Well my Computers Stink!

Topic

New Reply

Hey Y’all,

It’s been 5.5 years since I bought a new computer for myself, of course my wife has a newer machine… So, naturally I’ve been lusting after some new hardware. But there’s a problem here. I’ve been watching LTT videos to see the performance gains that new hardware provides but they are gaming setups and I don’t game, I’m a productivity and programming type of guy.

So just for kicks I thought I’d run some benchmarks on my machines:

As you can clearly see they stink! What doesn’t show in the table is that not one of the 3 machines could break 25 fps in any of the tests.

That said I don’t have any particular problem with any of my machines, with maybe the exception of the Laptop. My questions to all you HW guys is:

1. Will I get any really noticeable speed improvements for my workload by purchasing a new machine?
2. Do you think I’ll get a noticeable improvement in my laptop performance if I upgrade the DRAM?
3. Do you have any other suggestions as to improving the performance, that I would notice, of any of the machines?
4. Should I just wait for the clock to run out on Win 10 and upgrade then?

May the Forces of good computing be with you!

RG

PowerShell & VBA Rule!
Computer Specs

1 user thanked author for this post.

geekdom

Reply | Quote

Replies

What apps do you run? Do any apps sit there and do a “not responding”?

Like some of our key apps are Word and Excel.  you can only type so fast so a faster computer won’t do much.

 

Susan Bradley Patch Lady/Prudent patcher

Reply | Quote

Susan,

I spend most of my time writing PowerShell. I still dabble in VBA macros for Excel & Access, I have some pretty elaborate ones if I say so myself…LOL!

I used to get some “Not Responding” msgs before I upgraded my main desktop from 16 to 32Gb, but now only if I have severe multi tasking going on.

May the Forces of good computing be with you!

RG

PowerShell & VBA Rule!
Computer Specs

1 user thanked author for this post.

geekdom

Reply | Quote

Wow, RG, your devices are all much better specified than my own. If yours stink then mine stink much worse. Just saying…

I have 1 i7 device which I very rarely use ‘cos my eyes aren’t good enough. The rest are i5… and soldier on admirably.

I’m 68 and realised a long time ago that I don’t need cutting edge. I’m retired and have all the time in the world.

I’ve looked at your 4 questions and IMO it’s not a hardware issue. Your devices are all fine. It’s a state of mind, my friend.

Never give up… just chill, instead. 🙂

Reply | Quote

Sorry RG
Daddy says no new toy today 😁

🍻

Just because you don't know where you are going doesn't mean any road will get you there.

Reply | Quote

RetiredGeek wrote:

I’ve been watching LTT videos to see the performance gains that new hardware provides but they are gaming setups and I don’t game

I don’t game too but I use a gaming laptop as these laptops have better hardware : CPU, GPU, Motherboards, USB-C, Thunderbolt, More RAM, better displays, faster SSD lanes…
It all amount to faster response, faster loading…

Reply | Quote

All my computers move faster than I do.

On permanent hiatus {with backup and coffee}
offline▸ Win10Pro 2004.19041.572 x64 i3-3220 RAM8GB HDD Firefox83.0b3 WindowsDefender
offline▸ Acer TravelMate P215-52 RAM8GB Win11Pro 22H2.22621.1265 x64 i5-10210U SSD Firefox106.0 MicrosoftDefender
online▸ Win11Pro 22H2.22621.1992 x64 i5-9400 RAM16GB HDD Firefox116.0b3 MicrosoftDefender

2 users thanked author for this post.

Rick Corbett, opti1

Reply | Quote

geekdom wrote:

All my computers move faster than I do.

And they don’t have to move fast. There’s nothing fast about my computers.

On permanent hiatus {with backup and coffee}
offline▸ Win10Pro 2004.19041.572 x64 i3-3220 RAM8GB HDD Firefox83.0b3 WindowsDefender
offline▸ Acer TravelMate P215-52 RAM8GB Win11Pro 22H2.22621.1265 x64 i5-10210U SSD Firefox106.0 MicrosoftDefender
online▸ Win11Pro 22H2.22621.1992 x64 i5-9400 RAM16GB HDD Firefox116.0b3 MicrosoftDefender

Reply | Quote

I saw an article in a computer magazine a long time ago – someone had taken the original IBM PC and souped it up as much as was humanly possible. It was fast, I’m sure, once they got done with it.

I’m sure your current computer has been souped up as much as possible. If it hasn’t, I would consider going that route.

On the other hand, you could get a new computer, then use your current one as an internet radio, print server, internet streamer for one of your TVs, or any number of other functions that would be better offloaded from your current computer.

For example, a network firewall:
https://www.sophos.com/en-us/free-tools/sophos-xg-firewall-home-edition

I am really intrigued by this free and powerful-looking tool by Sophos.

Group "L" (Linux Mint)
with Windows 8.1 running in a VM

2 users thanked author for this post.

Seattle27, Fred

Reply | Quote

I have wondered this every time I have considered a new box, I mostly surf and email. Do I need a new box? The real answer is not really but the little pauses still bother me. Alt Tabbing between pages and waiting for a web page to load. I ‘think’ the faster the GPU clocks and the wider the bus the faster it would be, but I never found any stats for that only gaming and FPS stats.

But of course building a new box keeps me busy every few years and older windows installs accumulate detritus and slow down.

🍻

Just because you don't know where you are going doesn't mean any road will get you there.

Reply | Quote

wavy wrote:

Alt Tabbing between pages and waiting for a web page to load. I ‘think’ the faster the GPU clocks and the wider the bus the faster it would be, but I never found any stats for that only gaming and FPS stats.

Those delays are a function of RAM or CPU speed. A faster GPU would not make any difference for those kinds of workloads.

