Hello Comrades,
Thanks for all your advice about setting up Linux. It was a success. The problem is that I’m now I’m intrigued and I’d like to play around a bit more.
I’m thinking of building a cheap-ish computer but I have a few questions. I’ll split them into separate posts to make things easier. Note: I won’t be installing anything that I can’t get to work on Linux.
Should I prioritise RAM or the processor? My budget is limited so I will have to make a choice between RAM and the processor. Would it be better to go for e.g. 32GB RAM and a slower processor, or 8GB RAM and a faster processor? Or is balance better? Say, 16GB RAM and a ‘medium’ processor (that’s ‘medium’ between the ‘slower’ and the ‘faster’ option within my budget, not ‘medium’ for the market).
Intel or AMD?
This is just my 2 cents, but I’d go for the CPU. Reason being you can upgrade RAM later with more sticks. However, it all depends on your use case, as this is the old memory-cpu tradeoff dilemma.
Want speed? Go for CPU. Want to have many tabs open, or guarantee a program does not crash due to low memory even if it doesn’t run at full steam? Go for memory.
Many virtual machines open? Definitely memory. Gaming? CPU… most of the times.
This is helpful, thanks. I didn’t realise I’d landed on an age-old dilemma lol.
Some more concrete information about your budget and use case here would be useful. For gaming workloads 16GB is sort of considered a minimum these days, but how much you need could vary a lot depending on what your system will be doing.
Mainly typing and reading PDFs and ebooks. Browsing the internet. If it’s useful information, my work laptop has an i3 processor and 8gb RAM and I regularly have to limit the number of documents I have open, which is annoying.
If it doesn’t make the price skyrocket, I wouldn’t mind playing some games. Nothing AAA, though, I don’t think. If it was legal I would consider using an emulator to play some Pokemon. I might use GIMP occasionally but just for fun, not for work.
Ideally, as cheap as possible because I’m
tightfrugal. At the same time, I want it to work.I think 32GB of RAM might be worth it for you then, that should let you multitask quite comfortably for awhile. Additionally, a SSD would probably be a great investment too if you can swing it since having faster storage makes everything snappier in general, and in case you do still run out of RAM, swapping data between RAM and storage will be dramatically faster.
This is helpful. I think I can opt for an SSD because I don’t need loads of storage, which means I can save by getting a smaller drive. Are there performance losses by filling up an SSD in the same way as with filling up an HDD more than half full?
Technically there is a reduction in performance as you fill the drive but, as far as I know, it’s a pretty small difference in modern SSDs and you’ll probably never notice it in real world usage. It might show up in synthetic benchmarks or server/database applications that involve moving huge amounts of data constantly.
An issue you may encounter in the real world is SLC cache saturation when writing data. Flash memory can basically kind of come in high density, or high speed, but not both. You trade off one for the other. Most SSDs have a mix of both, allowing rapid writes to the “fast” SLC memory, which will then get transferred to the “slow” TLC/QLC/PLC/etc. memory over time. Depending on the SSD model and how the manufacturer configured things, it’s possible that if you’re writing hundreds of gigabytes in one operation you’ll completely fill the fast memory and your write speeds will plummet dramatically until the transfer is finished.
I think nowadays 8GB of RAM doesn’t really make the cut anymore depending on the workload, but you should keep in mind that upgrading a CPU will most likely force you to upgrade your motherboard as well, since by that time there will be newer CPUs that your motherboard won’t support. Upgrading RAM in the future will be less expensive as you can just use new RAM sticks alongside the ones you already have though it will probably affect performance if they are mismatched.
I think that having a fast CPU now will definitely be better on the long run, but that’s just my opinion. There are probably other comrades more knowledgeable than me.
That makes sense. So I’d go for a motherboard that works with a decent processor and get the best processor I can afford? Then add 16GB RAM if it’s still within the budget, knowing that I can add another stick in a year?
When looking for a CPU, should I be overly concerned with the number of cores/threads and clock speed? Or is there a more important consideration? I see that manufacturers mention the overclock speed, too, nowadays; I’d have thought it’s better to stick to its standard max speed – is that an outdated view?
For RAM, it’s better to go 2x8GB than 1x16GB due to the way the CPU interfaces with the memory. You can get just one stick and the system will work, but having two for dual-channel mode improves performance.
