By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - PC Discussion - [Project] [Complete] "Get all the stuff out of my gaming PC and put it somewhere else"

vivster said:
caffeinade said:

https://www.amazon.com/GIGABYTE-GA-AB350N-Gaming-WIFI-Fusion-Motherboard/dp/B073PWKSP6
One HDMI, one DP and an M.2 slot.
This will work with the APUs too.

Where's the m.2 slot on that thing? Position is important since most of the board will be covered by the PSU. I might have to forgo m.2 entirely or get a different Case. My current one is a Lian Li PCQ8 or something.

The back.

Last edited by caffeinade - on 29 January 2018

Around the Network
caffeinade said:
vivster said:

Where's the m.2 slot on that thing? Position is important since most of the board will be covered by the PSU. I might have to forgo m.2 entirely or get a different Case. My current one is a Lian Li PCQ8 or something.

The back.

Damn, that's clever. Have to check if there is enough room spared in the case. But I'd assume yes.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

vivster said:

That could be fine. Gonna see how far I will progress. In the coming weeks. To see benches first would be cool since I don't trust AMD's CPUs just yet. Currently basically everything is up in the air, even my case. So I could still go for some mATX build.

Considering how Intel is planning to (not) fix the Spectre bug, I'd trust AMD a whole lot more then Intel right now.



WolfpackN64 said:
vivster said:

That could be fine. Gonna see how far I will progress. In the coming weeks. To see benches first would be cool since I don't trust AMD's CPUs just yet. Currently basically everything is up in the air, even my case. So I could still go for some mATX build.

Considering how Intel is planning to (not) fix the Spectre bug, I'd trust AMD a whole lot more then Intel right now.

Being unaffected by Spectre doesn't make my CPU faster, though.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

vivster said:
WolfpackN64 said:

Considering how Intel is planning to (not) fix the Spectre bug, I'd trust AMD a whole lot more then Intel right now.

Being unaffected by Spectre doesn't make my CPU faster, though.

AMD is susceptible to Specter too.
Meltdown was the one that hit Intel hard.

Considering the patches for Meltdown have slowed down Intel's chips in certain workloads: not being affected by Meltdown should increase Zen's relative speed.



Around the Network
caffeinade said:
vivster said:

Being unaffected by Spectre doesn't make my CPU faster, though.

AMD is susceptible to Specter too.
Meltdown was the one that hit Intel hard.

Considering the patches for Meltdown have slowed down Intel's chips in certain workloads: not being affected by Meltdown should increase Zen's relative speed.

We can only hope. I am very much interested in the benchmarks. The 2400G certainly looks like a winner.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

vivster said:
WolfpackN64 said:

Considering how Intel is planning to (not) fix the Spectre bug, I'd trust AMD a whole lot more then Intel right now.

Being unaffected by Spectre doesn't make my CPU faster, though.

It's not about speed really, it's about security. Just know that no amount of encyrption will really safely store data on an affected PC, as a Spectre attack can glimpse sensitive information from RAM. Intel, instead of having to choose whether to impact perfomance with a patch or keep the systems up to speed decided that they'll just put an optional flag for program compilation, thus forcing programmers to choose if they want to implement the patch for eacg individual program. That's a complete lack of responsability on Intel's part and will probably mean over a decade worth of CPU's will remain vulnerable to Spectre.

If security is completely unimportant to you and you just want performance, Intel is atm still in the lead. But they're certainly atm less trustworthy then AMD.



WolfpackN64 said:
vivster said:

Being unaffected by Spectre doesn't make my CPU faster, though.

It's not about speed really, it's about security. Just know that no amount of encyrption will really safely store data on an affected PC, as a Spectre attack can glimpse sensitive information from RAM. Intel, instead of having to choose whether to impact perfomance with a patch or keep the systems up to speed decided that they'll just put an optional flag for program compilation, thus forcing programmers to choose if they want to implement the patch for eacg individual program. That's a complete lack of responsability on Intel's part and will probably mean over a decade worth of CPU's will remain vulnerable to Spectre.

If security is completely unimportant to you and you just want performance, Intel is atm still in the lead. But they're certainly atm less trustworthy then AMD.

As an IT security specialist myself, security is completely unimportant to me because I know I'm not a target. It's kinda irrelevant what security flaws in software or hardware exist if I don't invite the hackers into my home. And there aren't even any useful exploits around to effectively target Spectre or Meltdown. I feel quite safe regardless of my choice of CPU.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

vivster said:
WolfpackN64 said:

It's not about speed really, it's about security. Just know that no amount of encyrption will really safely store data on an affected PC, as a Spectre attack can glimpse sensitive information from RAM. Intel, instead of having to choose whether to impact perfomance with a patch or keep the systems up to speed decided that they'll just put an optional flag for program compilation, thus forcing programmers to choose if they want to implement the patch for eacg individual program. That's a complete lack of responsability on Intel's part and will probably mean over a decade worth of CPU's will remain vulnerable to Spectre.

If security is completely unimportant to you and you just want performance, Intel is atm still in the lead. But they're certainly atm less trustworthy then AMD.

As an IT security specialist myself, security is completely unimportant to me because I know I'm not a target. It's kinda irrelevant what security flaws in software or hardware exist if I don't invite the hackers into my home. And there aren't even any useful exploits around to effectively target Spectre or Meltdown. I feel quite safe regardless of my choice of CPU.

I wish I had your confidence, but I wouldn't install an Intel CPU in my personal rig next time, especially with how their handling the entire situation.



WolfpackN64 said:
vivster said:

As an IT security specialist myself, security is completely unimportant to me because I know I'm not a target. It's kinda irrelevant what security flaws in software or hardware exist if I don't invite the hackers into my home. And there aren't even any useful exploits around to effectively target Spectre or Meltdown. I feel quite safe regardless of my choice of CPU.

I wish I had your confidence, but I wouldn't install an Intel CPU in my personal rig next time, especially with how their handling the entire situation.

Yeah, they're being pretty stubborn. Though properly reacting to the issue could actually cost them quite a bit. Replacing every single Intel CPU out there is actually physically impossible. The least thing that they should do is to fix whatever next CPU generation is coming in hardware. But it looks like they're not even willing to do that, which is kinda sad. Stupid capitalism and its monopolies.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.