Upvote Upvoted 131 Downvote Downvoted
1 ⋅⋅ 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 ⋅⋅ 134
PC Build Thread
posted in Hardware
3781
#3781
2 Frags +

It'll probably move in favour of the 5600X.

The GPU should be around 180W TDP then.
Now do the math. It's just PBO but at worst the OC would add another 50W to the 5600X.

https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SbtaxozLH6TV4fvofLDHQm-1920-80.png

A 5800X might still be doable, a 5600X is easy (probably around 100W left even with everything else added in), a 10700K at 5.1 is very tight, I would not recommend it. Yes, it would work most of the time since you'd rarely have 100% load on both CPU and GPU at the same time, but nominally you'd be one bad spike (remember, that's 214W average, not peak) away from the PSU triggering an overcurrent shutdown.

It'll probably move in favour of the 5600X.

The GPU should be around 180W TDP then.
Now do the math. It's just PBO but at worst the OC would add another 50W to the 5600X.
[img]https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SbtaxozLH6TV4fvofLDHQm-1920-80.png[/img]
A 5800X might still be doable, a 5600X is easy (probably around 100W left even with everything else added in), a 10700K at 5.1 is very tight, I would not recommend it. Yes, it would work most of the time since you'd rarely have 100% load on both CPU and GPU at the same time, but nominally you'd be one bad spike (remember, that's 214W average, not peak) away from the PSU triggering an overcurrent shutdown.
3782
#3782
0 Frags +

Alright, thanks for the useful graph and info !

How big is the gap in performance between the 5600X @4.7 GHz and i7-10700K @5.1 GHz ? I believe we've mostly talked about the gap at stock, that's why I'm asking, and I've mostly only found benchmarks at stock too. Would it justify paying for a new PSU ? (assuming similar prices for mobo+cooler no matter what CPU I choose)

The only thing that would bother me is choosing the W of the PSU I would get if I were to change in any case, since I could end up upgrading my 1070 in a few years, and would then be annoyed if I had to change the PSU again just because of average midrange (70-ish) GPUs' power usage values being really high at that point in time (not sure if there is a way to make a good assumption on how power consumption will evolve in the next few years in the GPU department).

Alright, thanks for the useful graph and info !

How big is the gap in performance between the 5600X @4.7 GHz and i7-10700K @5.1 GHz ? I believe we've mostly talked about the gap at stock, that's why I'm asking, and I've mostly only found benchmarks at stock too. Would it justify paying for a new PSU ? (assuming similar prices for mobo+cooler no matter what CPU I choose)

The only thing that would bother me is choosing the W of the PSU I would get if I were to change in any case, since I could end up upgrading my 1070 in a few years, and would then be annoyed if I had to change the PSU again just because of average midrange (70-ish) GPUs' power usage values being really high at that point in time (not sure if there is a way to make a good assumption on how power consumption will evolve in the next few years in the GPU department).
3783
#3783
1 Frags +

Depends on who you're asking. If we stick with tomshardware then a 5600X at stock with the stock cooler (and pretty good RAM I think) beats a 10700K@5.1 in games at 1080p. Slightly "worse" at higher resolutions, but does it really matter at that point?

https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NgcARhwkfbyirrZScknbCb.png

Yes, you can throw a lot of money at a Z490 mobo, a high end cooler and a new PSU to maybe beat a 5600X with a B450/B550 mobo and stock cooler, but at that point you might as well get a 5800X (+B450/B550) for about the same amount of money. Yes, you might not get much of an overclock (though that's a given with Zen anyway), but it'll be faster all the same.

I did tell you that it's a tradeoff. The 5600X is faster single-threaded and the 10700(K) is faster multi-threaded, you will not get the 10700K to do both. If you want both you'll have to pay for a 5800X.
Not that you need it if you don't render that much.
If you did a ton of rendering a 10700 (non-K) would be a good choice because then you actually get more for less, looking purely at multi-threaded vs the 5600X, but that is not your use case.

Or let's summarize it: Why do you think street prices for the 10700K are lower than its list price and lower than street prices for the 5600X, which has a 75$ lower list price? Do you really think that would happen if an overclocked 10700K beat a 5600X in single and multi-threaded?

About the PSU: You've seen the power consumption. <100W for a 5600X with PBO. You could fit a 300W if you really wanted to. If there's ever a "midrange" 300W GPU I'd have some questions about the highend.

Depends on who you're asking. If we stick with tomshardware then a 5600X at stock with the stock cooler (and pretty good RAM I think) beats a 10700K@5.1 in games at 1080p. Slightly "worse" at higher resolutions, but does it really matter at that point?
[img]https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NgcARhwkfbyirrZScknbCb.png[/img]

Yes, you can throw a lot of money at a Z490 mobo, a high end cooler and a new PSU to maybe beat a 5600X with a B450/B550 mobo and stock cooler, but at that point you might as well get a 5800X (+B450/B550) for about the same amount of money. Yes, you might not get much of an overclock (though that's a given with Zen anyway), but it'll be faster all the same.

I did tell you that it's a tradeoff. The 5600X is faster single-threaded and the 10700(K) is faster multi-threaded, you will not get the 10700K to do both. If you want both you'll have to pay for a 5800X.
Not that you need it if you don't render that much.
If you did a ton of rendering a 10700 (non-K) would be a good choice because then you actually get more for less, looking purely at multi-threaded vs the 5600X, but that is not your use case.

Or let's summarize it: Why do you think street prices for the 10700K are lower than its list price and lower than street prices for the 5600X, which has a 75$ lower list price? Do you really think that would happen if an overclocked 10700K beat a 5600X in single and multi-threaded?

About the PSU: You've seen the power consumption. <100W for a 5600X with PBO. You could fit a 300W if you really wanted to. If there's ever a "midrange" 300W GPU I'd have some questions about the highend.
3784
#3784
0 Frags +

No, higher resolution definitely doesn't matter for me, at least not for a couple more years at least.

I guess with those last arguments I'm probably not going to go for the 10700K, especially if both 5600X (even overclocked) and 5800X can fit on the old PSU.

Now I realize maybe I could consider going a bit overkill since I don't buy components all that often at all, so given that the 5800X is not worth overclocking (and might be tight for the PSU if oc'd) from what I've read, I would see 3 buying scenarios if I keep that PSU then : one for a 5600X that I don't overclock (if I want to keep my money), one for a 5600X that I do overclock, and one for a 5800X that I don't overclock.

Would you have a mobo and cooler recommendation for each of these scenarios ? Or if that's a bit too much work, just an estimate of the combo price for each scenario ?

No, higher resolution definitely doesn't matter for me, at least not for a couple more years at least.

I guess with those last arguments I'm probably not going to go for the 10700K, especially if both 5600X (even overclocked) and 5800X can fit on the old PSU.

Now I realize maybe I could consider going a bit overkill since I don't buy components all that often at all, so given that the 5800X is not worth overclocking (and might be tight for the PSU if oc'd) from what I've read, I would see 3 buying scenarios if I keep that PSU then : one for a 5600X that I don't overclock (if I want to keep my money), one for a 5600X that I do overclock, and one for a 5800X that I don't overclock.

Would you have a mobo and cooler recommendation for each of these scenarios ? Or if that's a bit too much work, just an estimate of the combo price for each scenario ?
3785
#3785
2 Frags +

Not worth is a relative term, PBO is definitely worth trying at least.
The thing is the 5600X comes with a stock cooler (10700K and 5800X don't) and you can overclock on B450/B550, it's not locked like with Intel.

Those super expensive X570 boards rated for 200A or even 250A are great and all but you don't need that. A 5800X with half the cores physically can't draw much more than half the power without catching fire and a 5600X will obviously need even less. A 125A B450 mobo would do the job just fine, that means 80-90€, something like a MSI Mortar/Tomahawk. B550 would cost you 120-130€. It's nice, but you probably won't need most of the features. Now if you want X570 you better have a damn good reason for spending that much money.

Cooler depends mostly on how quiet you want it to be. Stock cooler would do for the 5600X, could get something nicer for 30€, midrange that would also be plenty for the 5800X for 50-60€ or if you thing it'll help with the OC (it won't) or want it really quiet you can look at the high end for 70-90€.

Beyond a certain point the mobo doesn't really do anything for the OC and it never does anything for performance directly, it's all about features and connectivity. I'd focus on getting Dual Rank RAM (or 4 SR DIMMs) instead of obsessing over overclocks because that'll matter far more.

Not worth is a relative term, PBO is definitely worth trying at least.
The thing is the 5600X comes with a stock cooler (10700K and 5800X don't) and you can overclock on B450/B550, it's not locked like with Intel.

