Modern games have been struggling with only 4 CPU threads for around 5 years now—this was particularly noticeable with Zen1 where the Ryzen 1600 competed well against the i5-7400 with the i5 doing worse and worse with newer and newer games AAA, and that was a CPU with 4 full-fat cores rather than 2core/4thread.Keep in mind that a modern web browser is not unlike a modern game in what it is tasked to do. You can't expect those CPUs to be supported by modern games, either.
The price jump from a Pentium to an i3 with integrated graphics back in the DDR4 era was more like $50 which, when your CPU is around $70, is way closer to double than $10 more. I don't know if you've ever built a PC yourself, but it's around $200 to $300 on the essential parts of a non-workstation PC or non-AAA-gaming PC, that being CPU+motherboard and maybe RAM since the rest are almost always re-usable between PC builds even from a decade ago (case, power supply, storage, mouse & keyboard, display, even a discrete graphics card if you had one), so stepping up to a higher-end CPU can easily make your total cost be like 50% to 100% more, and it was much wiser to put any such money towards an SSD (even higher-end pre-built PCs still came without them in the mid to late 2010s, like my uncle's i7-6700 non-K pre-built).If you really couldn't/didn't want to spend $10 more on a processor when you bought it and expect to get more than about 3 years of life and support out of it,
At least with the popular G4560 and other Kaby Lake-derieved 2core/4thread Pentiums, that was the generation where even the i3 was still 2core/4thread, so you had to spend over double the price (a little below $200 USD) on the CPU in order to get more than the 2core/4thread offered by the likes of a $70 G4560 (or $~80 G4600 if you wanted the faster variant of integrated graphics). The only thing the i3 offered that generation was in fact AVX other than a stupid-expensive ~$200 i3 model that was unlocked for overclocking, and I'm not sure any sane person could argue to spend like double the price just to get AVXAs far as I'm concerned, those budget CPUs were a waste of sand and most people who bought them got screwed, and I'm sorry, but the rest of the computing world isn't going to stop going forward just because you made a bad decision and bought an Intel CPU that was limited to 2009-era Nehalem instruction sets in 2022. The newer instruction sets have existed for long enough that it's becoming a bit ridiculous to be stuck with that as a limit to what we can bake in without people complaining.
So, I guess consider it a lesson learned. Be careful of buying low-end PC parts, you never know how crippled they might be or whether they are cheap because they are missing key features that developers will take advantage of in the next couple years. Like for instance, it would be a bit like saying game developers still shouldn't require more than the amount of power used by the GT 1030 due to it being part of the 10 series, and conveniently thus still work well enough with a 560 Ti, just because something was produced more recently with that older baseline. It doesn't work that way, your budget hardware is only suitable for older stuff and is a replacement for buying used, it's not meant to last.
Don't suppose it has anything to do with the combo of ECC + integrated graphics? That was a difficult thing to achieve beginning with AM3+ up until AM5 (or some AM4 to a lesser extent if counting the used market).Let's just say there's a reason why I am planning to leave my illumos/Solaris builds as SSE2...
On this point, I agree with you, that this going to be a bigger nightmare to deal with on Linux than on Windows. On Windows, there is a 32-bit build to fall back on, Microsoft has encouraged AVX as a semi-official baseline level in MSVC for ages, and also most Windows users are on newer hardware anyway. Linux is just in a worse place overall due to poor 32-bit multilib support and them taking Intel's v2 baseline a bit too seriously, effectively capping themselves at a level that isn't very helpful for us.A use case all the more likely to be appropriate for Linux rather than Windows, running once again into the issue of the AVX requirement on Linux builds being particularly problematic relative to Windows.
Indeed, I meant x86 builds of Pale Moon for Linux.What was meant is that there's no official x86 Pale Moon build for Linux.
SSE2 was introduced with the Pentium 4 and Athlon 64, both of which had large market share (Pentium 4 due to Intel's known shady business tactics against AMD, and Athlon 64 because it's K8 architecture was just that good especially against Intel's woeful Netburst).Aapparently SSE2 systems are quite a few out there.
You've got it backwards—Intel was actually the hold-out on 32bit with their 1st generation netbook variant of "Diamondville" Atom CPUs from 2008 or so (and, in typical Intel segmentation fashion, the nettop variants of "Diamondville" supported 64bit...) while the current 64bit x86 is actually an AMD invention that was included in all AMD architectures beginning with the Athlon 64 in 2003, hence why it's called AMD64 in some circles (commonly in Linux for example) since Intel's own version of 64bit, Itanium, broke compatibility with x86 (reminds me of IPv6...) and was just all around a failure (especially against AMD's Opteron).what I understand because the amount of x86-only CPUs nowadays is very, very low compared to non-AVX CPUs