• 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.

best amd cpu for a non gamer

corsamel

corsamel

corsamel

Associate
Joined
3 Feb 2015
Posts
14
Hey all,

Any suggestions on the fastest amd cpu for my work pc,

Using it for work, emails, surfing etc. Got the usual 20 website open :)
Got a AMD A6-6400K currently on a Gigabyte F2A68HM-HD2 but its a bit laggy.

Got 8gb and a SSD and there fine, never really go above 60% usage. So I think the cpu is the weakest point at the moment.

Whats best for under £100?

Also would like to keep the heat down if possible as im using a micro atx case with limited airflow and its in my desk cupboard, lol, awaiting for all the negative feedback about that ;)



Thanks in advance
 
Phatzy said:
An A6-6400k is more than capable for your needs. are you using chrome or IE?
Click to expand...

Tend to use Chrome, sometimes IE too.

The A6 is doing ok, just looking for something with a bit more power to keep my pc running smoothly and fast. I guess mainly while i'm multitasking.
 
Your CPU support list is here (r1.0) or here (r1.1).

Your 6400K has one Piledriver module @ 3.9 GHz, so for a decent upgrade you would be looking at any of the two module models but without wasting money on the GPU side.

For me it's the A8-7670K. Two modules at 3.6 GHz and newer Steamroller architecture, without the extra GPU power found in the A10s. Note you might need a BIOS upgrade (see the CPU support list).

My basket at Overclockers UK:

Total: £88.69
(includes shipping: £8.70)
​


​
 
Or go for one of the low end Intels and passive cool it. Then a low powered passively cooled GPU. With a hybrid fan PSU (fan turns off when not needed). Silent PC :D
 
Thanks for all your replies.

joeyjojo - Very informative and will look into that CPU. To summarize whats the range of AMD's cpu's to look at? Are the FX more for graphics? but you also say the A10 is also wasted on a non gaming pc?

So much info out there for gamers but not so much for non gamers!
So I was wondering the best cpu for my case.

The most amount of graphics it will be dealing with is some heavy media loaded website like the dailymail.co.uk
This is why im just using the onboard graphics, using the hdmi and dvi for dual monitor and works really well.

Razor Time - I dont have any problems with my new build, just want it to be ultra fast but on a budget. It is a fresh install anwyay :)


I just loaded a fairly big Excel spreadsheet... took 4.93 seconds. How can i cut that time in half? :D

Challenge time! Can anyone get that spreadsheet load time to under.. lets say 3 seconds for no more than £100 :) Prize = a bag of sweets ;)
 
Last edited:
corsamel said:
Thanks for all your replies.

joeyjojo - Very informative and will look into that CPU. To summarize whats the range of AMD's cpu's to look at? Are the FX more for graphics? but you also say the A10 is also wasted on a non gaming pc?
Click to expand...

I have an fx6300 that cost 70 quid. It's adequate for gaming and pretty great for everything that's not too intensive, such as web surfing / videos etc. Might be worth looking into.
 
corsamel said:
joeyjojo - Very informative and will look into that CPU. To summarize whats the range of AMD's cpu's to look at? Are the FX more for graphics? but you also say the A10 is also wasted on a non gaming pc?

So much info out there for gamers but not so much for non gamers!
So I was wondering the best cpu for my case.

The most amount of graphics it will be dealing with is some heavy media loaded website like the dailymail.co.uk
This is why im just using the onboard graphics, using the hdmi and dvi for dual monitor and works really well.
Click to expand...

Basically the FX chips are a different socket (AM3) so they're out of the question. Also they don't have integrated graphics.

In the FM2(+) socket that you have, they are mostly APUs (i.e. CPU+GPU) which is what you want. The Athlons are plain CPUs so you'd also need a GPU.

Which leaves you to choose from the various APUs - A6, A8, and A10 models.