Cores and clock speeds and boost clocks are…complicated, and most of the numbers are only useful with comparison between other products in the same line and sometimes competing products in the game generation. A 4GHz processor from five years ago will probably be slower in almost every task than a 3GHz processor from today due to improvements in instructions-per-cycle and other things.
The way I would go about this: first, figure out what your budget is. Find a current-generation processor within that budget and find some benchmark data for it. Then, start looking at previous-gen or even older, used processors at the same price point and find benchmark data from them to compare. In terms of performance-per-watt, newer is almost always better, but performance-per-dollar takes a bit more digging. Also worth considering, while the motherboard itself will have a negligible impact on performance in most cases, the prices of older (and, again, especially used) motherboards can be substantially cheaper so you might be able to save even more money by going previous-gen than the difference in CPU prices alone. To a point though, beyond a certain age, motherboards/RAM are hard enough to come by that they tend to increase in price again.
Thanks for explaining. Is there a similar risk with used processors and motherboards as there is with GPUs, re: the possiblity of having been used for mining?
As far as I know, it’s not really a concern. CPUs are so much worse at mining compared to GPUs that putting any mining workload on a CPU isn’t cost effective. Obviously any used product is going to be a bit of a crap shoot though and there’s always the small chance you get scammed.
I think if you go with a slower processor it will limit you on options to upgrade RAM later, if needed to. If you don’t actually do some hardcore stuff on your computer, I would go with medium option and 16GB of RAM. 32GB sounds excessive to me (well, considering you don’t do the suff that needs too much RAM).
Intel and AMD both work really well under Linux, but I would go for Intel.
It depends on what is meant by slower CPU. If you can, I would go with current gen staff anyway, and then it doesn’t matter. You can upgrade no matter which CPU you choose. The only factor is a number of channels your CPU have (which will almost always be 2), what generation of DDR it supports (current gen is DDR5 but if you go for older it will be cheaper DDR4) and how many DIMM slots your motherboard have.
Also, AMD is almost always better value with lower power consumption, with some exception in some rare use cases.
Thanks for the advice. Do Intel processors play nicely with AMD GPUs if I decide to add one? And/or are Intel GPUs any good?
You can mix and match CPU and GPU brands without worry. I wouldn’t recommend an Intel dedicated GPU for a Linux machine right now, they’re still pretty new and driver support is dodgy even on Windows. Integrated graphics should work fine, but even fairly recent Intel integrated graphics have issues with Vulkan that can make 3D gaming on them especially difficult compared to Windows.
Thanks, I’ll avoid an Intel GPU just to be on the safe side, then.
What is your usecase? Can you tell something about what you are doing with your computer. Are you planning to tinker with AI, virtual machines or other things? Are you a video editor, graphic editor or do you work with music? Please tell more about which kind of software you will use.
Intel or AMD?
Doesnt really matter. More important is what your expectations about power consumption and performance are
Mainly typing (mainly essays), reading (and annotating) PDFs and ebooks, and browsing the internet and streaming (YouTube, Netflix). Occasionally, I use Excel/Google Sheets. I won’t be using AI. I might use wine if it’s needed to play some games. Otherwise, I won’t be using any virtual machines as I’ll be avoiding Microsoft programs. I don’t edit videos or graphics or make music. I might download videos or music. I might use GIMP occasionally but just for fun, not for work.
I wouldn’t describe myself as a power user but I do like a snappy computer as I tend to need lots of documents/websites open for reference.
If it doesn’t make the price skyrocket, I wouldn’t mind playing some games. Nothing AAA, though, I don’t think. I’d like to try HOI4 and Victoria 3. If it was legal I would consider using an emulator to play some Pokemon.
Lower power consumption would be preferred but I want/need a snappy computer, really. I can’t be dealing with lag. I think processor-wise, it’d need to be at least as fast as OSX runs on an Intel i5 processor and 8GB ram. Windows running on an i3 with 8GB ram is a little too slow for me as it holds me up when I need to work fast. I’m imagining that some Linux distros on an i3 would run as quickly as OSX on an i5 because of how much lighter the OS is. (Feel free to tell me that’s a misguided assumption!)
Simply take 16GB RAM and an i5 gen8 or Ryzen 3600X. Dont forget to buy a NVMe and you should be fine
Ir really depends on what you do. If you do normal web browsing/gaming etc. I would prioritize CPU, I would still but at least 16 GB, but with that you should be totally fine. If you do something unusual, programming, virtualization, self-hosting, etc. it depends on your workload.
