Why does /g/ hate dual core processors?
Do you not realise that for many people a dual core APU or Pentium is more than enough for their uses?
Most people for who those actually are good enough will inevitably shit up the computer somehow, or if they ever decide they want to do slightly more it will just be complete shit.
Also modern software is shitty and bloated.
More cores are always better.
>>52889834
/g/ users multitask
2 cores isn't enough, plus dual cores are usually clocked lower as well
>>52889936
My mother is using an a6 APU. I'm using a turionx2 in my old laptop that I use to multitask with my desktop. There isn't enough difference in performing common tasks like web browsing to even justify having an i5 desktop if you don't need the extra processing power.
Yes, for browsing the web and watching 720p video there is really not much difference between a turionx2 laptop dual core with a hd3200 and a desktop i5 2400 with a gt 640.
>>52890017
Other than gaming, what does /g/ do that requires more than what a g3260 can provide? Serious question.
>>52890056
browsing with 20 tabs, while listening to music, while running some work software. Then you need to browse folders and the whole PC shits itself.
>>52890056
MATLAB simulations
VM's
Content creation
Streaming
Muh games
>>52890095
A g3260 can handle that.
A fucking Intel atom with 2gb ram handled that in the Lenovo 100s review.
>>52890116
Fair enough.
Stop making excuses for having a poorfag-tier computer. Dual cores are shit and useless for modern computing. I'd understand if you were running one in a nas or torrentbox, but that's it.
>>52890056
Reencoding my movies and shows into x265. It can take around 30-60 minutes for a single episode with a 4790k @4.7GHz
>>52890173
Then don't buy a dual core. Buy an I5 or higher, or an fx 4350 or higher.
>>52890174
Damn.
Having only 2 threads cripples you immensely in multi-tasking which is what a laptop/desktop is for.
An i3 or A8 is the MINIMUM you should have in 2016. Preferably the A8 if you are too poor to afford a dedicated GPU.
The cheapest i3 is like $20 more than a the pentium meme btw.
If you're not buying a laptop you have no business buying anything less than a quad core these days. More cores improves multitasking even with poorly threaded applications. Speedstep and coolnquiet make the power usage difference pretty minuscule.
>>52890276
Not in Australia.
A g3260 is 80 dollars. The i3 is 180 dollars.
Nothing wrong with choosing a higher end cpu because some people legitimately need the extra performance but I'm still struggling to understand the hate againstbdual cores.
>>52890304
You do know that a dual core desktop is much more powerful than a dualbcore laptop, don't you? So if you support dual core laptops why be against more powerful dual core desktops?
>>52890341
The I3 4170 is 180 dollars*
>>52890341
>You do know that a dual core desktop is much more powerful than a dualbcore laptop, don't you?
yes
>So if you support dual core laptops why be against more powerful dual core desktops?
Because with a laptop you actually have to consider power usage. The only benefit you get out of better power usage is you can save a few cents every month. After 5 years you might save a dollar, fucking big deal. You might as well spend that money up front for a much better chip and actually benefit.
>>52890341
christ, why is everything so fucking expensive in australia. I literally saw an i3-4160 for $80 in microcenter today
its 2016 dual core is so fucking outdated it makes me sick
To be honest, if you arent a gaymer and you need something to browse web or whatever, one core is enough.
>>52889834
Because it's 2016. A dual core is fine for basic web browsing and stuff, but most people either use their PC for work or playing games like a child, and a dual core CPU is useless for both.
>>52890667
No. One core is too little. If a proccess locks for any reason, there is a huge performance impact to switching to executing a different thread.
>>52890722
I dont know man, works for me for light web browsing.
>>52890667
A sempron 3850 is like $40 family
>>52890606
>old = bad
>>52890791
In 2016 it is, christ even atoms have 4 threads now
>>52889834
Because you could get quad cores for less than that
>>52890777
Got something for LGA775 style socket?
>>52890963
>being a poorfag
>choosing intel
You didn't think things through did you?
>>52890963
Xeon X5450. Cost a pittance on eBay and can be overclocked past 4GHz, at which point they're good for just about anything, gay men included.
>>52891052
>being a poorfag
Cant help it
>choosing intel
How do you like your fire?
>>52891055
Seems like a pretty good deal.
>>52891077
>>52891135
I dont think so, senpai
>>52889834
I rescued an old Pentium 4 PC from going in the dumpster at work. I installed OpenBSD + Xfce on it. For the sort of shit most people do, that would be sufficient. I guess most would be too fucking lazy to bother trying to learn their way around OpenBSD though.
