A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » General Hardware & Peripherals » General
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

How to choose hardware for C# (Windows desktop) developer?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 13th 20, 02:06 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware
Egor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default How to choose hardware for C# (Windows desktop) developer?

Softwa
1. Visual Studio.
2. Windows 10.
Main answer in subject.
  #2  
Old June 13th 20, 05:35 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware
Paul[_28_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,308
Default How to choose hardware for C# (Windows desktop) developer?

Egor wrote:
Softwa
1. Visual Studio.
2. Windows 10.
Main answer in subject.


I think the 2019 description is being somewhat imaginative,
the 2015 description somewhat silly (low estimate).

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/vis...m-requirements

"Hardware

1.8 GHz or faster processor. Quad-core or better recommended === 4 core CPU

2 GB of RAM; 8 GB of RAM recommended
(2.5 GB minimum if running on a virtual machine)

Hard disk space: Minimum of 800MB up to 210 GB of available space,
depending on features installed; typical installations
require 20-50 GB of free space.

Hard disk speed: to improve performance, install Windows and Visual Studio
on a solid state drive (SSD).

Video card that supports a minimum display resolution of 720p (1280 by 720);
Visual Studio will work best at a resolution of
WXGA (1366 by 768) or higher.

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/vis...irements-vs#vs

Visual Studio Community 2015 with Update 3
Hardware Requirements

1.6 GHz or faster processor
1 GB of RAM (1.5 GB if running on a virtual machine)
4 GB of available hard disk space (5400 RPM hard disk drive)
DirectX 9-capable video card (1024 x 768 or higher resolution)

*******

Just by specifying Windows 10, a quad core CPU is a good minimum. This
gives the OS three cores to waste scanning things, while you get your
work done with the remaining core.

The amount of RAM, is likely to be up to the platform limit. If
you're working on Chromium or Firefox for example (a team project
with a lot of source), the builds may require 32GB to complete in
a competitive time with your peer developers. Some teams do recompiles
several times a day, at 20 minutes per run.

If you are writing 60 line "Hello World" programs in C#, then a *lot*
less resources are needed for that. Even a 4GB RAM machine should be
plenty, if the linking stage is not very demanding. When you build
Firefox, it's usually the linking of XUL.dll that requires peak
RAM usage, as every object file is loaded into the computer while
the link takes place. Nobody optimized the build in a way that
reduces peak RAM behavior on that one.

A basic computer purchased this year, should have most of what
you need. Just don't buy the cheapest laptop (with 1 core or
2 core CPU). The CPU should have 4 cores, so you will not
feel cheated out of your money. You do not want to buy a
computer, only to throw it away because it's inadequate.

Computers don't always come with SSD drives. SSD drives can
add to the price of the purchase. When fetching #include files,
an SSD containing the IDE might help with the load time
for the files. The System Read cache (part of your computer RAM)
can cache the include files, so on the second build attempt,
the "speed" comes from RAM rather than the SSD.

Where the SSD helps, is with Windows 10 boot times. Again,
if you buy a computer in 2020, with Windows 10 on it, the
developers at Microsoft are using SSDs on their machines,
and they don't care that the computer you bought with a
rotating HDD is slow.

To boot Windows 10, that's about 45GB of SSD right there.
(You can dial the partition to 32GB if you want, but then
you'll be cramped on program install space at some point.)
If we assumed the absurd amount of 50GB of space on the SSD
for the IDE, the total could be handled by a 128GB drive.
Just the other day, I saw a WDC 1TB drive (8 times that size)
for $100 USD, to give some idea how big a cheap SSD you can get.
I use 256GB SSDs and have one 512GB SSD here. The 256GB has
been fine as a Win10 choice (one has Visual Studio Community Edition
on it, the others don't).

Laptops can be power and cooling limited. This processor for example,
is 15 watts, and runs at 1.8GHz clock rate on all cores (4C 8T). When
lightly loaded, a single core can run at 4.6GHz. Either a 4C 4T
or a 4C 8T (hyperthreaded) CPU meet the "quad core" recommendation.
If you shop for a desktop (tower) computer, some of those the
CPU can use 160W (ten times as much power), and the designs are not
thermally limited like a laptop would be. But a laptop is a bit
more portable (a "workstation" for example, is a laptop which
is hard on batteries, and such laptops like to be plugged in
at times during the work day). Workstation laptops are
thicker designs (they're not the thin and light kind) but
they have more room for high-end components inside. Workstations
get part of their size, from the powerful 3D graphics card.
Software developers, unless they're working on CUDA or OpenCL,
don't generally need such powerful graphics components. An
Intel Iris integrated graphics is plenty of horsepower, even
for a lightweight OpenCL run.

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us...-4-60-ghz.html

*******

This laptop fails, because it's a 2 core CPU. $800 in CDN dollars.

https://www.bestbuy.ca/en-ca/product...ws-10/14655794

This one has a quad core, with an IPS screen so you can actually
work on it. IPS screens are superior to TN (twisted nematic)
screens for long work hours. I'm typing on an IPS screen.
IPS screen, you can move your head side-to-side, without the
colors changing too much. This one is $1000 in CDN dollars.

https://www.cdw.com/product/acer-swi...gb-ssd/5537706

My total hardware outlay costs might be cheaper, if I got
a desktop machine instead. Or, if I assembled a computer
with a screwdriver, buying retail parts.

These ideas may be discouraging you, as the price is not
conducive to entry-level usage. The quad core thing is
an unfortunate side effect of Windows 10, rather than
Visual Studio. I'm typing on a dual core machine, but
I'm also not running Windows 10 on it (the Win10 SSD for
this machine, sits right next to me, unplugged!). My other
machine is a 6C 12T CPU with 64GB RAM, and I've done Chromium
and Firefox builds on it. Yes, that's overkill, but
you do have room to work, and the thing will rail on
all 12 hyperthreaded cores and draw 180W during a build.
The people at Google and Mozilla, they tend to get
20 core computers with about as much RAM, and their builds
happen in less than half the time of mine. To do faster builds,
I split the RAM in two, use 32GB for a RAMdisk, and use
the other 32GB for the compilers to use.

You have the option of installing Visual Studio Community Edition
(Free) on your current computer, and you can do a Hello World
program on that and get a feeling for how sluggish it is.
Windows 10, if installed on a gutless computer, can suck the
life out of it, and that's why I cannot exactly endorse
dual core garbage laptops with Windows 10 on them.

A quad core is a better choice in my opinion. You won't have
to throw it in the landfill because it annoys you :-)

Windows 10 is the problem, not Visual Studio particularly, for
small project usage. The SSD size should not be the minimum
one, or you might (eventually) regret that. Maybe some machines
come with 128GB, but a 256GB is a good minimum size because
of the Visual Studio footprint. Since you're just doing C#
development, you don't have to install every subsystem that
Visual Studio has to offer. I don't have any web crap
added to mine for example. You generally don't volunteer to
install all of it, unless you have storage space to waste for
no reason (I've installed Visual Studio community editions
a number of times, and never had regrets about my
initial configuration choices later). The features in it
that sound silly, are silly.

Paul
  #3  
Old June 14th 20, 07:13 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware
Egor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default How to choose hardware for C# (Windows desktop) developer?

On 13.06.2020 19:35, Paul wrote:
Egor wrote:
Softwa
1. Visual Studio.
2. Windows 10.
Main answer in subject.


I think the 2019 description is being somewhat imaginative,
the 2015 description somewhat silly (low estimate).

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/vis...m-requirements

"Hardware

1.8 GHz or faster processor. Quad-core or better recommended === 4 core CPU

2 GB of RAM; 8 GB of RAM recommended
(2.5 GB minimum if running on a virtual machine)

Hard disk space: Minimum of 800MB up to 210 GB of available space,
depending on features installed; typical installations
require 20-50 GB of free space.

Hard disk speed: to improve performance, install Windows and Visual Studio
on a solid state drive (SSD).

Video card that supports a minimum display resolution of 720p (1280 by 720);
Visual Studio will work best at a resolution of
WXGA (1366 by 768) or higher.

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/vis...irements-vs#vs

Visual Studio Community 2015 with Update 3
Hardware Requirements

1.6 GHz or faster processor
1 GB of RAM (1.5 GB if running on a virtual machine)
4 GB of available hard disk space (5400 RPM hard disk drive)
DirectX 9-capable video card (1024 x 768 or higher resolution)

*******

Just by specifying Windows 10, a quad core CPU is a good minimum. This
gives the OS three cores to waste scanning things, while you get your
work done with the remaining core.

The amount of RAM, is likely to be up to the platform limit. If
you're working on Chromium or Firefox for example (a team project
with a lot of source), the builds may require 32GB to complete in
a competitive time with your peer developers. Some teams do recompiles
several times a day, at 20 minutes per run.

If you are writing 60 line "Hello World" programs in C#, then a *lot*
less resources are needed for that. Even a 4GB RAM machine should be
plenty, if the linking stage is not very demanding. When you build
Firefox, it's usually the linking of XUL.dll that requires peak
RAM usage, as every object file is loaded into the computer while
the link takes place. Nobody optimized the build in a way that
reduces peak RAM behavior on that one.

A basic computer purchased this year, should have most of what
you need. Just don't buy the cheapest laptop (with 1 core or
2 core CPU). The CPU should have 4 cores, so you will not
feel cheated out of your money. You do not want to buy a
computer, only to throw it away because it's inadequate.

Computers don't always come with SSD drives. SSD drives can
add to the price of the purchase. When fetching #include files,
an SSD containing the IDE might help with the load time
for the files. The System Read cache (part of your computer RAM)
can cache the include files, so on the second build attempt,
the "speed" comes from RAM rather than the SSD.

Where the SSD helps, is with Windows 10 boot times. Again,
if you buy a computer in 2020, with Windows 10 on it, the
developers at Microsoft are using SSDs on their machines,
and they don't care that the computer you bought with a
rotating HDD is slow.

To boot Windows 10, that's about 45GB of SSD right there.
(You can dial the partition to 32GB if you want, but then
you'll be cramped on program install space at some point.)
If we assumed the absurd amount of 50GB of space on the SSD
for the IDE, the total could be handled by a 128GB drive.
Just the other day, I saw a WDC 1TB drive (8 times that size)
for $100 USD, to give some idea how big a cheap SSD you can get.
I use 256GB SSDs and have one 512GB SSD here. The 256GB has
been fine as a Win10 choice (one has Visual Studio Community Edition
on it, the others don't).

Laptops can be power and cooling limited. This processor for example,
is 15 watts, and runs at 1.8GHz clock rate on all cores (4C 8T). When
lightly loaded, a single core can run at 4.6GHz. Either a 4C 4T
or a 4C 8T (hyperthreaded) CPU meet the "quad core" recommendation.
If you shop for a desktop (tower) computer, some of those the
CPU can use 160W (ten times as much power), and the designs are not
thermally limited like a laptop would be. But a laptop is a bit
more portable (a "workstation" for example, is a laptop which
is hard on batteries, and such laptops like to be plugged in
at times during the work day). Workstation laptops are
thicker designs (they're not the thin and light kind) but
they have more room for high-end components inside. Workstations
get part of their size, from the powerful 3D graphics card.
Software developers, unless they're working on CUDA or OpenCL,
don't generally need such powerful graphics components. An
Intel Iris integrated graphics is plenty of horsepower, even
for a lightweight OpenCL run.

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us...-4-60-ghz.html

*******

This laptop fails, because it's a 2 core CPU. $800 in CDN dollars.

https://www.bestbuy.ca/en-ca/product...ws-10/14655794

This one has a quad core, with an IPS screen so you can actually
work on it. IPS screens are superior to TN (twisted nematic)
screens for long work hours. I'm typing on an IPS screen.
IPS screen, you can move your head side-to-side, without the
colors changing too much. This one is $1000 in CDN dollars.

https://www.cdw.com/product/acer-swi...gb-ssd/5537706

My total hardware outlay costs might be cheaper, if I got
a desktop machine instead. Or, if I assembled a computer
with a screwdriver, buying retail parts.

