Personal computing discussed
Moderators: renee, Flying Fox, Thresher
techguy wrote:https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/AMD-Phenom-II-X4-920-vs-AMD-Ryzen-3-2200G-vs-AMD-A4-7300-APU/365vs3186vs2357
LMAO, it's slower than a Phenom II.
just brew it! wrote:techguy wrote:https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/AMD-Phenom-II-X4-920-vs-AMD-Ryzen-3-2200G-vs-AMD-A4-7300-APU/365vs3186vs2357
LMAO, it's slower than a Phenom II.
It's more complicated than that. It's quite a bit better for single-threaded performance, but has half the cores. Thanks for pointing that out though, for some reason I thought it was also a quad core.
This makes the decision much less clear, TBH.
Concupiscence wrote:just brew it! wrote:techguy wrote:https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/AMD-Phenom-II-X4-920-vs-AMD-Ryzen-3-2200G-vs-AMD-A4-7300-APU/365vs3186vs2357
LMAO, it's slower than a Phenom II.
It's more complicated than that. It's quite a bit better for single-threaded performance, but has half the cores. Thanks for pointing that out though, for some reason I thought it was also a quad core.
This makes the decision much less clear, TBH.
It's a dual core, single module chip with an IGP that's not quick but has a solid feature set. I wouldn't hesitate to use it as a home theater PC. If I were OP I'd pull the battery and keep it in storage for a while until the Phenom II kicks the bucket. It would also be trivial to replace the CPU with a quad core, at which point it'd be a spry but not overwhelming upgrade from the Phenom.
just brew it! wrote:What's the advantage of waiting for the Phenom II to die?
Concupiscence wrote:just brew it! wrote:What's the advantage of waiting for the Phenom II to die?
There really isn't one. I feel a little silly for that. I'd swap the A4 in, sell the Phenom with or without its motherboard, put that money toward a solid FM2+ chip, and upgrade it, then sell the A4 too. You'd end up pulling roughly financially level that way and enjoy a perceptible upgrade.
techguy wrote:Concupiscence wrote:just brew it! wrote:What's the advantage of waiting for the Phenom II to die?
There really isn't one. I feel a little silly for that. I'd swap the A4 in, sell the Phenom with or without its motherboard, put that money toward a solid FM2+ chip, and upgrade it, then sell the A4 too. You'd end up pulling roughly financially level that way and enjoy a perceptible upgrade.
Sell the Phenom? How much do you think a used 10 year-old ($235 MSRP) AMD CPU goes for these days?
Concupiscence wrote:techguy wrote:Sell the Phenom? How much do you think a used 10 year-old ($235 MSRP) AMD CPU goes for these days?
About $15 to $20 shipped, if eBay's any indicator. Not big money, but enough to make a dent in acquiring a nicer FM2+ chip.
just brew it! wrote:Concupiscence wrote:techguy wrote:Sell the Phenom? How much do you think a used 10 year-old ($235 MSRP) AMD CPU goes for these days?
About $15 to $20 shipped, if eBay's any indicator. Not big money, but enough to make a dent in acquiring a nicer FM2+ chip.
On a related note, it surprises me how much the 8-core Piledriver FX chips (both used and new-in-box) are still going for these days. Looks like they're only down by a little more than half compared to what they were selling for when they were still reasonably current.
dragontamer5788 wrote:Topics like this scare me whenever I'm programming low level stuff. Lol. I wanna use AVX without doing a cpuid check, but... then I see a topic like this come along and remind me that not everyone has a computer from this decade... Modern architectures are way better for programming, and will be closer to the computers that will be built in the future. But if all the software you use is working fine, you can definitely stay on the old machine.
Ultimately, it depends on the software you are running. Or alternatively, if you're a programmer... the software you plan to write.
Chrispy_ wrote:That A4 is Piledriver, also known as "the rubbish, slow, inefficient one".
Chrispy_ wrote:Almost everything about the entire Bulldozer architecture and all of its refreshes was garbage. Its one advantage over Intel was more cores per dollar, but the A4 does not qualify for that merit.
dragontamer5788 wrote:Topics like this scare me whenever I'm programming low level stuff. Lol. I wanna use AVX without doing a cpuid check, but... then I see a topic like this come along and remind me that not everyone has a computer from this decade...
jackbomb wrote:dragontamer5788 wrote:Topics like this scare me whenever I'm programming low level stuff. Lol. I wanna use AVX without doing a cpuid check, but... then I see a topic like this come along and remind me that not everyone has a computer from this decade...
The latest Pentiums still don't support AVX.
Chrispy_ wrote:OP's A4 is a dual-core (single-module) Richland architecture parts. Whilst it's true that Piledriver is an improvement on Bulldozer, it took until Excavator for AMD to reach IPC parity with K10 and Steamroller was really the point at which they finally surpassed the old Stars cores. This is why overclocked Thuban (6C K10 architecture) were loved by so many for so long.
It's not even really fair to call the A4-7300 a dual-core though, because whilst it's better than Intel's hyperthreading (1C/2T), we would laugh at anyone trying to market it as a dual-core chip today. It has a single I-Cache, Fetch module, Decode module, Floating Point scheduler, and L2 Cache. The only thing that qualifies as "dual" is the integer core, and as a result, Bulldozer/Piledriver only approached dual-core performance in synthetic integer-only benchmarks. There were nearly zero real-world scenarios where a single 'module' behaved like two cores. It's better to say that AMD's module was SMT done right, in that Intel's integer core was usually the biggest bottleck in their pipeline, so doubling up on just that one component allowed the module or core to process two threads better.
Getting back to the real-world issue, Piledriver still has lower IPC than K10, and although the clockspeeds on the A4 are higher, the single-threaded performance of the A4 is only around 20% higher than the Phenom-II X4 920 it would be replacing. Most modern tasks are multithreaded, so the additional three cores on the Phenom-II would run circles around the A4, especially given the sheer number of concurrent services running in Windows 7 onwards.
lex-ington wrote:Sorry guys...have a lot of life crap going on at the moment. I was thinking of building a mini-itx box at some point just for the hell of it.
My main machine normally is used for AutoCAD work...nothing else really. Its in the basement and my basement isn't finished so I really just use the laptop and the tablet upstairs.
Even tough a NAS machine is quite interesting since a good NAS box is quite expensive....i'll have to look into that....never even crossed my mind
ludi wrote:I voted 'no' on account that when you disturb 10yo hardware and try to drop in 6+yo hardware, you're likely to discover just how many things are about to break and/or are mysteriously incompatible on both system configs. Then you end up sandwiched between a rock where the new one doesn't work when you try to upgrade, and a hard place where the old one doesn't work when you try to roll back.
IMO if it's worth tearing down, it's worth replacing with something at least in the Skylake or first-gen Ryzen timeframe.