Posted on 10/23/2025 10:05:38 AM PDT by ducttape45
AMD's equivalent of Intel's Hyper-Threading is called Simultaneous Multi-Threading (SMT). It allows each CPU core to handle two threads simultaneously, ... Ryzen 7 and Ryzen 9 Processors https://vtechinsider.com/does-ryzen-have-hyperthreading/
https://pcpartpicker.com/user/PBJ/saved/#view=4TFNvK build yr own, (hopefully use for what God sees good) .
That's a great choice IMO -- i7 quad-core w/HT is what I'm running in my desktop. When running two OSes (one the host, the other the guest VM) I typically assign 4 threads ("vCPUs") to each, and they both do fine.
I'm not a gamer, but I imagine that gaming wants as much horsepower as possible, which would suggest that if it's a Windows game, maybe give 5 threads to the Windows VM and retain 3 threads for the Linux host. Or even 6 and 2. Experiment.
Daniel1212 may have additional comments. He has experience with astonishing number of browser windows and tabs, as well as other esoterica.
Yes, thank you Daniel1212, sometimes I forget to include AMD in the discussion. Which is ironic, since for many years I was a die-hard AMD fan (back in the K6 / Athlon / Opteron days).
Interesting! If I wasn’t already half way into my new build I’d get that in a heartbeat. Heck, I still may! Thank you!
I'm not a gamer either, other than Solitare đ. I just want a reliable system, and one that I can do new things with in regards to Linux and running Windows in a virtual window. MicroThief is boxing us all into a corner and it's time to fight back against their overreach.
My computer is mine, not theirs, and I want the control back that they took away from us with everything after W7.
I'm going to keep this thread bookmarked so I can refer back to it.
And wise words, thank you brother.
Actually that was before I updated it to . New quick build, by the grace of God, with AMD Ryzen 7 5700G (good integrated graphics) which uses SMT (Simultaneous Multithreading) to allow its 8 cores to run 16 threads (note no OS, I would add W/11 retail for 140, and that RAM can be the most expensive component now, and this is only with 32GB, with which I think should be doubled and mobo has 4 slots and can handle 128GB - which is what I have running Ryzen 3200G):
| Type | Item | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|
| CPU | AMD Ryzen 7 5700G 3.8 GHz 8-Core Processor | $163.99 @ Amazon | |
| Thermal Compound | Arctic Silver Ceramique 2 Tri-Linear 2.7 g Thermal Paste | $3.85 @ ModMyMods | |
| Motherboard | ASRock B550 Phantom Gaming 4/ac ATX AM4 Motherboard | $79.98 @ Amazon | |
| Memory | PNY Performance 16 GB (1 x 16 GB) DDR4-3200 CL22 Memory | [lowest price] | $38.40 @ Walmart |
| Memory | PNY Performance 16 GB (1 x 16 GB) DDR4-3200 CL22 Memory | $38.40 @ Walmart | |
| Storage | Patriot P300 512 GB M.2-2280 PCIe 3.0 X4 NVME Solid State Drive | $37.50 @ Amazon | |
| Storage | Leven JS600 512 GB 2.5" Solid State Drive | $30.99 @ Amazon | |
| Case | Thermaltake Versa H21 ATX Mid Tower Case | $52.99 @ Amazon | |
| Power Supply | Thermaltake Smart 500 W 80+ Certified ATX Power Supply | $39.49 @ Amazon | |
| Case Fan | Masscool SL-FD14025 45.32 CFM 140 mm Fan | $5.99 @ Amazon | |
| Case Fan | Thermalright TL-P12W-S 52.86 CFM 120 mm Fan | $5.39 @ Amazon | |
| Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts | |||
| Total | $496.97 | ||
| Generated by PCPartPicker 2025-10-24 06:39 EDT-0400 |
Same here. This 5.5 year old low cost build with Ryzen 3200G (then $100 now $67) with 128Gb Ram, NVME and SSD drives, handles over hundreds of tabs open across 8 portable browser installs, all with multiple tab rows (Gecko-based Floorp offers that has an option, while Firefox and Vivaldi can be made to do so), plus many documents and programs, thanks be to God. Often weeks without restarts (updates delayed: now 23H2), hit one key to sleep, many other hot keys (CapsLock remapped to copy, F2 to paste), thank God, and may all God gives us only be used to His glory, with mercy for my many failures.
Due to your hyperthreading remarks I would upgrade to AMD Ryzen 7 5700G 3.8 GHz 8-Core Processor w/ Simultaneous Multithreading and compatible mobo if warranted (and if my Ram was), but it is not. And No gaming ever.
It was an approximation. As from what I have played with all current Linux Distros are under 2.5Gb even loaded with default apps. And the Win 10 was around 18Gb last time I knew. Is Windows even bigger now? I absolutely might be behind on the size of current Windows. Could you bring me up to date?
Thank God for His mercy and grace.
Windows 10 typically uses around 2GB to 4GB of RAM, while Windows 11 can use anywhere from 2GB to 8GB or more
How much RAM does Windows 11 use up? The operating system can consume anywhere from 2GB to 8GB of RAM and more. However, that doesnât mean that all the RAM used by Windows 11 is unavailable to you for running other software.
Windows has a service called SysMain (previously Superfetch) that optimizes your PC performance, and this will often take up some of your system memory that is not needed elsewhere. SysMain preloads the apps and files that you use frequently into the RAM. Thanks to SysMain, once you do launch a program thatâs already been preloaded, itâll load faster as itâs already been cached into your RAM- https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/how-much-ram-does-windows-11-use/
I need far more than that.
AOMEI Partition Assistant has a EULA that excludes me. Meanwhile, i saw this?
You realize that how many tabs you have open is not really a gauge of comparison right? They are only transferring data when you have that one tab open at a time. When you switch tabs to another site it unhooks from the other ones you were on. So the tabs are just inert window dressing using zero resources until you go back to it and it sees you back.
Except for when you are playing media such as Audio or video in a tab. These will continue to use resources and play as you use other tabs. Once a page has been downloaded into cache it is just static graphics sitting dormant until you come back from a different tab and interact with it. The site knows if you are on it’s particular tab or not and unhooks you when you are not. So you are actually only transferring data and using resources on one tab at a time.
You can see this in action on lets say a forum that has a “whos online” feature. When they switch tabs away from that forum tab it will show them offline while they are on another tab. They didn’t log out, they just switched to another tab in their Browser. When they come back to that forum tab it shows them online again. In Ajax chats you can watch them come and go from that tab in real time. And this is pretty much an industry standard for almost all sites. Although occasionally some cheat and “lock you in” and keep running while you are on other tabs. It is not common and one should not give those any traffic at all just because they are not letting you unhook when you change tabs.
Watch your processes in real time and it will show what I just shared. No matter how many you have open, you are actually only connected/hooked to one at a time. The rest are all just cached static page graphics doing nothing. Media is the only thing that can override this standard. Such as ad videos or GIFs. But they can be stopped by shutting off the autoplay features in the Browser.
I guess I may have confused with what I said there. What I was trying to imply was the differences in size of the OS package not the memory required. Linux is no more than 2.5 Gb, and last I knew Win 10 was around 18 Gb. If you were to download them this would be the difference in the size of the OS package downloads.
But since you mention it, Linux is much easier on RAM than Windows is... Even a “Heavy” Linux is much easier on resources than Windows.
I tried Crossover and it wouldn’t work. It seems it relies on Bottles type technology and that has never worked for me.
No doubt, but daniel1212 is much heavier on RAM than most users on any OS! As an aside, how can one enable multi-level taskbar* as Windows used to enable (alone with the Quick Launch toolbar, both of which now enabled via Explorer Patcher, thank God)
* 
OK, but I think you are confusing the required space for each install, and not the ISO, which for W/10 is about 4GB, and about 5.6 GB for W/11.
It is as regards the required space for each install that the contrast is more manifest. One can run Linux live off a USB, and and Windows as well, however, the absolute minimum for installing Windows 11 is 64 GB. I read that "Ubuntuâs official minimum requirement for installation is typically around 8 GB. This allows the base system to be installed and booted. Recommended Disk Space: For a more practical experience, at least 25 GB of disk space is suggested."
All i know is that:
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.