Those super expensive X570 boards rated for 200A or even 250A are great and all but you don't need that. A 5800X with half the cores physically can't draw much more than half the power without catching fire and a 5600X will obviously need even less. A 125A B450 mobo would do the job just fine, that means 80-90€, something like a MSI Mortar/Tomahawk. B550 would cost you 120-130€. It's nice, but you probably won't need most of the features. Now if you want X570 you better have a damn good reason for spending that much money.

Cooler depends mostly on how quiet you want it to be. Stock cooler would do for the 5600X, could get something nicer for 30€, midrange that would also be plenty for the 5800X for 50-60€ or if you thing it'll help with the OC (it won't) or want it really quiet you can look at the high end for 70-90€.

Beyond a certain point the mobo doesn't really do anything for the OC and it never does anything for performance directly, it's all about features and connectivity. I'd focus on getting Dual Rank RAM (or 4 SR DIMMs) instead of obsessing over overclocks because that'll matter far more.
3786
#3786
0 Frags +

Alright, I've given it a bit more thought and I'm pretty sure now that I'm going to buy the 5800X.

I've looked at the B450 options you listed, couldn't really find the Mortar consistently but the Tomahawk seems good. My only question is about the two versions I found in ATX, being Max (7C02-020R) and Max II (7C02-014R), is there a difference that justifies the slight price gap (~5-7 euros) ? I couldn't really notice one myself but I'm no expert.

For the cooler, since PBO might be interesting as you suggested, and since ideally the kind of temps I would want to keep are like a max of ~70-75°C at full load for a little bit of durability (if that's a stupid goal feel free to disagree), I've mostly been looking at the be quiet! Dark Rock 4 and Noctua DH-U14S, which I can find for 59 and 68 euros respectively. That is, two of the best single tower coolers, and midrange coolers on the global scale as you suggested. Do you have a recommendation between the two ? Or do I need a dual tower cooler like the Dark Rock Pro 4 or NH-D15 instead for that temperature goal ?

Also you mentioned "4 SR DIMMs" but I'm not entirely sure what that refers to precisely ? Is it not the classic 4-slot DDR4 DIMM that seems to be pretty standard and is to be found on the Tomahawk like on most motherboards ? Sorry about being completely ignorant on that part.

Alright, I've given it a bit more thought and I'm pretty sure now that I'm going to buy the 5800X.

I've looked at the B450 options you listed, couldn't really find the Mortar consistently but the Tomahawk seems good. My only question is about the two versions I found in ATX, being Max (7C02-020R) and Max II (7C02-014R), is there a difference that justifies the slight price gap (~5-7 euros) ? I couldn't really notice one myself but I'm no expert.

For the cooler, since PBO might be interesting as you suggested, and since ideally the kind of temps I would want to keep are like a max of ~70-75°C at full load for a little bit of durability (if that's a stupid goal feel free to disagree), I've mostly been looking at the be quiet! Dark Rock 4 and Noctua DH-U14S, which I can find for 59 and 68 euros respectively. That is, two of the best single tower coolers, and midrange coolers on the global scale as you suggested. Do you have a recommendation between the two ? Or do I need a dual tower cooler like the Dark Rock Pro 4 or NH-D15 instead for that temperature goal ?

Also you mentioned "4 SR DIMMs" but I'm not entirely sure what that refers to precisely ? Is it not the classic 4-slot DDR4 DIMM that seems to be pretty standard and is to be found on the Tomahawk like on most motherboards ? Sorry about being completely ignorant on that part.
3787
#3787
1 Frags +

I am still pretty sure that you don't really need 8 cores, but it's your money.

I hope you thought about B450 vs B550.
Max II is a bit newer so slightly higher chance of the 5800X working out of the box, kind of irrelevant though since they can both be updated without a CPU installed, which is one of the reasons why I recommend them. Also HDMI 2.1, which you obviously can't use.

I haven't checked specific temperatures, might work, you can obviously just set the fans to 100%, not sure how much voltage PBO will try in that case though, but I doubt it would heat up too much.
No idea if you'd need dual tower for your specific goals. They might be worse for RAM compatibility and two fans are usually louder than one (especially at low loads they're not that much better that lower rpm could compensate for that). Noctua might have the nicer mounting system but it's always hard to justify the NH-U14S when a dual tower Dark Rock Pro 4 only costs ~7€ more.

Nah, this is about single vs dual rank RAM. Zen likes having two ranks per memory channel which means either 4 single rank DIMMs or two dual rank DIMMs.

I am still pretty sure that you don't really need 8 cores, but it's your money.

I hope you thought about B450 vs B550.
Max II is a bit newer so slightly higher chance of the 5800X working out of the box, kind of irrelevant though since they can both be updated without a CPU installed, which is one of the reasons why I recommend them. Also HDMI 2.1, which you obviously can't use.

I haven't checked specific temperatures, might work, you can obviously just set the fans to 100%, not sure how much voltage PBO will try in that case though, but I doubt it would heat up too much.
No idea if you'd need dual tower for your specific goals. They might be worse for RAM compatibility and two fans are usually louder than one (especially at low loads they're not that much better that lower rpm could compensate for that). Noctua might have the nicer mounting system but it's always hard to justify the NH-U14S when a dual tower Dark Rock Pro 4 only costs ~7€ more.

Nah, this is about single vs dual rank RAM. Zen likes having two ranks per memory channel which means either 4 single rank DIMMs or two dual rank DIMMs.
3788
#3788
0 Frags +

Well upon looking for further info on coolers like RAM and PCIe clearance (because I'm considering adding two more sticks of DDR4-3200 someday maybe, and my two sticks are some G.Skill Ripjaws 5 CL16 with 42 mm clearance, so unless I'm wrong and don't need the exact same sticks I have to keep that in mind), case space or acoustics and thermals, I have stumbled upon many threads or articles about the 5800X running very hot even on the most high-end cooling, like 90°C in stress tests constant and >80°C in many basic scenarios (I don't really care about stress test temps obviously, since they're not necessarily realistic for my use case). However some people say it's nothing to worry about and something to be expected with this Gen of Ryzen and especially the 5800X, and argue that those temperatures are safe, while some others view these as worrying. Doubt on this matter would push me back towards the 5600X but I'm not sure what to think of this (and even the 5600X seems to not be so great in terms of temps). Do you have an opinion on those temperatures ? If the power draw remains in expected values and no shutdown is triggered because of the temperatures (it seems like pretty much nobody's reported such shutdowns indeed), do those temps even matter ? I've also read that they have to do with the architecture being unoptimized in terms of the surface being used to dissipate heat, and it having to do with the fact that the 5800X is some sort of nerfed 5950-5900X or something (which the TDPs being 105W for all 3 would confirm I guess ?). And that undervolting and improving airflow could make for good improvements like 5°C or so, along with a rumored BIOS improvement update since then to manage these too (since most threads are from November or so) ?

Otherwise I had thought about B450 vs B550 a little bit yes, but I'm not sure whether I need most features, especially Gen 4 PCIe since I've read that most SSDs that use Gen4 don't really show performance improvements that justify the price gap. Or that market is still a bit young idk. Am I wrong ?

Also on a completely different topic, how reliable is Mindfactory ? Cause they seem to have really good prices on many components (according to Geizhals) but I don't know much about german shops.

Well upon looking for further info on coolers like RAM and PCIe clearance (because I'm considering adding two more sticks of DDR4-3200 someday maybe, and my two sticks are some G.Skill Ripjaws 5 CL16 with 42 mm clearance, so unless I'm wrong and don't need the exact same sticks I have to keep that in mind), case space or acoustics and thermals, I have stumbled upon many threads or articles about the 5800X running very hot even on the most high-end cooling, like 90°C in stress tests constant and >80°C in many basic scenarios (I don't really care about stress test temps obviously, since they're not necessarily realistic for my use case). However some people say it's nothing to worry about and something to be expected with this Gen of Ryzen and especially the 5800X, and argue that those temperatures are safe, while some others view these as worrying. Doubt on this matter would push me back towards the 5600X but I'm not sure what to think of this (and even the 5600X seems to not be so great in terms of temps). Do you have an opinion on those temperatures ? If the power draw remains in expected values and no shutdown is triggered because of the temperatures (it seems like pretty much nobody's reported such shutdowns indeed), do those temps even matter ? I've also read that they have to do with the architecture being unoptimized in terms of the surface being used to dissipate heat, and it having to do with the fact that the 5800X is some sort of nerfed 5950-5900X or something (which the TDPs being 105W for all 3 would confirm I guess ?). And that undervolting and improving airflow could make for good improvements like 5°C or so, along with a rumored BIOS improvement update since then to manage these too (since most threads are from November or so) ?

