• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Rocket lake leaks

~>Dg<~ said:
99 percent of people dont do anything needing more than 4 cores never mind 8. its not saying if you need it use it its just many people are buying 12 cores and the like and wont even use em. better off just getting the fastest 8 core and that will last you five years.
Click to expand...

99%? No, not accepting that. If you had said 75, 80 or similar I'd have agreed. But no, source please.
 
Roadrunner_668 said:
its probs true tbh

when you consider the number of computers used jsut for browsing the net and word processing or sat in offices i recon its easily 99%
Click to expand...

No, the psychology is that the average user or gamer will always seek better settings and more demanding games which means that he does need the ultimate configuration - what stops him is his budget.

The need is always for more and better. The quads are literally entry-level and low-performance CPUs in 2021.
 
I've only just replaced a 4 core in my personal desktop, and believe me, that 6600k was grinding to a halt.

4 core, 8 threads - maybe, for light office work. But that's still 8 threads, not just a simple 4 core.
 
4K8KW10 said:
No, the psychology is that the average user or gamer will always seek better settings and more demanding games which means that he does need the ultimate configuration - what stops him is his budget.

The need is always for more and better. The quads are literally entry-level and low-performance CPUs in 2021.
Click to expand...
need does not equal want :)
 
Roadrunner_668 said:
need does not equal want :)
Click to expand...

Users need the fastest possible because the faster it is, the better the user experience is. 4-core CPUs today are obsolete, unless very very low-end of the market and demands for basic use - like running Windows and maybe somehow Office, but not much more than this. Low quality gaming, etc...
 
i really dont think thats right at all, you can do anything with 4 cores and only certain types of program will use more, and thats without even considering threads per core, but carry on, not worth arguing over :)
 
DeathStorm said:
Light office work? Is that supposed to be a joke?

Reading posts here you'd almost think you can't launch a couple of Notepad instances without at least 10 cores.
Click to expand...
So speaks someone who doesn't have to provide support for terribly written business applications, that both fight the AV and grind to a halt when Windows updates runs.
 
q974739 said:
So speaks someone who doesn't have to provide support for terribly written business applications, that both fight the AV and grind to a halt when Windows updates runs.
Click to expand...

So how many cores do they need for that situation then?

Having been using a 7700K for the last 4 years, to happily game, develop with VMs, run Photoshop etc I do not believe that having 4 cores is in any way a problem for the vast majority of people.
 
Jimmy Weirdarms said:
I've recently switched up to a 16 core dev system. Believe me you noticed it when compiling things, it makes a huge difference there, and results in me getting distracted less and producing more.
Click to expand...

I'm a great believer in efficiency and I wouldn't claim I know what everyone here needs from their hardware, if you need a 32 or 2 core chip to get the job done, more power to you. Properly understanding your needs is a great thing, whatever they may be.

However, I was not claiming it makes no difference, I was simply disagreeing with the earlier comment made regarding 4 cores being only suitable for light office work.
 
DeathStorm said:
However, I was not claiming it makes no difference, I was simply disagreeing with the earlier comment made regarding 4 cores being only suitable for light office work.
Click to expand...

Oh sure, 4 cores are still adequate for an awful lot of things. It *all* depends on your workload. I've got quad-core ARM machines running linux-based security cam systems that get away with having 256MB of RAM, but I'm not going to recommend that for AI training (or gaming) :)
And for average office work an i3 a few gens old is still going to be more than adequate, so long as it's got an SSD and 8+GB of RAM.

I just wanted to say that for dev work, I've not found 16 a waste, and I've appreciated the speedup over 8 cores in some of my work.
 
DeathStorm said:
So how many cores do they need for that situation then?

Having been using a 7700K for the last 4 years, to happily game, develop with VMs, run Photoshop etc I do not believe that having 4 cores is in any way a problem for the vast majority of people.
Click to expand...
8, more memory then management will give them and *****" SSDs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom