trouble free stable use on heavy work cycles, and if you're not actually that bothered about tinkering and self-building might be a better way to get the rock solid reliability you'er after.

2) Build a stop-gap machine. As DanceswithUnix said earlier, *anything* you build now will be lightning fast compared to your AM2 rig. A new mobo/APU/RAM/HDD can be chucked together for around £100; it'll improve your computing experience now, but isn't such a large investment that you'd be sad to replace it in a year or so's time once you know how good/bad Zen is and what the alternatives are (after all, Intel aren't going to sit on their hands for a year whilst AMD try to catch up).

[DanceswithUnix]

If you are feeling the pinch now, then I don't see it being worth waiting. First edition of anything is always a bit iffy, eg very happy with my FX8350 but the 8150 that came out before was quite a bit slower. I don't expect Zen to be any different.

I would also say that you shouldn't sweat it over the TDP either. All the modern chips are designed primarily for laptop use, so compared to an old Athlon X2 they really sip power. On idle, they use close to nothing.

My home server with 16GB of ram, a pair of mirrored hard drives and a second network card uses a A8-6500 and pulls about 50W from the wall despite running game servers and video recording systems all the time. That is pretty typical unless you go for a top end deluxe motherboard where each firewire etc chip takes another 5W which is fine if you use those features, but a waste otherwise.

By the sounds of things an i3 would do you fine, an i5 might be overkill but then it would last longer. I wouldn't bother with the S or T variants, better to get the job done fast and then go back to idle.

Only problem with the Intel route is the Intel graphics drivers. They are massively better than they used to be, but still leave me a little nervous.

[EndlessWaves]

The post that I saw was for 2560x1440 (3,686,40px); the 16:10 is 1920x1200 (2,304,000px) so HDMI might do it as it's not much more tha HDTV (2,073,600). I guess that there's a threshold for the HDMI on mobos and the high resolution is too much.

HDMI has always been capable of the same as single link DVI. i.e. up to 1920x1200 or 2048x1152.

More recent HDMI versions (1.3 & 1.4 IIRC) from the last few years can do the same as dual link DVI, i.e. anything up to 2560x1600.

The newest HDMI 2.0 that's just starting to appear supports the same as DisplayPort 1.2, i.e. 3840x2160.

although I feel that the current AMDs are getting a bit out of date.
Is it worth waiting for Zen? It's another year yet and that'd make this rig 9.5 years old!

AMD's 7000 series 'Steamroller' APUs were released in January 2014.

Intel's 4th generation 'Haswell' processors were released in June 2013, six months earlier.

If AMD are out of date then Haswell is even more so and you should be looking at Skylake.

[Giraffe]

Thanks for all the pointers and thoughts you've all given me.

I wouldn't go the pre-built, crap-ware loaded, route (Dell recently gave some freebies).
As for stop-gap, it's tempting (I'm sure even AM1 would be quicker) but, at 68, I'd like something v. well built that'd last me until I'm past realising that I can't catch up with all the breweries and beers that keep appearing!

Intel graphics: I am tempted by Broadwell - should do, as the graphics on this mobo are good enough.
Very useful details on HDMI - looks like I'm released from the need for DP.

So, I'm beginning to veer AMDwards. I'll look at mobos for Kaveri - the A8-7600 mentioned above does look good.
Not keen on Skylake yet and also I'd need to d/l several drivers for W7 - then set it up to avoid a forced downgrade to W10.