overpowered

[sandyd]

Why do people run/buy such overpowered computers just to run ubuntu?

[Kingsley]

Because their inner nerd appreciates the latest and greatest in hardware. The power could also be used for very resource intensive tasks like encoding, compiling, etc.

[doas777]

Why do people run/buy such overpowered computers just to run ubuntu?

why wouldn't they? many of us use more than one os.

[H2SO_four]

I am wishing I got a more powerful setup. Encoding and other resource intensive processes still take longer than I would like

[sandyd]

why wouldn't they? many of us use more than one os.
i wouldn't need a core i7 to run vienna would i?

[Skripka]

why wouldn't they? many of us use more than one os.

Also, you can end up saving energy. With a CPU governor installed, I can throttle down my 3.6gHz quad down to 800mHz And back up ondemand. Whereas a slower CPU would need to run high/hot to keep up.

I also have resource intensive apps that I need to run, when I'm in Win, aside from games.

[doas777]

i wouldn't need a core i7 to run vienna would i?

dunno. whats vienna?

there are lots of factors to why somone picks a particular peice of hardware.

in my early days I prided myself on getting sub-optimal performance out of really terrible hardware (old, broken, or cheap). after a few years of that though, I came to the conclusion that to progress beyond a hardware junkie (eg development) I would need a solid box that didn't require monkeying with every 2 days, and didn't produce bizarre aberrations from the simplest of tasks.

personally I don't by high performance kit, I buy high quality kit.

[PurposeOfReason]

Because very few people who build their own computers (which are usually the "over powered" ones) don't "just run Ubuntu". That, and everybody has their vice. Mine is electronics. Once you know how good something can be, why ever go back?

[Screwdriver0815]

Why do people run/buy such overpowered computers just to run ubuntu?
just because its possible. :D I don't need excuses like "I do resource intensive work" because I don't. I just want a ******* fast machine!!

Before I had an old AMD Athlon Xp 1600+ and 1 gb RAM. It was too slow for me. Even when Ubuntu ran much faster than the previously installed XP.

Thats why I bought a new one. Why should I buy a slow machine when I can get a much faster one for just 50 Euros more?

[azangru]

whats vienna?
The codename of Windows 7 :D

[jbruced]

Why do people run/buy such overpowered computers just to run ubuntu?

I agree totally for my situation, especially when running Ubuntu.

Email, web surf, some programming, music, movies, all the regular stuff.

I actually wrote up a document to explain to people why they should save their money because in a lot of cases there is low return in speed for the dollars spent. Never did post it anywhere, I figured PCMag and sites where it would do the most good would be pissed if things like that got posted, because they live off reviewing and advertising the latest and greatest stuff.

Power professionals, yes, they need all that stuff.

I's rather have 2 $500 computers than 1 $2000 computer, but that's just me.

[LowSky]

what is considered overpowered anyway?

My computers are decent machines I can throw anything at them and they can handle it.

Oh I forgot I like to record TV shows, rip DVD's and watch TV while using my PC so I get alot of extra ability using a newer faster "overpowered" processor.

[doas777]

I agree totally for my situation, especially when running Ubuntu.

Email, web surf, some programming, music, movies, all the regular stuff.

I actually wrote up a document to explain to people why they should save their money because in a lot of cases there is low return in speed for the dollars spent. Never did post it anywhere, I figured PCMag and sites where it would do the most good would be pissed if things like that got posted, because they live off reviewing and advertising the latest and greatest stuff.

Power professionals, yes, they need all that stuff.

I's rather have 2 $500 computers than 1 $2000 computer, but that's just me.

agreed, but I'd rather have 1 $1000 computer than 5 $200 ones.
$500 is a good target price for a ubuntu system. if you wanna game, take it to $700

[sim-value]

Because i have a trauma from 192 MB ram with 1.6 Ghz ...

[H2SO_four]

agreed, but i'd rather have 1 $1000 computer than 2 $500 ones.

+1

[Jlb181]

I would rather have too much then just not enough! At least when it comes to computers.

[sandyd]

what is considered overpowered anyway?

My computers are decent machines I can throw anything at them and they can handle it.

Oh I forgot I like to record TV shows, rip DVD's and watch TV while using my PC so I get alot of extra ability using a newer faster "overpowered" processor.
look at the post #76 in here http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1148452&page=8. (the poster's sig i mean).

unless your running VPSes on that rig, or are using it to run a server, or are playing a few games at once, running several video converters, theirs really no reason why you should consume 100% cpu. thats kind of a waste of money aint it?

[jbruced]

agreed, but I'd rather have 1 $1000 computer than 5 $200 ones.
$500 is a good target price for a ubuntu system. if you wanna game, take it to $700

agree with the $700 or so gaming machine figure. Frozen bubble is about as gamer as I get, so more machines, more networked stuff, more accessable PCs for people in the household would be more fun for me.

[H2SO_four]

look at the post #76 in here http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1148452&page=8. (the poster's sig i mean).

unless your running VPSes on that rig, or are using it to run a server, or are playing a few games at once, running several video converters, theirs really no reason why you should consume 100% cpu. thats kind of a waste of money aint it?

Maybe, but its his money to waste. I often find I need more power here and there. *dreams about next computer*

[Skripka]

Maybe, but its his money to waste. I often find I need more power here and there. *dreams about next computer*

Why do people "need" to buy a BMW or a Corvette--when a 2000 Honda Civic will do them just fine?


A similar perspective. The only difference being-speed limits don't double every 2 years.

[hkgonra]

I haven't spent more than $500 on a pc in years.
There is just not that much more power for the money.
You can get all this for $439 from Dell.

Intel® Core™ 2 Duo E7400 (2.8GHz, 3M, L2Cache, 1066FSB)
1 Year Basic Limited Warranty and 1 Year NBD On-Site Service
3GB DDR2 SDRAM 800MHZ - 1x2GB 1x1GB
Dell 21.5 inch S2209W Full HD WidescreenFlat Panel Monitor
Single Drive: 16X (DVD+/-RW) Burner Drive
500GB Serial ATA Hard Drive (7200RPM) w/DataBurst Cache™
Integrated Video, Intel® GMA X4500HD
Integrated 5.1 Channel Audio
Dell USB Keyboard
Dell Optical USB Mouse
Resource CD and DVD
Vostro 220 Mini-Tower

Why do you need more for an average user ?

[LowSky]

look at the post #76 in here http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1148452&page=8. (the poster's sig i mean).

unless your running VPSes on that rig, or are using it to run a server, or are playing a few games at once, running several video converters, theirs really no reason why you should consume 100% cpu. thats kind of a waste of money aint it?

I rather have a processor that can do more than one that creates a bottleneck. Sure a Core i7 might seem like overkill but when it can do 9 processes at once and not be taxed, then it seems worth it to me.

For instance lets say I was recording four TV shows in MPEG4, playing MP3's, ripping a DVD to Xvid, Watching a HiDef rip of another Movie, writing emails, looking at websites that are java/flash intensive, and maybe a little Folding@home. Sounds like a lot of stuff for even todays processors, but someday that maybe something that even the cheapest CPU could do in idle mode.

Just look at the progress computers have made in 15 years. Heck Bill Gates was once quoted saying "No one will need more than 637 kb of memory for a personal computer"... Boy was he wrong!

[Skripka]

I haven't spent more than $500 on a pc in years.
There is just not that much more power for the money.
You can get all this for $439 from Dell.

Intel® Core™ 2 Duo E7400 (2.8GHz, 3M, L2Cache, 1066FSB)
1 Year Basic Limited Warranty and 1 Year NBD On-Site Service
3GB DDR2 SDRAM 800MHZ - 1x2GB 1x1GB
Dell 21.5 inch S2209W Full HD WidescreenFlat Panel Monitor
Single Drive: 16X (DVD+/-RW) Burner Drive
500GB Serial ATA Hard Drive (7200RPM) w/DataBurst Cache™
Integrated Video, Intel® GMA X4500HD
Integrated 5.1 Channel Audio
Dell USB Keyboard
Dell Optical USB Mouse
Resource CD and DVD
Vostro 220 Mini-Tower

Why do you need more for an average user ?

Well, integrated graphics stink. ;)

[LowSky]

Well, integrated graphics stink. ;)

=D> So true...

[PurposeOfReason]

Well, integrated graphics stink. ;)
As does integrated audio. Not as bad, but still not good.

[Skripka]

As does integrated audio.

Perhaps-but integrated audio always works painlessly...audio cards never do. Especially when the manufacturer's name starts with "Sound" and ends with "Blaster".

[PurposeOfReason]

Perhaps-but integrated audio always works painlessly...audio cards never do. Especially when the manufacturer's name starts with "Sound" and ends with "Blaster".
That's why you stick with ASUS and the hell away from Creative. :popcorn:

[collinp]

The primary reason: because you can

The secondary reason: Because many people run resource-intensive applications and actually need a powerful computer. How powerful matters not; you don't want to have to upgrade your computer every time you buy a application that is too heavy for it to run.

And yes, people actually *need* a Core i7. Gamers *need* a Core i7. Video encoders and graphics designers *need* a Core i7. Don't try saying that they don't need them, because they do.

[FalloutMan]

Especially when the manufacturer's name starts with "Sound" and ends with "Blaster".
If only there was a company named Sound Blaster...

To be on topic, it isnt too hard to max out a gfx card with todays games so I buy the best card I can get and slack a bit on CPU. For a media person, they should get the best cpu they can and slack on the gfx card since it isnt as detrimental to the system. People buy pc for people. If your a gamer, you get a little more spendy pc, if your a media person, you buy a spendy pc. If all you do is surf the net and type docs and emails, you buy a pc thatll have a decent CPU and good discrete gfx card. Lets face it, today's "average user" is evolving into a more resource hungry pc due to media and the such. I always recommend to people to not go with the cheapest pc because A: almost everyone I know runs Winblows and B: they get sub-par experiences and in the end it makes em mad while they wait for x process to do x thing. Take it for what its worth.

[pookiebear]

Perhaps-but integrated audio always works painlessly...audio cards never do. Especially when the manufacturer's name starts with "Sound" and ends with "Blaster".


Tru that, but the onboard cards eat cpu cycles as they are similar to the old winmodems. Steer clear of sound blaster but you still need a good real add-on card if you are mixing audio for production work.

[Skripka]

Tru that, but the onboard cards eat cpu cycles as they are similar to the old winmodems.

OTOH, with a modern machine-the number of cycles eaten is a tiny fraction of 1 core of the CPU.

[doas777]

OTOH, with a modern machine-the number of cycles eaten is a tiny fraction of 1 core of the CPU.

definitely. this is a rather silly argument. one sub-optimal line of code in any peice of software would overshadow any performance loss related to maintaining the bus the inactive device is on.

[SLEEPER_V]

folding @ home always uses 100% of the cpu. I dont consider my rig to be fast, AMD Kuma 7750 @ 3ghz, but I would rather have the flexibility to do as a wish rather than only do what I can.

[Regenweald]

Why do people run/buy such overpowered computers just to run ubuntu?

Because a proper OS does not monopolize processor and memory usage, leaving the resources available for high intensity tasks.

I could counter by asking why do people expect modern software to run on relics ? ;)

[pwnst*r]

Why do people run/buy such overpowered computers just to run ubuntu?

because i dual boot with windows and play the latest games with no issues.

k, next question.

[pwnst*r]

I agree totally for my situation, especially when running Ubuntu.

Email, web surf, some programming, music, movies, all the regular stuff.

I actually wrote up a document to explain to people why they should save their money because in a lot of cases there is low return in speed for the dollars spent. Never did post it anywhere, I figured PCMag and sites where it would do the most good would be pissed if things like that got posted, because they live off reviewing and advertising the latest and greatest stuff.

Power professionals, yes, they need all that stuff.

I's rather have 2 $500 computers than 1 $2000 computer, but that's just me.

what about the one $1000 computer?

[doas777]

folding @ home always uses 100% of the cpu. I dont consider my rig to be fast, AMD Kuma 7750 @ 3ghz, but I would rather have the flexibility to do as a wish rather than only do what I can.

boinc apps ALWAYS run at 100% unless you configure a cpu %used max in your application configuration profile (on the projects site). if you buy a faster processor it will just use 100% of it. unfourtunatly, if you throtle the cpu via project settings, most boinc applications will simply pause the thread for whatever portion of the clock time, making the screen saver start and stop every half second, for me. doing this will free up clock time for other apps, but is not exactly astheticly pleasing.

I had a Pentium D back in '06 that would overheat and shutdown after 6 hours running seti and einstien. the D's are just crappy chips. nowadays I've stopped using these apps for concern of the power bill.

[doas777]

Why do people "need" to buy a BMW or a Corvette--when a 2000 Honda Civic will do them just fine?


A similar perspective. The only difference being-speed limits don't double every 2 years.

some of the reasons that I can't/won't get dirt cheap builds, are rooted in matters of trust and perceptions of quality. i am sick and tired of buying cheap (low quality) hardware, and I am willing to pay a bit extra for a part that i can be reasonably assured will function correctly for a reasonable lifespan.

when I'm looking for parts on newegg or wherever, I have specs, reviews, and pricing to rely on, to make my decision. usually the first step involves the elimination of the really cheap and absurdly expensive vendors, and to establish a "middle ground" price range. Then once I've decided on the class of vendors, i try to get the most spec I can for the buck. makes sense, from that perspective. as a result, i pay mid-range prices, but I have far fewer hardware headaches.

tangentially, I'm not pleased that Abit stopped making higher-end mobos. I could usually trust abit.

cheers

[gletob]

If I have the money then I will buy whatever I want out of impulse. Why should you just go for what's needed? Why should we all conform to what YOU say?

[-gabe-noob-]

Because they're not that expensive, and they can prepare for the future so to speak?

I know mines is not as wild as some of the posters on this forum, but I'm currently posting from a box I built (today) cost about 720 US Dollars, with rebates its like 670. 4 Gigs of Ram A nice Graphics card 2.7 GhZ AMD2+ Dual core, and for a damn good value.

