Best processor ever?

>>61441294
Still using one

>>61441294
yes

>>61441294
Core2quad is actually still relevant, no so.

>>61441305
Which one?

Wolfdale master race here.

>not using celeron

>>61441294
No. There's a reason they don't make them anymore.

>>61441294
Yes, Core2Duo were awesome.

>>61441711
>implying they still aren't

>>61441737
Of course they still are (: I did not say otherwise

File: cpuz.png (54KB, 816x402px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 816x402px

>>61441305
>>61441428

File: IMG_0660.jpg (32KB, 300x250px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 300x250px

>>61441294
>>61441305
>>61441307
>>61441428
>>61441711
E8400 reporting in

>not using P4 to impress the girls

>>61441305
me two

You guys are all fucking high. I have this in my computer right now and it crawls. Anyone that says that tech older that 5 years old is good still is full of shit.

>>61441419
My main machine is still a Q9300.

Sad I know, but I've had little reason to upgrade aside from being unable to obtain cheap RAM.

File: ryzen.jpg (34KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 640x640px

>>61442488

>>61442525
You're doing it right.

File: 2500k.jpg (27KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 640x480px

>>61441294
no, picrelated is

File: neofetch-2017-07-18-01-40-22-861.png (292KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

292KB, 1920x1080px

>>61441457

I still do, on my Toshiba ChromeBook2 that rocks one

>>61442654
Smart people's choice was 2600k, not that crap.

File: computer specs.png (50KB, 765x588px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 765x588px

>>61441294
Yep.

File: 1481140613906.jpg (78KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 600x450px

>>61441305
Same here.

>>61441428
P8400.

>>61442488
I'm running Debian with XFCE on mine and it's lightning fast. Stop using Winshit.

>>61442488
>he doesn't have a PC running Gentoo with no X installed
Stay pleb

>>61442657
How does gallium OS run on a chromebook?

>>61443356

Better than Chrome OS and Chrome OS is a heap of shit

File: 19-103-379-03[1].jpg (28KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 640x480px

>>61441294
Uh excuse me? This was the best processor family ever.

>>61445096
I had one, it fried up after two months (stock cooler).

>>61441824
Had one in my old PC, or the e8500. Was a beast, had it overclocked to 3.6Ghz

>>61445096
Holy shit that box. It's a fucking nightmare. The processor is good tho, upgraded from a new 2000+ thoroughbred to a 2500+ barton plus with the pencil trick it gave bestest bang of bucks.

>>61442657
Holy shit son, just go fuck your tranny next door already.

>>61445096
>Extreme perfomance for Windows XP

kek

>>61445096
I had that exact same CPU. Upgraded to X2 4200+ later. Shit was so cash.

>>61441824
Same here. I might upgrade in 2018 though.

Slow ass FSB + no memory controller. 128bit SSE was nice, thoughtful.

File: 2014_amd_laptop.png (16KB, 407x404px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 407x404px

>>61441798
>only having 2 cores
>in 2017
neck yourself.

File: speccy.png (64KB, 737x586px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 737x586px

>>61441294
also have a macbook pro 13" rockin a core 2 duo for max comfy on the go

>>61441294
Yep. On an E7500 now.

>>61442488
Either you're a hyperactive child or you're too retarded to maintain your system, take your pick.
>>61443277
>he thinks you need a "lightweight" operating system configuration for a fucking Core 2
That's pretty retarded, too. They'll run whatever you give them just fine at this point.

>>61442488
Try running an SSD.
Even a c2d system will support sata2 and give you good speeds up to 250MB/s

>>61441294
I still use an E2180. Not a Core 2 Duo but pretty similar

>>61446377
http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core2-Quad-Q9000-vs-Intel-Atom-Z3735F/m5898vsm16367

If I can run Win 10 32-bit debloated with 2 GB RAM on the shit-ass atom here you can sure as hell run Linux stripped down edition on a Core2Quad.

>>61442779
>/g/
>smart

Sandy Bridge era will always be GOAT.

E8400 here but i'm waaaaaaaaay overdue for an upgrade. coffee lake/kaby lake refresh/ryzen refresh in 2018?

>>61441294
>backdoored
Trash

Sorry but my amd duron is better LOL GET REKT LOL

File: Celeron300A-640x353.jpg (78KB, 640x353px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 640x353px

Hai guize. 'Member me?

>>61446522
C2D was backdoored in the motherboard, and only a few motherboards implemented Intel ME.

>>61441294
Is core 2 quad OK?

File: ppc-g4-7400.jpg (15KB, 256x256px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 256x256px

>>61441294
No. Best processor ever.

>>61442488
This. They're fine for non-CPU intensive tasks, light web browsing, etc, but they can barely decode a 1080p at lowest possible settings on mpv. Not usable when high-bitrate 720p video starts dropping frames.

>>61446571
For a lightweight linux installation maybe. For anything more intense you need more.

>>61446467
I'm not really shitting on running something simple and light, that's usually the route I go with Linux anyway. It's when people act like it's the only thing that will work that makes me laugh at them, I've never seen a high-end Core 2 system lose its shit with a typical use case on any operating system, software demands just haven't increased that much since we're doing the same exact shit in 2017 that we were doing on them in 2008 90% of the time.

>>61446522
>>61446553
Core2 was the last line of Intel CPUs where you could disable the ME

File: 03-3930k.jpg (166KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1024x683px

GOAT

>>61446616
you say that as if i didn't just kill a javascript clock tab that was using 500+ MB memory

>>61446616
Uh you're forgetting about games and multitasking and 4k movies and inefficient website coding sweetie.

>>61441294
Still got one powering my 1080p Kodi HTPC. It's a laptop too.

File: Untitled.png (146KB, 402x220px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 402x220px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ya5zRRMaBwM

>>61446640
Nah, that was expensive as fuck when it was new. 2500K provided the best bang for buck.

>>61446694
>it's time to multiply
l-lewd

>>61446694

That weird-looking albino girl makes me angry.

File: nigguh.jpg (13KB, 196x228px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 196x228px

>>61446716

>>61446651
What's your excuse for having so little RAM in your system that this is an issue? Is it even an actual issue?
>>61446663
>but big numbers for my mindless media and video game consumption
It's time to grow up and get a real home theater, or maybe a hobby.
Multitasking isn't a terrible point, though, but it depends on what you do. I have no problem running shit tons of applications (Photoshop, VMware and 40+ tab Firefox browsing sessions being the biggest ones) on any of my Core2 or first generation Nehalem systems. Javascript bullshit is mostly a meme from mewling faggots who do nothing with their computers but stare at top/taskmgr all day.

>>61446736

She looks like some bitch Kirk would fuck on Star Trek.

File: S_AMD-ADA3700DAA5BN (top).jpg (14KB, 250x239px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 250x239px

>>61441294
I see you're too young to remember the revolution this was.

>>61446851
kill yourself retard. you'd probably be better off with an i7-7700k or a high end ryzen

File: Maximum_PC-1GHz_Athlon.jpg (186KB, 964x1132px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 964x1132px

>>61446925

This blew my mind.

>>61446528
my sister still has her windows98 computer with that cpu.
i think it had 333mhz cpu and 32mb ram.
still kicking too.

>>61446964
kek

>>61446964
I owned one. Can confirm, it blew my mind.

>>61446964
>double the power
>supercomputer

File: threadripperchip2_678x452_678x452.jpg (17KB, 678x452px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 678x452px

>>61447208
They're about to do it again.

>>61442525
>Sad I know, but I've had little reason to upgrade aside from being unable to obtain cheap RAM.
That's how they do it to you, yep.

Lads 2-@5 should I do with my q9600? Sell it on eBay?

>>61447555
>2-@5
did you have a stroke

>>61447643
Honestly don't know how that happened.

>>61446926
>you'd probably be better off with something high end from 2017 than something mid-range from 2007
No shit, retard.

>>61446694
So this is the power of the Jew...

File: ADVANCED_MICRO_DEVICES_Am386_TM_DX-40_NG80386DX-40_D_313NFY9_m_AMD_5983D_9312BP_MALAYSIA-SM.jpg (3MB, 4000x3435px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4000x3435px

>>61446925
>>61446964
/g/ gives these two chips way more credit and hype than they really deserve. The 1 GHz slotted Athlon was a piece of geriatric trash with slower than fuck off-die cache running at 1/3 the CPU clock that only existed so AMD could say they were "first" to a big number that meant nothing because any equivalently clocked PIII or Thunderbird Athlon would blow it the fuck out with ease. The A64 definitely wasn't a piece of shit, but it wasn't the lord and savior either. All it really did was finally rescue the 2% of users still stuck on shitty comatose big RISC/SysV platforms while the 98% could use more RAM without PAE bullshit if they could afford it, otherwise it was just the same old fast 386 with bigger registers and some more special instructions.