Originally that PC had XP on it. The office manager had me clean all the shit off of it a few times, before he decided to replace it. It was fucking painful to try to use. With OpenBSD it's easy to forget just how old it actually is.
Because I can say my computer has 8 CORES!!!!
>>52891171
>no temperature sensor
Cool story senpai.
>>52891171
topkek
>>52891196
Look again
>>52891216
Now download open source hardware monitor and show us the actual cpu temperature reading.
>>52891247
>>52891180
How does bsd compare to tiny core? Been thinking of trying it out.
>>52891327
>under load
>cpu whimpers back to 2.4 GHz
>not a housefire
sure thing senpai
Kinda weird how open source hardware monitor does not read the cpu temp, it's suppose to be the most accurate hardware monitor out there.
>>52889834
"DRINK ALL THE BOOZE HACK ALL THE THINGS"
>>52891413
commit sudoku
>>52891413
w-what am i supposed to do?
>>52891453
Not him but there's no way a pentium 4 can reach 52°C at 2.4ghz under load. They weren't THAT fucking hot.
>>52891495
jesus man, save up for an AM1 motherboard and processor. I'm sure both can be bought together for less than $100.
>>52891501
Oh right, i kinda plugged front panel of my pc to kill the noise and left it like that whole day. Maybe thats part of the problem.
>>52891055
what about the motherboard?
>>52891495
Not much you can do beside upgrade or get a liquid cooler. Cooling 65nm chips was a fucking nightmare back then, especially the pentium 4.
>>52890166
I used an amd e-300u apu for my labs in VMWare last semester. Never had a problem with less than 5 VMs running.
>>52891544
You monster, you should be in prison right now.
>>52891581
No biggie, i just covered it with some thick cloth. Just removed it now to see if it works.
>>52891578
Your VMs weren't doing shit then.
>>52891378
I don't know to be honest. I've never used Tiny core.
The BSDs are lightweight compared to most of the Linux world, but OpenBSD is a bit heavier than the others, or at least can be. The full install disk comes with X (Xenocara, which is a stripped down, and more secured version of it). It's an optional part of the installation, but it's selected by default, and that's why it's heavier.
One thing to keep in mind with OpenBSD is that if you care about high performance, it's probably not the OS for you. It focuses on security, and code correctness, and it's designed to make things as simplified as possible, and let you get work done, but it's not going to win any performance benchmarks.
FreeBSD on the other hand offers good performance, and the developers care a lot more about Linux compatibility. The downside is that the developers don't see it as a desktop OS, and put minimal time and resources into improving the desktop experience--most of them use Macs to develop on.
The OpenBSD devs intend for their OS to be used as a desktop, and they use it to develop OpenBSD.
I like both, but I prefer OpenBSD. I'd pick it for a desktop, a router, or a simple server. FreeBSD is the way to go if your server needs are a bit complex, or if you absolutely must use Linux binaries for whatever reason. I don't really know enough about NetBSD or Dragonfly to offer an opinion on them. Dragonfly sounds really interesting though.
>using an i7 2620m dual core, runs great
>using an a4 7300 at work, runs great
>mother using an i3 2120, no problems yet
>father using an e8400 at work, no issues
>father uses an i5 650 at home, after an SSD upgrade it's faster than my desktop.
My desktop?
It's an i5 3570 quad core, and even then I feel like an i3 would be plenty for me.
>>52892339
Thanks. I'm really curious to try openBSD. I'll give it a try soon.
>>52890056
music production, where more cores definitely helps.
>>52892437
>fx9570 master race
>>52889936
My T420 with a 2620M has literally no problem handling just about anything I throw at it, including VMs, likewise for my X200. I can handle single-core chips just fine too. Learn the limits of your hardware and how to better take advantage of it instead of being a retard and trying to run 40 things at once you don't even need to keep open.
>>52890095
you can do that shit on late-model Pentium 4 if you feed it some RAM, what the fuck kind of bloat are you running???
>>52889834
>Why does /g/ hate dual core processors?
It doesn't. Now GTFO.
>>52890174
>Reencoding
Please dont be transcoding..........
>>52892499
>220W housefire
>master race
Fucking why, when you can get a 8320E or 8370E and overclock just the same, while also having the option of a sane 95W stock frequency?
