For productivity and multitasking is GPU, RAM or CPU the most important component?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
B

Bruno Vincent

Reputable
Mar 23, 2015
210
1
4,690
What matters most for business and some graphic design?

[NO GAMES EVER]

CPU, GPU or RAM?

Tasks:

- Virtual Machine
- Adobe Illustrator
- Multiple tab browsing
- Open and running many programs at once

Options:

A. Fast CPU i5 7600k with $60 graphic card [geforce gt 730] (4 gigs RAM)

B. Fast CPU i5 7600k Integrated graphics (16 gigs RAM)

 
Solution
velocityg4
Running a VM, Adobe Illustrator, multi-tab browsing and many open programs eats a lot of RAM. A discrete GPU will have very little effect, if any, on most tasks you are performing. More RAM is definitely the better choice.

Couldn't agree more on multiple monitors. It makes a huge difference in productivity.

Edit: With what you are proposing 32GB RAM would make more sense. If we are talking multiple VM. A Ryzen 5 1600 would also make more sense. As you get 12 threads instead of 4 threads. Although you would have to buy a GPU for it.
Sort by date Sort by votes
4745454b

4745454b

Titan
Moderator
Apr 29, 2006
29,241
437
93,590
4GBs of system ram? I'd go route two. To be honest I'd also suggest multi monitor. When I was coding in college I hated doing it at the labs in school because I had only one monitor there. At home I had two, and it's great for productivity. I would argue having more than one screen makes a bigger difference than what you've listed. But in this day and age I wouldn't run a system with only 4GBs of system ram.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Shektron

Shektron

Honorable
May 31, 2017
3,373
248
9,740
For multitasking and all those tasks, I'd frankly go with a Ryzen 5 1600. It'll multitask much better than that i5, and costs around the same(cheaper motherboard, comes with a stock cooler, and is overclockable). Virtual machines scale with more cores, so does Adobe Illustrator with some effects, multiple tabs also run better as the tabs increase, and multiple programs will also run better. For your use, I'd say a Ryzen 5 1600 with 16 gigs of RAM would be much more ideal than a 7600K. The only problem is that Ryzen won't have integrated graphics, so you'll need to add a cheap graphics card just for a display. I wouldn't recommend anything fancy, since you don't need GPU horsepower - get the cheapest working GPU you can find, because you only need something that can drive a few displays.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
B

Bruno Vincent

Reputable
Mar 23, 2015
210
1
4,690


Thank you, 4 gigs was just for example, could do 8 gigs / 32 comparison

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
velocityg4

velocityg4

Glorious
Nov 21, 2006
5,390
471
46,440
Running a VM, Adobe Illustrator, multi-tab browsing and many open programs eats a lot of RAM. A discrete GPU will have very little effect, if any, on most tasks you are performing. More RAM is definitely the better choice.

Couldn't agree more on multiple monitors. It makes a huge difference in productivity.

Edit: With what you are proposing 32GB RAM would make more sense. If we are talking multiple VM. A Ryzen 5 1600 would also make more sense. As you get 12 threads instead of 4 threads. Although you would have to buy a GPU for it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
B

Bruno Vincent

Reputable
Mar 23, 2015
210
1
4,690


Thanks Shekton, what about the new 8th Gens? So you say for what I need the more cores and ram better than GPU?


 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Shektron

Shektron

Honorable
May 31, 2017
3,373
248
9,740
Yes, the 8th gens will also be a good choice for your uses. And yes, you need more cores for better performance, but at the most 8 cores, no need to go over that. As for RAM, I think not only do you need 16 GB, but you also need high speed memory. In virtual machines, fast RAM helps a lot, so I suggest you try to get at least DDR4-3000, if not 3200.

As for GPU, you don't need to spend much on that, because none of your uses are GPU-intensive. You will only need a cheap graphics card that'll give you a display, that's it.
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
Shektron

Shektron

Honorable
May 31, 2017
3,373
248
9,740
Yes, a Ryzen 5 1600 will be faster than a 7600K for most of your uses. Virtual machines will run better on more cores, you can open more browser tabs(even though the i5 can still handle a crazy number of browser tabs already, the Ryzen can handle more), and you will be able to run multiple programs better. I'm still a bit doubtful on whether Illustrator would run better, I can't find any tests for it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Shektron

Shektron

Honorable
May 31, 2017
3,373
248
9,740


Intel has better IPC and clock speed. If you go down a bit on that page, you'll see Intel wins out in the single core and the quad core areas. whereas Ryzen wins out in the multi-core area. So basically, Intel has better per core performance, but fewer cores, while Ryzen has worse per-core performance, but more cores. When considering other factor like platform cost, value, etc, the Ryzen option becomes better. Plus, most of your workflows will benefit from more cores, which is also why the Ryzen CPU will be better for you.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
C

constantine_99

Estimable
May 18, 2017
1,977
0
3,960
Ryzen is the best choice for the productivity/multi tasking
even the upcoming coffelake had less core count than Ryzen

R5 cost just a bit below 300$, comes with a decent stock cooler + OCable, and it already had 6 core / 12 thread, which is on part with the i7 8700 :)
the motherboard for Ryzen is also cheaper

so, if productivity is your main concern:
Ryzen + 16 GB RAM at very least :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Shektron

Shektron

Honorable
May 31, 2017
3,373
248
9,740


Only thing wrong there is the cost of Ryzen - a Ryzen 5 1600 is around $210, and the 1600X is on sale today for $200(yikes!),
but is generally around $230.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
C

constantine_99

Estimable
May 18, 2017
1,977
0
3,960


woot u right, typo, sorry XD
a bit below 200$ XD (for the MSRP)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
B

Bruno Vincent

Reputable
Mar 23, 2015
210
1
4,690


" comes with a decent stock cooler + OCable" the Intel doesn't?

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
C

constantine_99

Estimable
May 18, 2017
1,977
0
3,960


the i5 7600k doesn't come with stock cooler (even if it does, it sucks)
it is OCable, but less cores, which will cripple your productivity performance (most of the time, the loading process time) + the motherboard is more expensive (Z series)

more cores/threads = more benefit for productivity

for the Ryzen's Wraith Spire, it can handle stock clock and light OC just fine (extra 0.1-0.3 Ghz perhaps), any more than that would require an aftermarket cooler to keep the temps down :)

what i meant is that even though Ryzen is OCable, AMD still go to the length of making a stock cooler that is good enough to handle it :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom