It’s not really accurate. I’m running Fedora 33 Linux on an AMD Ryzen 5 without any problem. I also run Fedora 31 on an AMD Ryzen 7, and a Fedora 29 and CentOS 7 as virtual machines on the same processor…simultaneously. Before Ryzen I was running AMD 32-bit processors.
It’s not the processor per se, but the combination motherboard-processor that could pose issues. That is because of the way different motherboards address their memory slots. which is why, nowadays, each motherboard manufacturer specifies the type of RAM memory compatible with its motherboard.
With respect to the main question, all these hypes about bigger, badder processor and GPU (aka video card) are the result of demands from
a) the gaming industry;
b) the 3D modeling and movie industry;
c) the money market industry; and
d) the scientific community (using computer farms to compute astronomical figures).
All these users demand faster devices for their respective activity simply because their products are processor- and GPU- intensive. For example, it takes 10s (if not 100s) of hours to render a 3D video game.
KiCad, on the other hand, is neither CPU, nor GPU intensive; perhaps it is requires some GPU work when rendering a board in 3D, but otherwise I doubt one will require a 32-core CPU to run it. If I were to build a computer (I always build my computers) for use specifically with KiCad, I would not shoot for the highest end in any component, except perhaps the motherboard.
FYI, I use KiCad on both Intel (i5) and AMD (Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 7) processors, both with NVidia video cards (1050 and 1070 GTX, respectively). All my computers run Linux in one distro or another - Fedora, CentOS, Mint. (I decided a long time ago I do not want to be Micro$oft’s slave anymore: I want to control the computer, not the other way around.)
I also have it on my laptop, which is a System76, running Pop! Linux on an Intel processor, and using the integrated Intel UHD GPU, and I did not observe any hiccups from my laptop in terms of performance or stability. (One disclosure, though: I do not build my laptops. ) As far as I observed, KiCad is not resource-intensive.
There are a lot of people who use ext4. This alone makes it a well tested filesystem, so I don’t expect it to contain (many) filesystem bugs that corrupt data. Ext4 is not able to detect nor correct silent corruption of data, so it can’t help you if for any reason some bits on the platter (or flash array) were flipped:
btrfs does detect corrupted files, and if it has 2 or more drives, it can even reconstruct the data on the fly. But btrfs is not as old as ext4, and therefore has the potential to have more filesystem bugs.
These box PCs usually have VESA mounting compatible screw holes… Just mount the PC on back of LCD and relax. Treat the setup as as All-In-One.
These PCs have one M.2 slot & one SATA slot. You can add 2.5 disc over SATA. Mounting holes are provided.
We do use these PCs in my current organization’s product line-up. Only issue is the available CPU configurations are limited and usually there are no discreet graphics.
To answer the original question
I used KiCad 4.x version on my HP laptop with 1st Gen i3,4GB RAM, Win7 32 bit & Ubuntu 64bit dual boot. KiCad installed in both OS.
Then I upgraded to Lenovo laptop 8th Gen i7, 8GB RAM, Nvidia MX series graphics (which are better than intel on-board graphic but not really desktop grade performance) Win8.1, Win 10, Ubuntu. KiCad 5.x… The ‘A64 made with KiCad’ design loaded without any hiccups on this. The only upgrade I’ve done after 5 years of using this laptop is replacing original HDD with SSD. The machine works as if its a new one. The performance upgrade by SSD is just amazing. I use just one external monitor over HDMI (which is controlled by CPU & not GPU).
So to sum it all, you just need a CPU with better clock. Even a mobile grade GPU will help a lot. Make sure you have a better SSD.
Now I’m going to upgrade to Lenovo Legion 5 (yeah of-course I want to play games). Maybe I can update you regarding Ubuntu & Kicad crashes (if any) on latest Ryzen 5 4500H in a week
Any desktop that is usable for the current web has enough power for KiCad.
I can design a small PCB with about 50 components, 2 layers, on a Raspberry Pi 3, without any problems. As long as i don’t use fancy 3D models (simple 3D models are OK) or some other features. The hardest part is to use the webbrowser to download a datasheet, the browser needs a way more powerful computer than KiCad.
) As far as I observed, KiCad is not resource-intensive.