Which CPU for browsing

opethdisciple · 27 Dec 2019 at 00:09

Grim5 said:
but you do if you have a very low end or no GPU and want to watch 8k videos

Obviously, but a low end GPU will sort that out no issue. There's always edge cases.

theforce · 27 Dec 2019 at 01:09

Chrome uses my CPU when watching YouTube videos. When watching videos from Edge the entire process if offloaded to the GPU.

4K8KW10 · 27 Dec 2019 at 06:58

opethdisciple said:
Sure. But you don't need much over a half decent chip for web browsing. An 8700k is a monster chip for web browsing.

It is not. It is a mid-range chip with limited resources when there are multiple tabs open and each one of them takes a separate and its own thread for execution. I wouldn't praise that poor chip

MagicBoy · 27 Dec 2019 at 10:09

4K8KW10 said:
Either this or simply each thumbnail takes its own thread, the load is divided among all the threads. It doesn't make any sense to use ONE core for the whole load. It won't load soon

Erm, no.

David Bisset · 27 Dec 2019 at 10:48

Playing cookie clicker late game gets pretty CPU heavy, if you ever want to pointlessly slow down your browser

opethdisciple · 27 Dec 2019 at 13:41

4K8KW10 said:
It is not. It is a mid-range chip with limited resources when there are multiple tabs open and each one of them takes a separate and its own thread for execution. I wouldn't praise that poor chip

As for your Chrome is the best browser:

Article1

But most importantly choice and privacy:

Article2

HangTime · 27 Dec 2019 at 13:57

Screenshot suggests it's using about 10GB of RAM as well.

Five.Stars · 27 Dec 2019 at 13:59

This thread is utterly bonkers!

opethdisciple · 27 Dec 2019 at 14:09

I cant believe we've reached a point where it is suggested that a 8700k isn't enough for web browsing.

willhub · 27 Dec 2019 at 14:15

You need a thread ripper for browsing the internet on Chrome, if you're using over 100 tabs you need a datacentre.

chaparral · 27 Dec 2019 at 14:22

HangTime said:
Screenshot suggests it's using about 10GB of RAM as well.

yes...many times i notice it using around 14GB to 15GB when I have a lot of browser tabs open

TNA · 27 Dec 2019 at 14:31

willhub said:
You need a thread ripper for browsing the internet on Chrome, if you're using over 100 tabs you need a datacentre.

Hahahaha

arc@css · 27 Dec 2019 at 18:25

opethdisciple said:
I cant believe we've reached a point where it is suggested that a 8700k isn't enough for web browsing.

I recall browsing through a load of tabs back when I had a Q6600 - and a lot fewer other system resources too.

Captain · 27 Dec 2019 at 18:41

opethdisciple said:
I cant believe we've reached a point where it is suggested that a 8700k isn't enough for web browsing.

It’s like the poster has become Castiel/Glaucus combined and just goes against the grain for everything just for the sake of arguing, surprised he hasn’t been warned yet.

jigger · 27 Dec 2019 at 20:08

Those Intel security mitigation’s must be mounting up. Time for hardware fixes.

Rainmaker · 27 Dec 2019 at 22:45

4K8KW10 said:
Chrome is faster than Firefox in about everything - initial start-up, loading of pages. I stopped using Firefox a decade ago.

Which is great, except in the last 10 years things - shockingly - changed. Firefox was rewritten and released as Firefox Quantum, for example. It's faster and lighter than Chrome now in most respects. As for recommending a £800 upgrade because an 8700K isn't fast enough to browse the web... to quote Magnolia - "Just LOL". You can't post a screenshot of your lowest-end-possible 15 watt AMD laptop CPU as justification that an 8700K can't load YouTube. Jesus, man, do you literally just post stream-of-consciousness? I've just upgraded from an 8700K to a ThreadRipper 3960X and there's no real discernable difference in web browsing, so there's your 3900X upgrade suggestion out the window.

chaparral said:
I rather stick with intel as I have always suffered from bad experiences with AMD/ATI stuff

Again, things change. AMD are now dominating desktop and server space and Intel just has no answer - the only new thing Intel has released the last couple of years has been more hardware flaws and software mitigations that killed performance of their CPUs by a massive margin.

ETA: Just realised you're the OP, sorry. You don't need to upgrade to begin with. Period. This is a software issue. Try an Ubuntu live USB and see what browsing feels like there. When you do finally upgrade, see what the landscape looks like at that time without bias (hint: AMD will likely still be killing it, but either way competition is great for us all).

Five.Stars said:
This thread is utterly bonkers!

+1.

Quartz · 27 Dec 2019 at 22:49

4K8KW10 said:
It is not. It is a mid-range chip with limited resources when there are multiple tabs open and each one of them takes a separate and its own thread for execution. I wouldn't praise that poor chip

My 8700 works just fine for browsing TYVM. That includes Youtube.

4K8KW10 · 27 Dec 2019 at 22:50

Rainmaker said:
Which is great, except in the last 10 years things - shockingly - changed. Firefox was rewritten and released as Firefox Quantum, for example. It's faster and lighter than Chrome now in most respects. As for recommending a £800 upgrade because an 8700K isn't fast enough to browse the web... to quote Magnolia - "Just LOL". You can't post a screenshot of your lowest-end-possible 15 watt AMD laptop CPU as justification that an 8700K can't load YouTube. Jesus, man, do you literally just post stream-of-consciousness? I've just upgraded from an 8700K to a ThreadRipper 3960X and there's no real discernable difference in web browsing, so there's your 3900X upgrade suggestion out the window.

The OP complained that his 6-core/12-thread CPU is overloaded by MS Edge.
I can confirm that browsing can be CPU-heavy, which is confirmed by at least several other sources if you check google search.

chaparral said:
I need to upgrade my CPU as just browsing the internet seems to use all it power
Which CPU would you recommend to upgrade from a i7-8700k from ?

Rainmaker · 27 Dec 2019 at 22:54

4K8KW10 said:
The OP complained that his 6-core/12-thread CPU is overloaded by MS Edge.
I can confirm that browsing can be CPU-heavy, which is confirmed by at least several other sources if you check google search.

Nonsense. As I said it's a software issue and would use 100% CPU of whatever you threw at it. I don't need to check 'google search' to understand CPU resource allocation or browser architecture, thanks - at least on Linux, BSD or Windows. It would be interesting to see what Task Manager actually showed if the arrow was expanded next to Edge, and/or if OP tried the same site in Firefox or Chrome with NoScript and uBlock Origin running.

TNA · 27 Dec 2019 at 22:55

Quartz said:
My 8700 works just fine for browsing TYVM. That includes Youtube.

You are wrong! He can confirm that browsing can be CPU-heavy, which is confirmed by at least several other sources if you check google search!

Bat **** crazy no?