GPUs are usually only tested in terms of gaming because the integrated GPU that nearly every CPU comes with is more than quick enough for nearly all non-gaming workloads. There are some specialized exceptions, but for users outside of fields like graphics design, engineering, and heavy number crunching (like protein folding simulations or cryptocurrency mining), it’s usually the case that if you are not gaming, you don’t need a faster GPU than the one your CPU comes with already.

Dell XPS 13/9310, i5-1135G7/16GB, KDE Neon
XPG Xenia 15, i7-9750H/16GB & GTX1660ti, KDE Neon
Acer Swift Go 14, i5-1335U/16GB, KDE Neon (and Win 11 for maintenance)

1 user thanked author for this post.

wavy

Reply | Quote

The reason that benchmarks target gaming FPS is that that is the main and one of the only places where you will see an impact of better GPUs. Even integrated graphics are enough for things like web browsing and document handling, as they are mainly CPU-bound processes. If you have a high resolution screen then videos will appreciate a better GPU, especially with modern hardware acceleration, as will things like video and image processing, but those things don’t apply to most of us.

In conclusion: If you want faster web browsing and document handling, upgrading your CPU (or RAM/lack of SSD, if those are your bottleneck), is what will most likely do it for you.

EDIT: This will teach me not to leave a tab open for half an hour without checking for new messages before posting!

1 user thanked author for this post.

wavy

Reply | Quote

Computers to me now are akin to hot rods in my younger years. Need for speed… even when I wasn’t racing. Days, weeks, months spent planning and building, then constantly tweaking for that little bit extra. After a bit time for a new project 🙂

Never Say Never

Reply | Quote

FWIW An option to consider is an ARM Cortex/ Qualcomm CPU’s with DDR5 multi-channel memory system nearer the time of Windows 12 release, just in case M$ raise the hardware threshold in the name of security and IT ransomware to appease benchmarks 🙂
As you were….

No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created IT- AE

Reply | Quote

RetiredGeek wrote:

As you can clearly see they stink! What doesn’t show in the table is that not one of the 3 machines could break 25 fps in any of the tests.

I discovered quite a while back that chasing after better FPS really only applies if you’re gaming or do a lot of video editing.

The “higher” FPS speeds are achieved by off-loading the processing of actual video data (i.e. 3d rendering, lighting, highlights, shadows, colors, etc., etc.) to the GPU, either built-in or external, instead of the CPU.

For the day-to-day software most users run (even programing in Powershell, Basic, C++, etc.) there’s really no “video data” to be sped up so you won’t see any effect from a setup that can product higher FPS (one exception is most browsers have a setting called “use hardware acceleration” that can speed up the processing of videos streamed from websites.)

On the other hand, if you do gaming or processing videos, having a faster FPS can make a world of difference!

I don’t game (never been good at the hand-eye coordination needed to keep from getting killed real quick), but I do process a lot of videos and the difference between letting the CPU do that vs my Nvidia GeForce RTX 3060Ti GPU is night and day.

My CPU (i7-9700K overclocked to 4.9 GHz) takes ~40 mins to process a 20 min video, my RTX 3060 Ti GPU (using the same quality settings) can compete it in less than 3 mins!

5 users thanked author for this post.

CADesertRat, Alex5723, JohnW, RetiredGeek, wavy

Reply | Quote

All graphics things aside, I saw a big kick in overall performance when I upgraded my DIY PC from a 3rd gen Intel Core i3 @3.4 GHz with dual cores to an Intel Core i5 9th gen with 6 cores, running at 3.7 GHz base, with turbo to 4.6GHz, which included a DDR3 to DDR4 swap. With Windows power settings set at high performance it usually runs between 4.0-4.3 GHz, without a lot of heat using stock air cooling.

With SSD drives for my boot and data volumes, the system boots up quickly, and applications load in a flash.

It did very well with the Intel 9th gen CPU integrated graphics for non-gaming use, but I ended up with an Nvidia GPU for some light casual gaming.

Windows 10 Pro 22H2

Reply | Quote

So, RG? Any follow-up? 🙂

Reply | Quote

Rick,

For now it looks like I’ll just stand pat! Unless someone comes up with a compelling reason to upgrade I’ll wait for the EOL on W10.

I’m probably going to go with a mini-form factor when I do upgrade since they seem to do all I want in less space. I like the MiniForm PCs.

May the Forces of good computing be with you!

RG

PowerShell & VBA Rule!
Computer Specs

Reply | Quote

-> “I like the MiniForm PCs.”

Based on the recommendation of a former student of mine at Berlin’s Technical University who was doing his PhD in computer science, over the past four years or so, I’ve bought three Intel NUCs. I’ve stuck to the “H” versions, which permit installation of both an m.2 and a 2.5″ ssd.

Within the MiniForm PC niche, the Intel machines are relatively expensive, and for financial reasons, I’ve been limited to models with the i3 CPU: a v.7i3, a v.8i3, and a v.10i3.

You can find both barebones kits and complete PCs. I bought all of mine second-hand as complete PCs, with RAM, SSDs, and Windows already installed. All were relatively inexpensive because they were advertised by users who knew computers and were looking to get rid of their “last-generation”machines so they could upgrade.

All three are now running Win10x64 pro v. 22H2. So far, M$ has only identified the v.10 as being ready for Win 11, but I haven’t looked into whether the other two could run it. I’m not interested yet.

I am very happy with all three machines and find the v.10i3 extremely fast and capable. Of course if you can afford an i7, it will doubtlessly perform much better.

Just for the record, I do no gaming or programming whatsoever. The most demanding computer work I do is photo-melanges (e.g. the attached New Year’s card).

Anyway, I’ve just written this to add my two-cents worth.

Reply | Quote