The A6 have one CPU module so won't be much faster than what you have. The A10 have expensive integrated graphics which you don't need. Leaving the A8 as the one to look at IMO.

The A8-7670K is nicely placed as it uses the latest revision ("Godavari") and is in your budget. Should be almost twice as fast in CPU workloads because it has two CPU modules. A bit like going to a quad core from a dual core.
 
Thanks for your help with this, I got the A8 and its very fast, not sure i can tell much difference from my previous high end's A6 but not used it much yet.


Anyone know of a better socket/CPU to choose for even fast desktop processing? would any AM3 cpu's be even faster for my requirements? i.e. no game play so dont need good graphics, just fast office desktop speeds.

Thanks again in advance.
 
I have the A8-7670K in one of my APU systems - its equally a match for A10-7700K - clocks and gpu power. I've not seen is throttle like the 7700k can every once in a great while.

My son uses it for homework - everyday use and gaming. on 1400 by 900 monitor and it handles everything thrown at it solidly - They are a fantastic little chip. I did have issues with Asus FM2+ board not likely the chip even after updating the bios - but Gigabyte board I'm almost positive is the same I have - bought it new with the latest bios last year and it worked straight out of the box.

She'll OC like a champ - but you'll want a better cooler to do that :) or if you just want to put it at its max turbo and leave it will also. I just need to flip him over to the ssd that's sitting in the system and it will be even faster....
 
yeah like I say i got the A8-7670k with a basic ssd and 8gb of ram. Just a basic Gigabyte FM2+ mboard and it is fast. Although sometimes does take a few seconds to open a big spreadsheet for example.

Would a higher spec SSD make any noticeable difference? Or a different CPU socket but still keeping it under £100 for the cpu?
 
Honestly - with big spreedsheets - ram and SSD makes the difference - you could OC the cpu a little - but if you could snag another 8 gigs of ram - that would actually most likely biggest difference with it.

also the speed of the SSD read/write can make a difference - cheapest ssds out there tend to be a little slower than some of the others out there.....
 
Yeah ive been wondering what component is actually going to make the main bit of difference with general desktop work... i.e. loading spreadsheets, loading the internet (apart from internet connection limitations obviously), loading of the Windows itself.

I have 8gb already and never really notice Task manager showing the pc using more than 60/70% of ram, thats when i have a dozen programs open, internet tabs etc. Would 16gb make any difference then?

Also re SSD's, I understand there are faster read and write speeds but in the real world are these going to be even noticeable?

Saying that, i think I saw a youtube video of a guy showing 5 ssds in raid and the speed of the computer was immense. Not really looking to go that deep though :)
 
The big boost from SSD's is latency. Standard drives seek times are 15ms+, SSD's are about 0.01ms. For the OS and Windows applications an SSD is one of the best upgrades. I put together a pc with a AMD 880K + MSI A88X + MX100 256GB SSD + 16GB RAM and a cheap GPU and it was very fast for office work. 8GB RAM should be ok but I had the RAM so used 16GB.
 
Last edited:
corsamel said:
Yeah ive been wondering what component is actually going to make the main bit of difference with general desktop work... i.e. loading spreadsheets, loading the internet (apart from internet connection limitations obviously), loading of the Windows itself.

I have 8gb already and never really notice Task manager showing the pc using more than 60/70% of ram, thats when i have a dozen programs open, internet tabs etc. Would 16gb make any difference then?
Click to expand...

It'll depend on what you're doing with it, you're the best person to find out what you need more of.

I would guess that the delay in opening a big spreadsheet is a CPU intensive task (since you're loading it off an SSD) in probably one main thread, so more clock speed would be the answer. You could check this by watching a system monitor and see if it spikes up on one core.

If that's the case your only option really is a more efficient CPU, because your 7670K is clocked very high already (3.6-3.9 GHz). Something like a new Intel i3. But I wouldn't bother because it means getting a whole new system.

If you're not getting close to 100% on the memory then you're right, that's not the problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom