#3882
The 5600X is a bit too old to be the best deal at this point. There's a reason why the 5500 and 5600 were released this year, they simply fill the budget niche much better due to being much cheaper while not being that much slower.
Especially an overclocked 5500 is really hard to beat.
The 5600G is technically slightly faster than the 5600 while including an integrated GPU and being slightly cheaper, but it doesn't support PCIe 4.0 so it's a bit of a sidegrade. Worth considering in combination with a B450 mobo to get 5600 performance at 5500 price.
A cheaper cooler should also suffice for any of these, even for overclocking.

Though honestly it boils down to this: If it's about the budget the 5500 with the stock cooler is unbeatable, if it's about performance then the 5600X and 12400(F) might be very close but 12500 and 12600 also exist.

Other than that cheaper mobos exist, a 750W PSU is a bit overkill for a 400W build and a cheaper/smaller case would be possible.
https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/9yK6PX

5500 got half the cache of 5600(X) and its pcie 3.0 only

Oh yeah, forgot to mention that and the BIOS update.
The 5500 is basically a 5600G with the clockrates of a 5300G and without the iGPU, so same advice as with the 5600G applies.
A B450 mobo whose BIOS can be updated without a CPU will be cheaper at the cost of fewer USB ports and no PCIe 4.0, which doesn't matter in case of the 5500 and 5600G because they don't have it anyway.

The build I linked is a mix of things, I don't really recommend spending 50 quid on a cooler for a CPU that only costs 120.
Basically that cooler and mobo and 5600(X) for overclocking, B450 mobo with BIOS flashback and no/stock cooler for a 5500 or maybe 5600G.

To be fair, a 5600X now costs less than 200$, the MSRP of the 5600. And the 7600X is very tempting.

And so is 5600 below its own msrp substantially, the price delta between the two CPUs and their msrps is on a country basis but its certainly non negligible on a budget build.

Yes it looks spicy indeed, but, it draws like a 12600k, costs on its own more than a whole zen 3 kit, and sells either right on its msrp or 10% above it in the case of UK market while also needing a 50 quid cooler. Gotta play the waiting game again or pay the adopter fee and fork some serious paper.

The point is that now the comparison of 5600X and 12400 actually makes sense because they both cost ~190.
So in terms of price the 5600X became the 5600 murkscribe wanted, while the 5500 has taken the place of cheapest recent 6 core CPU and the 5600 is somewhere in limbo between them.

Oh, I never said it's anywhere near the same budget, just that it's tempting.
And for all we know murkscribe is going to wait so long that the 7600 is released.

Hello. I'd like to get a config to run tf2 on the highest videosetting with good fps (100+)
I was told to ask for info here.
Right now as a processor I have a i5-6400 and as a graphics card I have GTX 750 Ti and 8 Gb ram
I was told TF2 uses the processor mostly. Should I only change my processor here?

Frankly, I've got no idea what you'd need on the highest settings, because uuuuh we don't do that here.
One easy test you could do though is checking the GPU usage. If it's at 100%, then you definitely need a faster one.

For the CPU, you're limited by the mainboard. The fastest you can get that fits, an i7-7700K, would be 35-40% faster. You'd have to find a used one, because they are not sold anymore.

Now, that means if you're getting less than 70 fps on those settings right now, that CPU wouldn't be enough. In that case you'd need a new mainboard as well, so you can get a newer CPU, and depending on what RAM you've got it might not fit either, then you'd need new RAM too. Worst case, the GPU also isn't fast enough, and then you essentially need a completely new pc.
I'm not sure if you've got the budget for that.

Anyway, check GPU usage, if it's significantly less than 100% you should only need a new CPU.
If you're getting more than 70 fps as it is, look for a 7700K, maybe 7600K. More than 80 fps and you can probably get away with a 7700 or 7600. That should get you just about 100 fps.
If you're getting less than 70 fps and it's not the GPU, or you simply want significantly more than 100 fps, then it needs to be a bigger upgrade.

hi mr Setsul. anything wrong here?
https://sk.pcpartpicker.com/list/ddZPLs
going amd because cheapest ddr5 z690 (non-asrock) here is 300+, might as well futureproof for AM5 3d vcache
aiming for stable 240 for tf2 and overwatch on low, 100ish and up for tripleA 1080p, occasional light workload
thank u sm

quick edit: would the 7600x benefit from aio (something like nzxt z63) or is beefy air cooler enough? also any need for b650e compared to b650?

https://i.imgur.com/axSyQcc.png

#3890 im not 100% up to date on it but 7xxx amd ramps up to thermal limit pretty fast and stays there as its intended... curve? ramp up? no real need for E board in this use case, and if youre looking to cut a few $ 67/6800xt is comparable or better for less/equal money, (and honestly, cpu x264 encoding for obs or whatnot can be done pretty handily with the amount of threads most viable cpus have nowadays)

for reference in ow, i get 144 locked on OW low w/ a 3600 and 1060

This is why i asked mr Setsul not mr Noob, you see, my pc case of choice is mATX.

Yeah i heard they get hot, but i'd rather not have cpu at 95° at all times if i could help it, and while i prefer air cooling over an aio, i don't mind going liquid if it means my cpu is not cooking itself every day. Just not sure if air cooling is still relevant with this gen of crazy hot and power hungry cpus.

#3890
No, can't see anything wrong with it.
#3891 does have a point though, there should be cheaper Z690 boards, and cheaper B650(E) boards for that matter. PCPartpicker probably does not have a lot of slovakian shops. I mean every part in that list shows only alza, which probably wasn't even added specifically for slovakia, they just added it to a dozen countries.

I dislike aios. https://www.teamfortress.tv/12714/pc-build-thread/?page=19#555
The Z63 specifically is a big no because you'd be paying 100 bucks for an LED display. The X63 is ok.
If you do care about the noise levels you could get an NH-U12A for less, if you don't you could slap 2000 or even 3000 rpm fans on an NH-D15 (or any dual tower really).
Honestly, for the price of a Z63 you can get a full watercooling kit that'll blow it out of the water, pun very much intended.
An NH-D15 should really be enough though.

B650E got PCIe 5.0. Do you want/need PCIe 5.0? Get B650E. Otherwise B650.

yeah no alza is pretty much the only retailer here that has ok return policies and customer service, unfortunately dont have the luxury of comparing prices between stores. only mentioned the z63 because its on sale here for 160, the nhd15 is 110 and nhu12a is 125. also full water cooling kit is a no go for me, i dont trust myself working with liquids near electronics. and yes, i really dont see the point of pcie 5.0, not even in couple of years.
thank u for validation, see you in benchmarks thread when its complete.

Hello, I was considering making the move to 1440p since my hardware is capable of handling it in most games now, but I'm struggling to pick a good monitor. There are a few on sale this week with all the Black Friday/Cyber w/e Electric Boogaloo25 events, but idk if they're actually good. I'm only considering VA and IPS panels (no TN) because I do a lot of video editing and therefore want good colors and contrast; I also (but less so) care about responsiveness in FPS such as TF2 (though not sure about the difference between MPRT response time and other measurements). 144Hz-165Hz is probably my goal, along with wanting to be able to make use of adaptative sync in more demanding games where useful (I'm not entirely sure about the differences between Premium and basic Freesync, G-SYNC intended and G-SYNC compatible anymore, feel free to tell me if they are actually noticeable; my GPU is a 3070 if that matters).

My current panel is a 1080p144 AOC 24" curved VA from 2018, curved feels nice so I could go for a curved panel again, and I quite liked VA so far so unless IPS has some good arguments for a change I would probably go for VA again. I don't really feel like going above 30", 27" would probably be the sweet spot for 1440p. Ideally I don't want to spend above 350 euros on the monitor unless there are no genuinely good choices below that price tag.

The few 27" VA models that are currently on sale in French shops such as LDLC and Materiel.net are the following:

- MSI 27" Optix G27CQ4 (250€)
- Samsung 27" Odyssey G5 C27G55TQWR (250€)
- Asus TUF VG27WQ1B (330€, 27" IPS version (VG27AQ) at same price, 31.5" VA version (VG32VQ1BR) on sale and cheaper than its 27" counterpart somehow (300€), weird idk lol)

Outside of sales, there's also the ASUS TUF VG27WQ for 350€ I guess. The AOC CQ27G2U and Q27G2U are at 300€, I had a decent experience with AOC on my current panel so that could be a logical path too. The Gigabyte G27QC A is at 270€, just like the Acer Nitro XV272UPbmiiprzx.

Feel free to suggest a completely different model if you think it's worth it, notably even IPS ones if you think I would be better off having IPS instead of VA even though I spend a lot of time editing. If anything in my use case information is unclear feel free to ask for a clarification.

https://www.dealabs.com/bons-plans/ecran-de-pc-27-lg-ultragear-lg-27gp850-b-2442164
https://www.boulanger.com/ref/1163044
review
pros: good response time/motion clarity; 10 bit panel(1bil colors vs 16.7mil on 8bit or 6bit+FRC); decent feature amount be it connectivity or variable refresh rate;
cons: I think red subpixels are a tiny bit slow like on most quantum dot panels but I dont think its a dealbreaker, should perform better than your or any other VA panel in gaming regardless; the stand doesnt swivel left right(horizontal) like on expensive benq's so check to see if your keyboard wont get in its way on the desk

yes

super laymans terms and probably lacking elaboration/full picture but essentially VA has good contrast and blacks for super cheap(thank you samsung very cool) at the cost of motion clarity (MSRP). VA is prone to have black smearing, ghosting and no overdrive setting will make it better, the undershoot is horrible

any questions? ask away, i cba

thanks for the recommendations and explanations narkkari, I could fancy IPS I guess. the only thing with the LG you recommended is it seems like the earliest I can get it is February 14 for some reason lol, idk if Boulanger's website is bugged or smth

How comparable in quality are the following 27" IPS? (I picked the ones that seem to be available and of comparable pricing)

- iiyama G-Master G2770QSU-B1 and Iiyama G-Master GB2770QSU-B1
- Samsung Odyssey G5 S27AG500NU
- Acer Nitro VG270UPbmiipx
- Gigabyte G27Q
- AOC Q27G2S
- Asus TUF VG27AQ and Asus TUF VG27AQ1A (not sure about the difference between IPS and Fast IPS)

Also side note: I haven't yet put my 3070 in my PC, got it very recently, and I was wondering whether I should get a 650, 700, or 750W PSU (current is a 500W one which definitely won't work). I'm gonna get an 80+ Gold probably, from be quiet/Corsair/Seasonic most likely. I have a 5800X that is not OC'd, only PBO+undervolting, 1 M.2 SSD, 1 SATA SSD, 1 SATA HDD, 6 fans total (counting the CPU push-and-pull ones), 4 sticks of DDR4, and my GPU is an OC version (but that's very common). be quiet's calculator for instance estimates the max power draw at 615 with all those details, making 80+ Gold 650W PSUs workable but relatively tight. Should I play safe and get 700/750W or is it overkill?

Why wouldn't a 650W PSU work? If a 650W PSU can't handle 615W load, it's not a 650W PSU.

Overcurrent protection is usually set to trip at around 120% rated load, so it's not like that would mess things up. If the 3070 somehow gets an absolutely terrifying spike to >600W so that it and 150W from the 5800X maybe just barely exceed that, then you really want the PSU to shut down.

For that matter, 20ms spikes on the 3070 seem to be around 300W, and the 5800X should be limited to 142W even when boosting. Unless you manually increase that, you could get away with a 500W PSU if it's a good one.

Alright thanks a lot for the PSU input Setsul, makes sense. Do you have an opinion regarding the monitors?

yeah well reading the comments on the french deals website it apparently ran out of stock yesterday(?) so eh, its on another website still for 299 according to pcpartpicker or 350 on spanish amazon, every other amazon is 400+
https://fr.pcpartpicker.com/product/WWcG3C/lg-27gp850-b-270-2560x1440-165-hz-monitor-27gp850-b
https://www.fnac.com/Ecran-PC-Gaming-LG-UltraGear-27GP850-B-27-LED-QHD-Noir-mat/a16147192/
says ships from Dec 2nd

most of these were cheaper before black friday(30-100eur), make of that what you will

Iiyama GB2770QSU-B1(2021) - 290eur G2770QSU-B1(2022) - 300eur, the only difference between the two is the stand and probably a slightly better panel on the newer revision idk
wont blow you out of the water, Okayge

Samsung Odyssey G5 S27AG500NU(2021) - 254eur amazon.pl, seems like just a lower binned, slower LG panel, no idea
B+

Acer Nitro VG270UPbmiipx(2018) ~250 eur
pros: slightly cheaper than the rest, went on sale for 200eur twice in the past month and a half
cons: shit panel from 2018, no color accuracy, no response time, 144hz, one of the HDMI ports is 1.4
skip

Gigabyte G27Q(2020) - 290eur 144hz native, 165 overclock, so expect pisspoor picture quality or overshoot at 165hz
Okayge

AOC Q27G2S(2020) - 290eur, neither fast nor color accurate

ASUS TUF VG27AQ(2019) - 350eur starting price for this is questionable, its just a gaming model, color gamut 8bit which is not ideal considering all of the aforementioned models and its only faster than the acer nitro which is hot garbage
TUF VG27AQ1A(2020) - a newer revision that has 10bit but cuts down on brightness from 320 nits on the 2019rev to 250 on this one making them dimmer than the acer nitro
neither worth bothering

lg is the one that is most worthwhile, then samsung/gigabyte
iiyama if you get a good deal is not the worst thing in the world
acer and asus are just not worth considering

I strongly urge you to read and watch some reviews on youtube of these remaining monitors before deciding, these people actually thoroughly test response times, motion clarity and color accuracy with 800eur calibrators
skip the casual reviewers that only show B-roll and quickly demonstrate the monitor like its an ad read
rtings.com and hardware unboxed on yt is a good starting point, there are a few more credible reviewers
full disclosure I've only looked at LG for an extended period of time earlier this year and it still seems to be the price to performace king this year

I'm not up to date on current models and don't really have the time to go down that rabbit hole right now.

that sounds very fair, thanks for the help so far nevertheless

epic, thanks for the detailed opinion, I'll check out some more thorough reviews of the LG but it's probably the one I'll go for

Might be potentially looking to upgrade cpu and to ddr5 over christmas. I'm thinking either 13700k or 7700x, they both seem to have their advantages while being roughly the same average over a couple of games. The 7700x seems to be very impressive in csgo which I guess translates to tf2 while being slightly cheaper and lower power consumption. However the 13700k seems to be impressively stable in games with very impressive low 1% avg fps.

I'm currently running i7-8700k. I do have a noctua nh-d15 which I suppose should be sufficient, though for 7700x ill need to grab a mounting kit. As for the 13700k it seems like you should get a contact frame? I'd also need a new mobo ofc but gotta decide on the cpu first. Thanks!

I mean you've said it yourself? The 7700X is a bit cheaper and more efficient (not as dependent on boost too, 4.5 vs 3.4 base), maybe a bit faster in source engine games (haven't seen it personally though), in everything else the 13700K probably wins.
I'm not sure how much that would change depending on if/how you overclock, but you'll need to decide on that to pick the right mobo.

I should add that the price drop on the 7700X is likely permanent, due to the existence of the 13700K, even though AMD likes to pretend it's a special offer for the holidays.

And another thing: There should be a 7700 (65W non-X) and a 7700X3D or 7800X3D (170W with 3D V-Cache) announced at CES in January. The former would fill the cheaper, more efficient niche better than the 7700X at the cost of being a bit slower or could be pushed to similar performance with a bit of overclocking at the cost of higher power consumption, while remaining cheaper, and the latter should be faster at the cost of being more expensive and more power hungry.
If you're lucky it's a 7700X3D and somewhere between the discounted and launch price of the 7700X (350-400$), if you're unlucky it's a 7800X3D and closer to the 7900X (450-500$).

You could of course make it weird and gamble a bit, buy a 7700X (or even 7600X) now if you find a got deal for a mobo, then upgrade when the 7700X3D is actually released (might be later than the announcement). Could go wrong, could be a 7800X3D that's too expensive for your taste, or you lose too much selling the CPU you initially bought, but it is an option.

For me waiting wouldn't be an issue, my current setup is fine for now. Is overclocking still the thing to do with the new chips? Seems to be a lot of praise for undervolting right now which is what I initially planned. I think the performance of the 13700k draws me in because of games like tarkov and whatever new tripple a's that will come out in the future. But I'll defo wait for 7700X3D and 7800X3D to see the price/performance unless i7 13700k comes on a crazy sale again, a friend got it for 400euros during black friday but I missed it :( Even though I'm planning on undervolting having the option in the future to overclock would be nice so I've been looking a bit at z690 and z790 and I'm leaning towards a z790 I've generally leaned towards asus in the past but they seem to be very expensive right now compared to gigabyte and msi. thanks for thr reply once again Setsul!

Well, these days you usually won't get much of an overclock, though it's still possible.
The Intel chips tend to be pretty maxed out and higher all core clocks run into power/temperature issues fairly quickly, but there can be a bit of room for single cores, especially because the standard turbo settings sometimes don't allow the max single core boost on any core, just a select few, and a bit more voltage can help with that.
For Ryzen, the 105W and especially 65W chips obviously have quite a bit of room, though again you'll likely run into temperature issues before voltage becomes a problem, let alone power draw if you've got a mobo that could handle the 170W SKUs.

But generally yes, because temperature is the main issue, the trend is to simply undervolt to keep those CPUs a bit cooler, and let the standard boost mechanisms take care of the rest. The end result is effectively an overclock anyway, because now they can boost higher and/or more often before running into the temperature, power, or voltage limits.

Also, it'll be either a 7700X3D or a 7800X3D. Just one 8 core SKU, as far as I know, with the name depending on the price (and performance segment) they're going for.

If you do get a Z690 mobo, make sure it's one that can have its BIOS updated without a CPU, or you're going to run into some troubles.

good shout, thanks!

I bought this SSD
which advertises "Sequential R/W : 7000 / 6850 MB per second" but when I test with crystaldeskmark it doesnt look like I'm getting that.

My other drive performs about as advertised.

Part list: https://pcpartpicker.com/user/saam/saved/kdwskL

Your cpu and mobo only support pcie 3.0 so you're not going to be getting pcie 4.0 speeds, at best the theoretical maximum for 4 3.0 lanes is below 4 GB/s. As for why it's so considerably lower than that, who knows, could very well be a crap ssd, could be set to 2 lanes, could be some other configuration issue or bottleneck. I would verify both M.2 slots are set to x4 in your BIOS setup if the option exists.

Hi Setsul, I would like your recommendation. My PC that I bought in 2014 seems to be slowly dying on me and I figure it's time for a new one. I play source games, so csgo dota and tf2, and also maplestory but that last one's not really intensive at all.

My main priority is with speedrunning, for that I use an xbox and capture the feed with a capture card and stream so something that can handle streaming decently is required, right now I get encoding issues and stuttering when I stream sometimes cause my cpu is overworked or something. Lastly, also for speedrunning, there's an emulator called CXBX that I would like to have the option to use, right now I get 20 fps when I use it so it's kind of unplayable. Not sure how knowledgeable you are with emulation specifically but for the game I run in particular the emulator works better with an intel cpu so I would prefer getting an intel cpu if all else is equal, but if an amd one would be more cost efficient that's fine

I'm not interested in playing new or triple A games so I don't really think the graphics card has to be that good, as my understanding is source stuff is primarily cpu based and streaming / emulation is also mostly cpu based. I would like to spend at most $1200 cad but would definitely prefer spending as little as possible.

I usually only check tftv every couple of months, but somehow always right after someone asks a hardware question. Someone asked one one day before you did, so I thought I didn't need to check the pc build thread, since I thought that was why I had the urge to check.

Anyway, a couple of preliminary question:
What's your current build?
Do you actually want to upgrade or is it just because you can't figure out what's wrong?
Do you want to reuse any hardware?
Are you fine with GPU encoding? That should make things a lot easier for the CPU and by now it's comparable and sometimes better than CPU encoding.
Is that information about CXBX doing better on intel recent? Because almost everything that made AMD CPUs suck really badly for certain things only apply to the pre 2017 architectures, and the last thing that I think would be relevant only applies to CPUs with more than 4 cores from before 2020, and more than 8 cores since. I'd definitely check just in case.
Are you going to overclock?

If you're going for as cheap as possible, I'd actually look into a non-overclockable Intel CPU with an iGPU.
Ironically, despite Intel GPUs being considerable worse for anything else, they're really, really good at encoding, consistently beating x264 for streaming (unless you've got an absurd CPU) last I checked.
So if your GPU is still good enough for your purposes, or you can get a cheap used one that is, and you reuse everything but the CPU, RAM, and mobo, you could probably get an i3-13100 and get a significant upgrade for less than half your budget. Next step up would be an i5-13600, if you want/need 6 big cores, but I don't think you do.