Core 2's overhyped too though, it has great longevity and is still plenty usable, but that's just due to stagnation in software and usage, not anything really special about its engineering. You could say the same for most A64 X2s and Phenoms, too.

>>61448987
so you admit it makes a difference. just because you're satisfied (or you think you're satisfied because you don't know any better) with your outdated setup doesn't mean it's the be-all and end-all

>>61449372
That was never my point. A Q6600 is never going to have anywhere near 100% parity with a 7700K for a lot of applications, but that doesn't mean the Q6600 isn't still perfectly fine for a lot of things too. I'd never put a second-hand Core 2 box to work for gaming or 4K media, but I wouldn't balk at using it for most everyday tasks with Windows 7/10 or a run-of-the-mill Linux distribution.

>>61446640
Yeah but my 3930K overclocked still outperforms a 7700K. The 2500k is probably on par with that new pentium or an i3.

Freescale PowerPC 7448
>tfw can't find a 1.92GHz PowerBook G4
>tfw upgrade service is no longer offered

>>61449625
except the thread is about core 2 duo which is much worse than even a q6600 and you're fucking gay and retarded for trying to argue that it's acceptable for light usage as if that's all that anyone ever does

>>61449654
I haven't really found Duos to be that bad either, and why are you so upset? We're not all gamer faggots taking a break from /v/ and r/pcmasterrace to circle jerk with you during CPU/GPU release seasons, there are plenty of us here who just like fucking around with old shit or simply do things that don't need a threadripper and a 1080 to accomplish, which is a lot of things in the era of stagnation we have been experiencing in the 2010s.

I have an i7 860

its at 4.2ghz and never hits full load

Why can't i just get a new GPU and smash games?

>>61442654
>Paying extra for an unlocked multiplier
Literal jews, this artificial bullshit can never be best CPU

My vote goes for original core2quad or p4

>>61449280
So no CPU is up to your standards?

>>61449908
some games use the cpu a lot

>>61449948
What standards? I just find it obnoxious when people suck AMD's cock for the sake of it. AMD64 was a great and necessary improvement for x86 and it would not be where it is today without it, but is it truly "revolutionary" on the same level of, say, the 80386, whose enhancements fundamentally changed the way we used PCs? Not really. It future-proofed the platform and made it truly viable in the high-end, but it didn't change much for the average user in the end.

But the 1 GHz Orion Athlon, however, certainly isn't up to my "standards," it's a piece of shit that only existed for marketing hype and sure as hell wouldn't live up to it.

>t7500
no plans to upgrade in the next 5 years

>>61449950
SoMe GaMeS uSe ThE cPu A lOt

File: 2core.png (39KB, 424x406px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 424x406px

THE BOYS ARE BACK IN TOWN

File: 3dm-timespy-score-benchmark_2500k.png (33KB, 806x416px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 806x416px

>>61450246
newsflash your cpu is getting old

File: KL_Intel_i386DX.jpg (269KB, 1212x1203px) Image search: [Google]

269KB, 1212x1203px

>>61441294
Pic related stopped production at Sept. 2007

It was introduced in 1985

Most relevant of all time.

File: Mycpu-z.jpg (143KB, 407x396px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 407x396px

I loved my old rig.

>>61450298
>Look the numbers are twice as big
but what do they mean?

>>61450349
performance bruh. i'm not saying the i7-860 is unusable but there can be a pretty big difference in performance depending on the game

>>61441294
I wish I had a core 2 duo rather than the botnet processor I have right now.

File: Screenshot_2017-07-19_02-32-55.png (359KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

359KB, 1366x768px

>>61450450
didn't post a god damn screenshot

>>61442779
>falling for hyperthreading meme in 2011

>>61450477
I'm talking about on my main laptop, can't change shit on it. Since I'm fucking cheap, it was the only one I could buy.

>>61446600
who, exactly the fuck, is using CPU to decode video? Ever since the Radeon 2000 series and Geforce 8 series video has been offloaded to the GPU.

I have a socket 478 P4 with a Quadro FX1800 (Geforce 9 equivalent) and 1080p plays just fine.

>>61441428
>>61441798
>>61441824
>>61442059
>>61443277

e6750 with dat V6GT at 3.6GHz

Dem boiiiiiiiiis

>>61450650
vlc with default settings

>>61450650
youtube, VP9

File: Compaq_front.jpg (86KB, 1392x1044px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 1392x1044px

>>61450350

Doom, Rise of the Triad, Heretec... good times with my old dx2-66.

Pic related, I had the same model, except with a CDROM drive. Added an AWE64, Midiman MM401, PowerTracks Pro 3.0 and it was also my sequencer.

>>61450679

why is GPU acceleration not the first thing you turn on after installing VLC???

>>61450997
why is gpu acceleration not on by default?

>>61451003
because not every machine has a GPU that will respond to that setting being enabled. My old Dell Mini 1012 doesn't have one (intel 3150 video) and neither does my dual Athlon MP machine (it's running an AGP Geforce 6200).

File: Capture.png (1KB, 99x20px) Image search: [Google]

1KB, 99x20px

E8400, 6GB ram, having a good time

>>61451051
Wouldn't GPU acceleration being on with a GPU that doesn't accelerate be the same as having it disabled? Sounds like always enabled would be the optimal default setting as it will use GPUs that support it.

File: cinebench.png (90KB, 806x615px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 806x615px

>>61450298
Timespy is a load of crap.

>>61453204
it's a much more realistic gaming workload than cinebench you fucking moron. and your chart still shows that older cpus are significantly worse than newer cpus

>>61441428
E8200 here, still running strong after 9 years.

>>61453204
>that r7 1700
>second place for $270
Monster.

>>61450723
Youtube on Edge offloads to GPU just fine my fucking atom 330 with ION plays 1080P on youtube

>>61453543
http://www.vpforums.org/index.php?showtopic=3316
>I`m Using a Intel mainboard with the same processor but the internal graphics is not enough to run VP9 and it stutters a bit with VP8.

>>61453466
in fucking cinebench a synthetic benchmark that is only relevant if you're a youtuber or someshti

File: StillUsingOne.jpg (86KB, 407x403px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 407x403px

>>61441294
TFW it has lasted me for 7 years straight.

File: post-4806-0-44840100-1406230336.jpg (45KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 640x480px

>>61441294
performance-wise it's been superseded, but maybe as a quantum leap in design

I'll also put the pentium pro as an entry

>>61453543
i love my 2010 netbook atom computer.
>just about crashes all browsers when opening facebook.
>can play 1080p mkv's without using any CPU power.

E6550 2,33GHz @ 3,5GHz here with stock VCore & cooler

>>61449654
>except the thread is about core 2 duo which is much worse than even a q6600

Depending on the C2D, this is wrong. The E8400 has significantly higher clocks than the Q6600 and performs better in tasks that don't use more than 2 cores.

And since we're talking about using old CPUs, I don't think you're talking about multi-threaded applications.

Have any of you E8400 users considered the 771 mod?

The X5460 is a beautiful thing to drop into place.

>>61454597
>And since we're talking about using old CPUs, I don't think you're talking about multi-threaded applications.
just because you have an old cpu doesn't mean you don't use multithreaded applications and multitasking FUCKING RETARD KILL YOURSELF

>>61454597
c2q is still relevant today.

File: grizward.jpg (13KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 480x360px

E6550 @2.8Ghz.
I wish Vista was still supported.

Logos after C2 look shit.

>>61441305
Same. It appears to be still adequate for general computer use, and I only render video occasionally so that's fine.

File: 00000.jpg (328KB, 1419x801px) Image search: [Google]

328KB, 1419x801px

E7200/400/500
E8400
Q6600
Q9450/9550
QX9770

File: Hp dc7700.png (30KB, 717x476px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 717x476px

i still use for 8 years

>>61454071
Which ram and mobo?

>>61453853
>>>/v/

File: newlogo-b.png (101KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 1024x768px

>>61455780
I concur

File: 1456874260208.png (850KB, 880x787px) Image search: [Google]

850KB, 880x787px

>>61456093
Delicious.

my E6750 is still up and running on a computer I let my nieces play.

Does the work.

>>61442654
Muh nigga

>>61441305
Usin E7300 here

>>61454693
Yeah I went from a 8400 about a few months ago, to a E5450 as it was supported by the mobo without any need to insert any microcode, thing runs extremely well on air at 3.8, based russians for finding this shit.

