PSU recommendations please, thanks

Hardware Build a PC
21

"All I´ve said is that Intel´s products are not an option due to Intel´s anti-competetive behaviour through software manipulation and not only that."

Finally, someone who gets it...i've been saying it for years that these benchmark programs are putting code into they're programs to manipulate scores for Intel. That's why I don't even do benchmarks, most are false. I go on real world performance. Good luck on your awesome build! However, I would recommend get a slightly better video card, perhaps a 270x, maybe 8gb instead of 6 too, will help abit. Is that motherboard you have already something you have siting around? I don't see it for sale anywhere.

22

I´ve got the motherboard and I´ve actually got a different system, mostly different.

The thing about Intel: http://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=118#73

Just read this blog. It´s from an, afaik, finnish or swedish professor who also had to testify in front of the FTC about his findings. It´s gonna take you a while but in the end you will see that Intel is manipulating the market via software until this day.

The problem is not the benchmark tools themselves. The main problem is Intel´s C++ compiler. In several of it´s libraries there is a biased CPU dispatcher which asks for the CPU vendor ID string first.

So, if the CPU reports back "Genuine Intel" the dispatcher will proceed normally and ask for the family and then it will ask what instruction sets are being supported / whether XYZ instruction set is being supported because it needs specific ones to create the fastest / optimal code.

However, if the CPU reports back anything but "Genuine Intel", for instance "Authentic AMD" or "VIA" etc. etc. . the dispatcher will, afaik, still ask for the CPU family but it will pass on the checks for which instructions sets are supported and instead will use an inappropriate instruction set and create the slowest possible / generic code.
The result of this is worse if not bad performance depending on the tasks.

Any program that has been compiled with Intel´s C++ compiler has a high chance of having these biases.

The problem is that Intel´s C++  compiler is considered the best compiler with a big set of libraries. Intel is selling this compiler without actually informing people about the real reason for bad performance on non-Intel systems.

Instead they´ve put a notification on their website somewhere stating that this compiler has been optimized for Intel CPUs, thus sub par performance may be experienced on non-Intel systems. This is a lie.

There are some developers who´ve read and or heard about this and are searching for ways to alter the source code to remove the bias. The problem is that it´s hidden in several libraries of said compiler so it´s gonna take a long time.

On top of that, this whole scandal has barely been made public. I mean, I´ve done several searches on youtube to see whether someone, preferrably famous youtuber, has addressed this issue to raise awareness. All without success. Neither have I seen anything about this on TV. So, of course without the backup of mainstream media nobody / the masses won´t know. I still wonder why the OH SO NEUTRAL AND UNBIASED teksyndicate team isn´t addressing this issue and maybe even trying to contact Agner Fog on this matter to arrange a live chat or something for people to watch and learn.

Like I said, I don´t claim that Intel´s CPUs are bad, I claim and have proof that Intel is bad / criminal. That´s why I won´t buy any of their products. So far, AMD hasn´t done anything alike, or at least they haven´t been caught doing so. Until then I will pick AMD over Intel any day because Intel is desperately trying to kill off all competition and regain monopoly, by any means neccessary. There´s a thing called the law and everyone, without exceptions, has to abide the law.

The reason why I´ve planed to build an efficient system is because the cost for electricity in Germany is much higher than in the US of A.

I am just a student and I don´t earn that much to be able to power a rig which is sucking 500W + on load ... .

Currently I´ve got an FX-6300, HD 7770, a total of 10 Gb RAM but I only use 6. The other sticks are just there for backup. A HDD and an SSD and a 650W 80+ Bronze PSU. I know, totally overkill but back when I´ve build this system I had no idea whatsoever about PSUs. Just looked at power, efficiency / rating, cables and AMPs on all the rails. The higher the better, that´s all I´ve looked out for.

I also own an Asus Radeon R7 260X, more or less, because I´ve sent it in for repairs / replacement. It´s caused my system to freeze approximately 2 minutes after booting constantly. No other card has ever done that. My system works just fine with the HD 7770 from XFX and I´ve had a HD 5870 for testing purposes and even that one worked like a charm. No freezes or anything alike.

23

Well, yes, if that compiler bias is indeed true, it's very dirty.  However, since it is bias, that doesn't take away from the fact that an intel-biased compiled program will run better on intel than AMD.