These ideas may be discouraging you, as the price is not
conducive to entry-level usage. The quad core thing is
an unfortunate side effect of Windows 10, rather than
Visual Studio. I'm typing on a dual core machine, but
I'm also not running Windows 10 on it (the Win10 SSD for
this machine, sits right next to me, unplugged!). My other
machine is a 6C 12T CPU with 64GB RAM, and I've done Chromium
and Firefox builds on it. Yes, that's overkill, but
you do have room to work, and the thing will rail on
all 12 hyperthreaded cores and draw 180W during a build.
The people at Google and Mozilla, they tend to get
20 core computers with about as much RAM, and their builds
happen in less than half the time of mine. To do faster builds,
I split the RAM in two, use 32GB for a RAMdisk, and use
the other 32GB for the compilers to use.

You have the option of installing Visual Studio Community Edition
(Free) on your current computer, and you can do a Hello World
program on that and get a feeling for how sluggish it is.
Windows 10, if installed on a gutless computer, can suck the
life out of it, and that's why I cannot exactly endorse
dual core garbage laptops with Windows 10 on them.

A quad core is a better choice in my opinion. You won't have
to throw it in the landfill because it annoys you :-)

Windows 10 is the problem, not Visual Studio particularly, for
small project usage. The SSD size should not be the minimum
one, or you might (eventually) regret that. Maybe some machines
come with 128GB, but a 256GB is a good minimum size because
of the Visual Studio footprint. Since you're just doing C#
development, you don't have to install every subsystem that
Visual Studio has to offer. I don't have any web crap
added to mine for example. You generally don't volunteer to
install all of it, unless you have storage space to waste for
no reason (I've installed Visual Studio community editions
a number of times, and never had regrets about my
initial configuration choices later). The features in it
that sound silly, are silly.

Paul


I'm live in Russia, but thank you, Paul.
  #4  
Old June 16th 20, 10:08 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware
Adrian Caspersz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 14
Default How to choose hardware for C# (Windows desktop) developer?

On 13/06/2020 17:35, Paul wrote:
Egor wrote:
Softwa
1. Visual Studio.
2. Windows 10.
Main answer in subject.


Desktop Hardware to support multiple monitor screens.

UPS.

Separate isolated PC for communications and entertainment.

Remote System
for backups
svn/git host
host for web services
host for wiki
for virtual machine building, package deployment and automated testing

Backup build system if critical project.

So I'd also chuck in a server class box somewhere. Maybe also a server
operating system (windows / linux), and do the whole VPN/remote desktop
thing, so you can run unleashed from it with a laptop by the side of the
swimming pool, or onboard your yacht etc...

--
Adrian C
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Developer lifts Windows 7's update blockade with unsanctioned patch skutre Homebuilt PC's 1 April 21st 17 01:30 PM
64 bit - Windows Liberty 64bit, Windows Limited Edition 64 Bit, Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Developer Edition 64 Bit, IBM DB2 64 bit - new ! vvcd AMD x86-64 Processors 0 September 17th 04 09:07 PM
64 bit - Windows Liberty 64bit, Windows Limited Edition 64 Bit, Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Developer Edition 64 Bit, IBM DB2 64 bit - new ! vvcd General 0 September 17th 04 09:01 PM
64 bit - Windows Liberty 64bit, Windows Limited Edition 64 Bit,Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Developer Edition 64 Bit, IBM DB2 64 bit - new! TEL Overclocking AMD Processors 0 January 1st 04 06:59 PM
64 bit - Windows Liberty 64bit, Windows Limited Edition 64 Bit,Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Developer Edition 64 Bit, IBM DB2 64 bit - new! TEL Intel 0 January 1st 04 06:25 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2020 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.