What's with all these people using ancient obsolete technology

>>61443356
Better than ChromeOS but fuck that shit, just use a regular distro and apply the audio, backlight and suspend patches.

>>61457363
i've been meaning to upgrade since 2012 but i never got around to it. haswell was a disappointment. now 7700k is pretty good but i've gotten more frugal and there's coffee lake supposedly coming out next year with 6 cores on the mainstream cpus so i might wait for coffee lake or ryzen 2.

>>61457450
*2013

>>61457467
or yeah i had been planning the upgrade since like 2012 (don't remember exactly) and i had ivy bridge in mind then of course

Literally futureproof if you don't game.

>>61453204
>i7-2600k OC'd faster than i5-7600k OC'd or i7-7700k stock
Well that's retarded.

>>61458083
Welcome to Intel product lines over the past 6 years.

File: guts rig q9550 20160405.jpg (733KB, 1668x1800px) Image search: [Google]

733KB, 1668x1800px

>>61441294
Mobo is now >10 years old.

Imagine being in 2007, and playing on a PII 233....

Yes, i will upgrade, but i don't know when. Probably when i will have time to play some vidya, i will want to play them on a ultrawide screen. I already know i will go for AMD this next.... decade....

File: athlonXp 3000+ 6600 rig.jpg (386KB, 1253x1200px) Image search: [Google]

386KB, 1253x1200px

>>61445096
No sorry. I'm this guy
>>61458960
in 2007 i upgraded from an Athlon XP. In some ways it was similar to a Core2. The socketA lasted for a LONG time (i went from a thunderbird 1333 to a thoroughbred 2400+ to a Barton 3000+) and it was a great success, but that's pretty much it.
Overclock-ability was NOTHING like on the Core2.
AthlonXP didn't lasted more than 10 years.
AthlonXP was not the champion of everything contended for his entire lifespan: when p4 Nortwhood came out Barton had a hard time.
Also AthlonXP was nothing revolutionary. k7 was, AthlonXP was just a reiteration. Hummer was a new paradigm, Conroe was a new paradigm.

>>61455902
Gigabyte GA-P35C-DS3R
Kingston HyperX (KHX8500D2K2) 4GB (2x 2GB) DDR2 1066MHz

>>61458083
but you have 1122 (222 single core) vs 830.5 (166 single core) on i7-7700K OC vs i7-2600K OC

File: based e2160.png (44KB, 448x431px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 448x431px

This is not technically a C2D, but it uses the same Conroe architecture as E6000 and E4000

this lil negro could be overclocked from 1.8GHz to 3.6GHz on stock cooler
yeah, 2x the stock clock on intel box cooler and shit thermal paste, and it didn't even get that hot
literally not possible with any cpu made in ${CURRENT_YEAR}

>>61455480
Are you one of those faggots with no redeeming personality traits other than the vast amounts of money he wastes on his shiny gamer toys? Because your posts read like a crying guts thread tard who didn't get enough attention from his repost.

>>61459832
Can you run GTA V?

>>61460082
No idea, I upgraded to a 2600K a while ago. I know I could run GTA IV just fine.

>>61460054
>And since we're talking about using old CPUs, I don't think you're talking about multi-threaded applications.
read that again. that's the dumbest thing i've read all day. we're talking about using old cpus in your main pc, not in some secondary toy that you choose specific tasks for. KILL YOURSELF JERKWAD

E8400 was performance/price king for a short while yes, as was 2500k and still is. Wolfdale and Sandy Bridge are the best x86 archs ever, no doubt about that (E8400 was the first Intel processor I bought and used since 8086).

>>61459832
I had a E2180 back in 2008, but that one wouldn't go past 3GHz no matter what.

>>61460054
by the way i'm going to stop giving you (You)s. all of your replies ITT have been utter garbage. you literally have assburgers or some other mental disorder.

>>61460168
My friend bought a E2220 (I think) after seeing my E2160, could not get it past 2.7GHz.
It's all about luck.

>>61460139
>>61460190
Aww, does baby want his bottle? He's getting so fucking mad, it's cute and hilarious at the same time.

Shoo, shoo, back to the battlestation thread. There's no love for your razer shit here.

File: when-someone-think-they-have-an-argument-but-its-not-2777133.png (54KB, 500x534px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 500x534px

>>61460605