Building an Office PC
In my research the majority of high end system builders have gaming and graphics in mind when choosing parts. I need to build office computers where graphics and gaming don't matter BUT I want the fastest computer for running email, office apps, accounting software, internet (usually all running at the same time). What processor should I get? And motherboard? Money is not an object, but if the only difference between 2 processors will be performance in graphics and the graphics one is $200 more, it's not worth it. Thanks.
A high speed Intel dual core is what you'll be needing for those tasks. Anything over that and thats useless.
i3 2100 (3.1Ghz) or i3 2120 (3.3Ghz) will do the job pretty fine. For ultra fast boot times, a SSD is what you need. 60GB is plenty for the OS. You also better get a motherboard that supports USB 3.0 and SATA 6.0GB/s for faster connectivity. Asus, ASRock, Gigabyte, MSI all make rock solid motherboards with high quality capacitors.
For those needs, a dual core processor having two powerful and fast cores (like the i3) will perform better than a hex or quad core having many invidually weaker and slower cores. (like Phenom II X6 1055T)
Do you want me to create a total build for you as well?
008Rohit said:Llano is not a great normal processor. just like an Athlon II X4, no L3 cache.
Browsing and office work doesn't need a Quad Core.
He said he want to run all of them in the same time. For that reason he needs a Quad Core CPU and 8GB of RAM. So an A8 3850 along with a good quality 8GB kit and, why not, a SSD is the way to go....Plus A75 platform is way better than H67/H61.
Even if you keep MS Office, Excel, Firefox (10 tabs) and internet explorer with email open you don't need a quad core. Quad Core's are specifically for heavy multitasking, video transcoding and high end gaming. Plus, the i3 2100 has hyper threading, so it has 4 logical cores. Plus, each of its cores are way superior than the Llano's. So it'll beat Llano in almost every everyday office task
I don't want to ruin this post to say which one is better... Just a few words
A)3850 is better at multithreaded apps
B)Better at multitasking
D)Way better GPU
E)Better platform with native USB III support
F)Low cost and power consumption
If you need a build like this, I'm here to help
008Rohit said:Even if you keep MS Office, Excel, Firefox (10 tabs) and internet explorer with email open you don't need a quad core.
For most people this is NOT multitasking. You have a lot of windows open but only the one that you are looking at is actually doing something, the rest are just sitting there idle.
OTOH the OP will have to analyze their own usage patterns and determine what they need. I agree that for 98% of office users the i3 dual core would be a good choice. And I don't think an SSD is necessary either. A desktop machine with a good processor and a good desktop hardrive is plenty responsive enough. I think where SSD's help the most is with replacing a slow hard drive in a laptop with a slow processor. My current CAD workstation has a dual core E8500 at 3.8GHz. I occasionally overwhelm it and drag it to its knees and I just have to wait on it to finish before I can do anything else. I end up doing tasks like background plotting, downloading/uploading large files from/to clients, copying folders, etc. and while doing some of these tasks I want to get on with my work. The dual core processor can't handle it. My home workstation was built about the same time and contains a quad core Q9400 at 3.4GHz. When I do similar tasks on it, including running a virus scan in the background, I can't even tell it. The processor never slows down and the computer always remains responsive.
While running handbrake, avast and firefox in the background, I play games on my i3 2100 build without any lags. Though the CPU usage gets to 100% because of handbrake. Plus, Quick Sync is an extra-ordinary thing. A 650MB video took 22m to get converted to .mkv without the help of quick sync and only 3m 15s with the help of quick sync.