Otherwise I had thought about B450 vs B550 a little bit yes, but I'm not sure whether I need most features, especially Gen 4 PCIe since I've read that most SSDs that use Gen4 don't really show performance improvements that justify the price gap. Or that market is still a bit young idk. Am I wrong ?

Also on a completely different topic, how reliable is Mindfactory ? Cause they seem to have really good prices on many components (according to Geizhals) but I don't know much about german shops.
3789
#3789
0 Frags +

You are aware that most GPUs have "target temperatures" like 83°C? Are you going to stop buying those too?

So you want to buy a CPU with a boost mechanism designed to pour on voltage as long as the temperatures are safe, which AMD considers anything below 90°C, you want to overclock it, cool it with a single tower air cooler, and not have it reach 70°C under load.
Do you see how that might be a problem?

Accept the temperatures or disable PBO, maybe even boost, and don't even think about overclocking.

What do you mean, the architecture is unoptimized in terms of surface area? If AMD wanted a larger area they could just go back to 14nm, where Intel is stuck, and produce 8 core CPUs that need 200W instead of 100W. Are those easier to cool thanks to their larger surface area? Well, not really, because 200W.

What do you mean, "some sort of nerfed 5950-5900X"? How does having the same TDP imply them being similar CPUs? Why did you think CPUs with the same architecture would be completely different? What is the 5600X in your opinion, since it got a different TDP? What are the 5800 and 5900 (non-X) with their 65W TDP? A beefed up 5600X? Because those are all the same chips. 5600X and 5800(X) is one 8 core chip and the 5900(X) and 5950X are two chips. Yes, two chips are exactly twice as large as one.
Yes, to absolutely no one's surprise having twice the cores at half the power consumption each spread across twice the area (because, you know, the cores are the same size?) is easier to cool. You can get that by simply underclocking the 5800X massively and running it at 3.775 GHz when all cores are active, just like the 5950X would, instead of the 4.450 GHz the 5600X and 5800X usually run at with all cores active.
If you overclock the 5950X to get the same clockrate as the 5800X on all cores then suddenly, magically, the power consumption doubles and it is much harder to cool.

Why do you expect a BIOS update to lower temperatures?

Well for PCIe 4.0 to matter for SSDs you'd need an SSD that saturates the bandwidth of PCIe 3.0 x4. So if you don't plan on getting an SSD capable of more than 4 GB/s the difference will probably be marginal. The USB 3.2 is more interesting. SLI support is kind of pointless since you'd need to first find an nVidia GPU that even supports SLI these days. x8 vs x4 would make a difference for Crossfire though, if you were planning on doing that.

Mindfactory is reliable.

You are aware that most GPUs have "target temperatures" like 83°C? Are you going to stop buying those too?

So you want to buy a CPU with a boost mechanism designed to pour on voltage as long as the temperatures are safe, which AMD considers anything below 90°C, you want to overclock it, cool it with a single tower air cooler, and not have it reach 70°C under load.
Do you see how that might be a problem?

Accept the temperatures or disable PBO, maybe even boost, and don't even think about overclocking.


What do you mean, the architecture is unoptimized in terms of surface area? If AMD wanted a larger area they could just go back to 14nm, where Intel is stuck, and produce 8 core CPUs that need 200W instead of 100W. Are those easier to cool thanks to their larger surface area? Well, not really, because 200W.

What do you mean, "some sort of nerfed 5950-5900X"? How does having the same TDP imply them being similar CPUs? Why did you think CPUs with the same architecture would be completely different? What is the 5600X in your opinion, since it got a different TDP? What are the 5800 and 5900 (non-X) with their 65W TDP? A beefed up 5600X? Because those are all the same chips. 5600X and 5800(X) is one 8 core chip and the 5900(X) and 5950X are two chips. Yes, two chips are exactly twice as large as one.
Yes, to absolutely no one's surprise having twice the cores at half the power consumption each spread across twice the area (because, you know, the cores are the same size?) is easier to cool. You can get that by simply underclocking the 5800X massively and running it at 3.775 GHz when all cores are active, just like the 5950X would, instead of the 4.450 GHz the 5600X and 5800X usually run at with all cores active.
If you overclock the 5950X to get the same clockrate as the 5800X on all cores then suddenly, magically, the power consumption doubles and it is much harder to cool.

Why do you expect a BIOS update to lower temperatures?

Well for PCIe 4.0 to matter for SSDs you'd need an SSD that saturates the bandwidth of PCIe 3.0 x4. So if you don't plan on getting an SSD capable of more than 4 GB/s the difference will probably be marginal. The USB 3.2 is more interesting. SLI support is kind of pointless since you'd need to first find an nVidia GPU that even supports SLI these days. x8 vs x4 would make a difference for Crossfire though, if you were planning on doing that.

Mindfactory is reliable.
3790
#3790
0 Frags +

Hi,

Currently getting frustrated with sub-100 frames while playing tf2 in certain maps, areas. (Mastercomfig Medium Low), and frame drops to 30 every minute or so while streaming. Also looking to future proof my build for current and future games.

Current:
i5 8400
GTX 1660 Super
MSI Z370-A Pro
16GB DDR4 2666MHz

Looking at upgrading CPU, RAM and Mobo:
Ryzen 5600X
MSI MAG B550 TOMAHAWK
16GB 3600MHz CL18

Any recommendations or changes? Will probably be upgrading GPU in the next couple years too.

edit: being told to consider an i5 9600k to avoid buying a new mobo, thoughts?

Hi,

Currently getting frustrated with sub-100 frames while playing tf2 in certain maps, areas. (Mastercomfig Medium Low), and frame drops to 30 every minute or so while streaming. Also looking to future proof my build for current and future games.

Current:
i5 8400
GTX 1660 Super
MSI Z370-A Pro
16GB DDR4 2666MHz

Looking at upgrading CPU, RAM and Mobo:
Ryzen 5600X
MSI MAG B550 TOMAHAWK
16GB 3600MHz CL18

Any recommendations or changes? Will probably be upgrading GPU in the next couple years too.

edit: being told to consider an i5 9600k to avoid buying a new mobo, thoughts?
3791
#3791
0 Frags +

Future proofing has never really been a thing.

Yes, the list looks good. Could get CL16 RAM if you want or a B450 mobo if you don't care about USB 3.2, but that's it really.

Nothing wrong with that, but you've got a Z370 mobo so you can get a used Coffee Lake K CPU and a cooler and lightly overclock it a bit. It wouldn't be as fast as a 5600X but much, much cheaper. Even a new 9600K(F) costs less than half what a 5600X does, so it's worth considering. For TF2 even a 9350KF would do. An 8350K would work, but then you're really relying on the overclock because it's stock clockrate is barely higher than the 8400's boost. If you really think you'll need 8 cores or more in the future of for streaming you can look at a 9700K(F)

You should also at least try GPU encoding (NVENC), since your GPU does have really good hardware encoding, before deciding that you absolutely need 8+ cores.

Even if you keep the mobo new RAM is worth considering because TF2 likes fast RAM. I mean it's not going to make it faster than a 5600X but if it cuts the difference from let's say 10% to 5% for half the price difference between an OC'd 9600KF + cooler and a new 5600X + mobo it could make sense, even if it seems wasteful.

Future proofing has never really been a thing.

Yes, the list looks good. Could get CL16 RAM if you want or a B450 mobo if you don't care about USB 3.2, but that's it really.

Nothing wrong with that, but you've got a Z370 mobo so you can get a used Coffee Lake K CPU and a cooler and lightly overclock it a bit. It wouldn't be as fast as a 5600X but much, much cheaper. Even a new 9600K(F) costs less than half what a 5600X does, so it's worth considering. For TF2 even a 9350KF would do. An 8350K would work, but then you're really relying on the overclock because it's stock clockrate is barely higher than the 8400's boost. If you really think you'll need 8 cores or more in the future of for streaming you can look at a 9700K(F)

You should also at least try GPU encoding (NVENC), since your GPU does have really good hardware encoding, before deciding that you absolutely need 8+ cores.

Even if you keep the mobo new RAM is worth considering because TF2 likes fast RAM. I mean it's not going to make it faster than a 5600X but if it cuts the difference from let's say 10% to 5% for half the price difference between an OC'd 9600KF + cooler and a new 5600X + mobo it could make sense, even if it seems wasteful.
3792
#3792
0 Frags +

Thanks for the response! Only reason I've been looking at B550's is that they seem more ready for the Ryzen 5 Series, but I could just be talking out of my ass as I'm not anything close to an expert.

SetsulYou should also at least try GPU encoding (NVENC), since your GPU does have really good hardware encoding, before deciding that you absolutely need 8+ cores.

I've been using the NVENC encoding, and still experiencing frame spikes, although I've got two options for NVENC encoder and I've only tested the new one so far and can't find a lot online about the differences between the two NVENC encoders.

That does help though, and it'll give me some things to think about. Not looking to buy for another month or so. Cheers

edit: forgot to add, I have 500w power supply - something I am keeping in mind when selecting CPU

Thanks for the response! Only reason I've been looking at B550's is that they seem more ready for the Ryzen 5 Series, but I could just be talking out of my ass as I'm not anything close to an expert.
[quote=Setsul]
You should also at least try GPU encoding (NVENC), since your GPU does have really good hardware encoding, before deciding that you absolutely need 8+ cores.
[/quote]
I've been using the NVENC encoding, and still experiencing frame spikes, although I've got two options for NVENC encoder and I've only tested the new one so far and can't find a lot online about the differences between the two NVENC encoders.

That does help though, and it'll give me some things to think about. Not looking to buy for another month or so. Cheers

edit: forgot to add, I have 500w power supply - something I am keeping in mind when selecting CPU
3793
#3793
1 Frags +

Yeah, B450s might need a BIOS update so to make sure you'd be limited to those that can be updated without a CPU installed.

Well if you're already using GPU encoding then you don't need more cores for "future proofing". There's no Zen3 quadcore available yet so obviously the 5600X is the cheapest you can get, but if you're not doing anything that needs/benefits from 6 cores the 9350KF is a viable alternative to the 9600K(F). I'd expect you to be more limited by your GPU than even your CPU in current games even as it is and definitely with a 9350KF. Between getting a 9600K(F) now and hoping it'll still be relevant when you replace the GPU and saving the money and getting a 9350KF, then upgrading everything including the CPU when the time comes I'd favour the latter.

1660S is a 125W GPU, if it's an actual 500W PSU, not chinese "300W but we put a 500W label on it because everyone buys PSUs with way more wattage than they need anyway" bait and switch, then you're not limited in terms of CPU choice at all.

Yeah, B450s might need a BIOS update so to make sure you'd be limited to those that can be updated without a CPU installed.

Well if you're already using GPU encoding then you don't need more cores for "future proofing". There's no Zen3 quadcore available yet so obviously the 5600X is the cheapest you can get, but if you're not doing anything that needs/benefits from 6 cores the 9350KF is a viable alternative to the 9600K(F). I'd expect you to be more limited by your GPU than even your CPU in current games even as it is and definitely with a 9350KF. Between getting a 9600K(F) now and hoping it'll still be relevant when you replace the GPU and saving the money and getting a 9350KF, then upgrading everything including the CPU when the time comes I'd favour the latter.

1660S is a 125W GPU, if it's an actual 500W PSU, not chinese "300W but we put a 500W label on it because everyone buys PSUs with way more wattage than they need anyway" bait and switch, then you're not limited in terms of CPU choice at all.
3794
#3794
0 Frags +

Thank you, I do appreciate this all. Take care!

Thank you, I do appreciate this all. Take care!
3795
#3795
0 Frags +
bat_Currently getting frustrated with sub-100 frames while playing tf2 in certain maps, areas. (Mastercomfig Medium Low), and frame drops to 30 every minute or so while streaming. Also looking to future proof my build for current and future games.

Current:
i5 8400
GTX 1660 Super
MSI Z370-A Pro
16GB DDR4 2666MHz

is your memory single or dual channel? single or dual rank? what timings? what brand and model even is it?
you can overclock and or reduce timings on your memory for free considering you have already got a z370 getting performance boost in tf2

do you play in 1440p or something, 8400 is more than capable to handle tf2 at 144fps even with generic oem 2666 ram at 1080p

is certain maps and or areas youre talking about are 32 man versus saxton hale? please be more specific, casual specifically never was and still isnt 240hz ready in this game

bat_edit: being told to consider an i5 9600k to avoid buying a new mobo, thoughts?

yes this is the cheapest conventional way of getting the most out of your motherboard, especially considering you can(and should) still be able to sell 8400 for a decent pocket change

Setsul For TF2 even a 9350KF would do. An 8350K would work, but then you're really relying on the overclock because it's stock clockrate is barely higher than the 8400's boost. If you really think you'll need 8 cores or more in the future of for streaming you can look at a 9700K(F)

9700k(f) while being more "futureproof" costing 50% more seems like a reasonable albeit more expensive option, but 8350k/9350k(f) are incredibly tough to reccomend to someone who already owns a 6 core, especially when the price difference between a 9600k(f) and the 4-core options(that do not even have hyperthreading mind you) is 20$ with almost identical power draw
i wouldnt ever consider dropping 80USD on a cooler for a 4 core chip

Setsul i hope you can see where im getting from, those 4 cores kind of dont even "todayproof" in a sense

bat_edit: forgot to add, I have 500w power supply - something I am keeping in mind when selecting CPU

could you kindly look up the exact model, Setsul has a point, this could be a chinese knock off brand

[quote=bat_]Currently getting frustrated with sub-100 frames while playing tf2 in certain maps, areas. (Mastercomfig Medium Low), and frame drops to 30 every minute or so while streaming. Also looking to future proof my build for current and future games.