24

So you mean that even if the compiled code would favour AMD over Intel, Intel CPUs of equivalent cost would still be better?

If so, then you´ve probably not cared to read the entire blog.

He has proven that even a simple change of the CPU vendor ID string on a VIA processor into "Genuine Intel" has increased performance drastically. In some synthetic benchmark tests up to 47%.

I swear to my life, if AMD adds the option to change the CPU vendor ID string Intel will lose big time.

VIA processors have this option.

AMD has been fighting with Intel over this for years. Since 2002 afaik. Since Intel doesn´t care to remove this manipulation AMD should just give their CPUs the ability to change the CPU vendor ID string.

I wonder by how much the performance would increase.

25

No.  If the compiled code favored amd over Intel, amd would likely run faster.  In that case get amd.  However, that's currently not the case.

26

Well, of course, that´s why it´s called bias.

Nah, let´s be real here. Depending on how large / small the bias is favouring AMD CPUs Intel CPUs would still be faster.

I just think that with absolutely neutral compiler -> Intel´s lead would shrink quite a bit but they would still perform better.

However, we don´t know for sure. BTW, after doing some further research I´ve stumbled upon a little tool called Intel Compiler Patcher.

The tool is supposed to check the .exe .dll .cdl etc. files for the infamous CPU vendor ID string check and the biased procedure in case of a negative / non-GenuineIntel response.

I´ve tried this tool and while it doesn´t seem to be able to remove / patch the vendor ID check it at least is able to identify the "infected" "biased" files.

I´ve checked my entire system with it. EVERYTHING.

Well, Cinebent r10, r11.5 and r15 all have it in their .exe files and some others which I can´t remember atm.

The DayZ Standalone .exe is also biased. Even the old COmmand&Conquer Generals and or Zero Hour are biased.

The Source SDK has biased files. Either v 2006 or 2007, don´t remember.

Counter Strike Source has biased files too and even the DayZ rip-off called Unturned.

After checking my entire system I was shocked to find out that loads of Windows´ files are biased. A HECK OF A LOT.

The Catzilla ALLbenchmark is biased.

So far, I think, this has to be fought from several sides. One is that AMD starts working on a C++ compiler of their own which at least deliver codes that is as fast as that of Intel´s C++ compiler but of course without a bias.

Another way to fight this is to inform software developers about this in case they haven´t heard about this yet, or aren´t up to date.

A third option would be if some developers could create a temporary solution, like an executable, which patches all biased files by removing the CPU vendor ID string check altogether so that the CPU dispatchers of the formerly biased programs would only ask for the supported instruction sets and produce optimal code based on that information, instead of asking for the vendor, family, model etc.

A fourth option is to inform well known youtubers, who are NOT biased, about this so that they may warn people and developers alike who might watch their videos.

This has to be made public.

I for one will boycott Intel for obvious reasons.

I think that none of us is interested in a CPU / GPU monopoly. We all want to have a choise, right? We all want technology to advance, right? Well, a monopoly would bring an end to that.

27

Just get one around 400-500watts that's 80+ certified and has good reviews also NO Chinese off brands. The reason for 400-500 is for future upgrades and better assortment of connections. I would alsogo fo the 260x or a gtx750 as the 240 is rather weak especially if you have a 1280x1024 or 1080p monitor. I know I have a 240 1gb gddr5 in my htpc and struggles to keep up with my laptop which has a AMD A6 APU. My laptop is at 900p and e htpc is only 720p which makes it more embarrassing for the 240....lol. If your not apposed to buying stuff off eBay look for a used hd7850, hd7770 or gtx560, gtx650. All these cards offer gdd5 vram and are great deals based on how well they perform. Any of those cards will get you good performance and save you some money.

28

F*ck me, psu recommendation to an intel rant. What company doesnt have a dark side?

Any old unit can have a Gold sticker slapped on it. Choose a psu based on reviews and what OEM supplys the un-badged unit. eg Seasonic units with XFX labels. Obvious that you arent using the machine for gaming (uber low end gpu) so you could get by with 300w easily. Id grab a quality 550w so you'll have the headroom to add a mid-high end gpu later on.

Good luck with it all.

29

this is hard to beat

http://pcpartpicker.com/part/seasonic-power-supply-ssr650rm