Results 1 to 40 of 73

Thread: Welcome Back SpeedRaider!

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Senior Member tim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    WA/ND/CA
    Posts
    177
    Thanks for the advice. I'm not finding refurb i5 4690k. I'll have to look at building. Or get back into it, it's been years. The last one I built was a Athlon xp 3000.
    Too bad nobody makes a LGA-1150 dual socket mobo. Or an AM3+ dual. 16 cores on one home machine would be nice.

  2. #2
    Senior Member tim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    WA/ND/CA
    Posts
    177
    Even as dual socket AM3+, it would be faster than i5 4690k not by much. From looking at mersenne.org's cpu comparison of iteration times, it looks like 2 amd 8 core processors would do about 1/4 more work than i5 4690k in the same amount of time. At a cost of more electricity. I'd still be interested if a dual mobo existed. Or better, dual lga-1150 socket.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by tim View Post
    Even as dual socket AM3+, it would be faster than i5 4690k not by much. From looking at mersenne.org's cpu comparison of iteration times, it looks like 2 amd 8 core processors would do about 1/4 more work than i5 4690k in the same amount of time. At a cost of more electricity. I'd still be interested if a dual mobo existed. Or better, dual lga-1150 socket.
    Don't put AMD's to run LL tests, it's a waste of time due to the fact that you can't take advantage of the avx instructions.

  4. #4
    Senior Member tim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    WA/ND/CA
    Posts
    177
    Quote Originally Posted by pinhodecarlos View Post
    AMD's . . . can't take advantage of the avx instructions.
    I read that AMD FX-8350 does have avx instruction set, not avx 2.0. Has the client not been updated to take advantage of it? I have also noticed that amd chips don't do near as well as intel at sob.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by tim View Post
    I read that AMD FX-8350 does have avx instruction set, not avx 2.0. Has the client not been updated to take advantage of it? I have also noticed that amd chips don't do near as well as intel at sob.
    I think you need to add the line "CpuSupportsAVX=1" to local.ini to take advantage of avx on AMD but problems may arise. Just test and see what happens.

  6. #6
    Senior Member tim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    WA/ND/CA
    Posts
    177
    I don't have an AMD chip that supports avx. My referring to AMD FX-8350 was just me lining up prospective cpus. Wishing there were a dual socket AM3+, to have processing power without so much cost. But I'm leaning toward building an i5 4690k, like you suggested. I'll keep looking as time goes on.

  7. #7
    Big Fat Gorilla guru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Warren, OR
    Posts
    501
    AVX2 isn't really what helps with SOB. AVX2 processors have FM3 which is what is helping speed up the processing over AVX. I'm not sure which AMD processors(Not my cup of tea) but many of the newer ones have FM4 which should help but to what degree I don't know off the top of my head. The AMD processors are cheap on the purchase side but it will end up costing more in the long run due to power costs. Even cheap power can't make up that difference.

    The problem with many dual socket MB is memory bandwidth. It is better to have two desktops vs a single dual socket system.
    I'm having fun!!! I'm just not sure if it's net fun or gross fun.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •