4 ms·

The right answer to this is to look into benchmarks. It now works again to compare Intel and AMD clocks, but only of the current generation, and then there is c

by onli 8y ago

The right answer to this is to look into benchmarks. It now works again to compare Intel and AMD clocks, but only of the current generation, and then there is core count and motherboard prices to consider, so on. A project of mine is a hardware recommender, it also includes a meta-benchmark. I collect published benchmarks and build a globally sorted order of processors out of it. https://www.pc-kombo.com/benchmark/games/cpu https://www.pc-kombo.com/benchmark/games/cpu for games, https://www.pc-kombo.com/benchmark/apps/cpu https://www.pc-kombo.com/benchmark/apps/cpu for application workloads (that one still misses a bit of work, the gaming benchmark is better). Legacy processors are greyed out, so this might be a good starting point for you. There is also a benchmark for gpus. For most people this processor choice is also very easy, it is "Get a Ryzen 5 2600 or an Intel Core i5-8400." Feel free to ask if you want some custom recommendations, email is in profile :)

johnchristopher 8y ago
Pretty cool project. Thanks :).
newman314 8y ago
Can you add the ability to sort based on price/perf? Also, the existing bar graph is unclear to me. What does 10/10 mean?
- onli 8y ago
  10 is just the fastest. Because it is a meta-benchmark, this rating is not necessarily relative performance, it is based on the position in the ordering. The achieved average FPS is just a factor in that, used to make the distance bigger to indicate performance jumps. Example, fictional values: The 8700K is the fastest, because it was most often seen as the benchmark leader. It gets a 10. The 8600K has almost the same FPS, but it was always a bit slower, it gets a 9.9. The i5-8500 comes next, but its average FPS scaled to the 0-10 scale is lower, it gets a 8.7. Then the i5-8400, always seen as slower than the 8500 in benchmarks, would at most be able to get a 8.6, no matter what the average FPS says (with enough benchmarks average FPS become an almost meaningless metric, it's the position in the benchmark that counts). That's why it is not possible to calculate price/performance with this. I could only highlight good deals, processors that have a high position despite being cheaper than the processors below. Which is of course already baked into the logic of the recommender.
- onli 8y ago
  Thought a bit more about this. What I can do is filter out all processors/gpus that are slower than cheaper processors. Proof of concept implementation: https://www.pc-kombo.com/benchmark/games/cpu?optimize=true https://www.pc-kombo.com/benchmark/games/cpu?optimize=true. Those are essentially the best price/performance choices, with some restrictions as explained in the other comment.

by onli 8y ago

johnchristopher 8y ago

Pretty cool project. Thanks :).

newman314 8y ago

Can you add the ability to sort based on price/perf? Also, the existing bar graph is unclear to me. What does 10/10 mean?

onli 8y ago
10 is just the fastest. Because it is a meta-benchmark, this rating is not necessarily relative performance, it is based on the position in the ordering. The achieved average FPS is just a factor in that, used to make the distance bigger to indicate performance jumps. Example, fictional values: The 8700K is the fastest, because it was most often seen as the benchmark leader. It gets a 10. The 8600K has almost the same FPS, but it was always a bit slower, it gets a 9.9. The i5-8500 comes next, but its average FPS scaled to the 0-10 scale is lower, it gets a 8.7. Then the i5-8400, always seen as slower than the 8500 in benchmarks, would at most be able to get a 8.6, no matter what the average FPS says (with enough benchmarks average FPS become an almost meaningless metric, it's the position in the benchmark that counts). That's why it is not possible to calculate price/performance with this. I could only highlight good deals, processors that have a high position despite being cheaper than the processors below. Which is of course already baked into the logic of the recommender.
onli 8y ago
Thought a bit more about this. What I can do is filter out all processors/gpus that are slower than cheaper processors. Proof of concept implementation: https://www.pc-kombo.com/benchmark/games/cpu?optimize=true https://www.pc-kombo.com/benchmark/games/cpu?optimize=true. Those are essentially the best price/performance choices, with some restrictions as explained in the other comment.