Perhaps it does overpower Ubuntu a bit, but, as said before by many, I'd rather be overpowered than underpowered with my Computers.

[jbruced]

what about the one $1000 computer?

2 PCs better than 1 for ME either way.

Me and maybe only me. This is an opinion thread. That is my opinion.

[jbruced]

If I have the money then I will buy whatever I want out of impulse. Why should you just go for what's needed? Why should we all conform to what YOU say?

Noone asked anybody to conform to anything??:confused:

[rookcifer]

Also, you can end up saving energy. With a CPU governor installed, I can throttle down my 3.6gHz quad down to 800mHz And back up ondemand. Whereas a slower CPU would need to run high/hot to keep up.


If you have your processor overclocked, CPU scaling will force it to run at its native clock speed even when not idle. This is why overclockers always say to disable CPU scaling in the bios.

And to the OP, why would you assume that no one does CPU intensive stuff in Ubuntu? There are things like video/audio encoding that I do all the time, and these processes are very CPU intensive. Just because people don't usually game on Linux doesn't mean that CPU intensive tasks don't exist. Wise up.

[ikt]

look at the post #76 in here http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1148452&page=8. (the poster's sig i mean).

unless your running VPSes on that rig, or are using it to run a server, or are playing a few games at once, running several video converters, theirs really no reason why you should consume 100% cpu. thats kind of a waste of money aint it?

not really, just because a processor isn't sitting at 100% usage doesn't mean it's going to waste.

I think my 3000+ is sitting at 1% usage a majority of the time but I'd still rather a new i7 or phenom x4..

[H2SO_four]

And to the OP, why would you assume that no one does CPU intensive stuff in Ubuntu? There are things like video/audio encoding that I do all the time, and these processes are very CPU intensive. Just because people don't usually game on Linux doesn't mean that CPU intensive tasks don't exist. Wise up.

+1 Like most ppl I have a Conky running and can see how resources are allocated on my system. I often see one core at 100%, a second one at 45% and the other 2 between 15 and 25% when I am working on intense stuff. Aside from that, I like my computer to be very responsive with all apps I run. I see nothing wrong with having a good system.

[LookTJ]

I wish I had a machine as powerful as others, which unfortunately I don't have the money right now.

My laptop slows to a drag(4 1/2 years) when trying a virtual machine.

[piousp]

If it bothers you, you can "donate" processing power to CERN o SETI with boinc :p

[rookcifer]

If it bothers you, you can "donate" processing power to CERN o SETI with boinc :p

But that would contribute to global warming. :D

[juancarlospaco]

Because i run several VMs

[piousp]

But that would contribute to global warming. :D

Then, you can create a computer simulation on how to stop global warming :KS

[H2SO_four]

If it bothers you, you can "donate" processing power to CERN o SETI with boinc :p

I did that and configured it wrong. As soon as the program started all four cores of the cpu maxed out to 100%! the temp shot up, my fans kicked in and sounded like a jet was in my room. It took a while for me to get it set up right. Needless to say, lesson learned.

[NFblaze]

Well, you cant help it really. I find it surprising that I can get reasonbly powered machines for about 400 dollars nowadays. I think all the advances in technology has allowed us to produce the components using cheaper and more cost effective methods.

[nanbanjin]

Why do people "need" to buy a BMW or a Corvette--when a 2000 Honda Civic will do them just fine?

A similar perspective. The only difference being-speed limits don't double every 2 years.

The speed limits don't grow but the traffic jams do as everyone gets convinced by mass media that they absolutely must have their own car.

Personally I spent quite a lot of money on my computer two years ago and after using Ubuntu on it all this time I arrived at a conclusion that that money was wasted - should have bought some cheaper stuff and used the excess money on something else. Books maybe...

[MaxIBoy]

I play Enemy Territory: Quake Wars on the highest settings (at a very high resolution, too.)

I once borrowed a copy of Crysis, and it ran on medium-high settings under WINE. Very pretty. However, Crysis is incredibly boring, so I decided not to buy a copy.

[evermooingcow]

My CPU is more powerful than it needs to be. The only reason I upgraded to an E8400 on my desktop was for VT and 45nm (low power).
I do compile a quite a bit too so I guess the speed is not completely wasted either.

[doas777]

My CPU is more powerful than it needs to be. The only reason I upgraded to an E8400 on my desktop was for VT and 45nm (low power).
I do compile a quite a bit too so I guess the speed is not completely wasted either.

I always get a chuckle when i see your username.
cheers

[PurposeOfReason]

While on this topic, I get my OCZ summit drive on Friday. I wish I had the money to get the 120GB model. I don't need that much space for OS/apps, but it has amazing write times. :KS

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227451