Current:
i5 8400
GTX 1660 Super
MSI Z370-A Pro
16GB DDR4 2666MHz[/quote]

is your memory single or dual channel? single or dual rank? what timings? what brand and model even is it?
you can overclock and or reduce timings on your memory for free considering you have already got a z370 getting performance boost in tf2


do you play in 1440p or something, 8400 is more than capable to handle tf2 at 144fps even with generic oem 2666 ram at 1080p

is certain maps and or areas youre talking about are 32 man versus saxton hale? please be more specific, casual specifically never was and still isnt 240hz ready in this game

[quote=bat_]edit: being told to consider an i5 9600k to avoid buying a new mobo, thoughts?[/quote]
yes this is the cheapest conventional way of getting the most out of your motherboard, especially considering you can(and should) still be able to sell 8400 for a decent pocket change

[quote=Setsul] For TF2 even a 9350KF would do. An 8350K would work, but then you're really relying on the overclock because it's stock clockrate is barely higher than the 8400's boost. If you really think you'll need 8 cores or more in the future of for streaming you can look at a 9700K(F)[/quote]

9700k(f) while being more "futureproof" costing 50% more seems like a reasonable albeit more expensive option, but 8350k/9350k(f) are incredibly tough to reccomend to someone who already owns a 6 core, especially when the price difference between a 9600k(f) and the 4-core options(that do not even have hyperthreading mind you) is 20$ with almost identical power draw
i wouldnt ever consider dropping 80USD on a cooler for a [b]4 core chip[/b]

Setsul i hope you can see where im getting from, those 4 cores kind of dont even "todayproof" in a sense

[quote=bat_]edit: forgot to add, I have 500w power supply - something I am keeping in mind when selecting CPU[/quote]
could you kindly look up the exact model, Setsul has a point, this could be a chinese knock off brand
3796
#3796
0 Frags +
jnki9700k(f) while being more "futureproof" costing 50% more seems like a reasonable albeit more expensive option, but 8350k/9350k(f) are incredibly tough to reccomend to someone who already owns a 6 core, especially when the price difference between a 9600k(f) and the 4-core options(that do not even have hyperthreading mind you) is 20$ with almost identical power draw
i wouldnt ever consider dropping 80USD on a cooler for a 4 core chip

Setsul i hope you can see where im getting from, those 4 cores kind of dont even "todayproof" in a sense

Nah, you're falling for a classic trap there.
First of all the 9350KF and 9600KF having almost the same TDP is so utterly meaningless I won't even bother to say more than that.

Secondly, a 9350KF would very much be "todayproof" if TF2 is all he'll use it for. It is a big if but like I said, there's a trap. Why do we recommend a 9600KF and not a 9900KF? Not just because it is a lot more expensive, but mostly because the extra cores/threads do nothing for TF2 so it's a tiny benefit in performance through clockrate for an exorbitant increase in price. And if he does nothing that benefits from more than 4 cores the exact same applies to the 9350KF vs 9600KF.
I mean why even bring up the TDP? When looking at a CPU that does everything you want it to do better than your current one, do you even care about the TDP as long as it's not outrageous? They've both got a higher TDP than the 8400.
The 9600KF doesn't have Hyperthreading either and I'm really not seeing any use case here where a 6c/6t or 4c/8t would be perfect while a 4c/4t would be unusable.
Also while in my opinion the shops thinking that the price difference between the 9600K(F) and 9350KF should be ~25$ (197-200$ vs 174$) instead of the 99$ Intel thinks it should be, is more of a point in favour of the 9350KF than against it, since that's about in line with my assessment of their relative value, it is also utterly irrelevant here.
He'll either buy a used one or a new one from a British shop, where the cheapest 9600K(F)s in stock go for 180£ and the cheapest 9350KF in stock for 140£.
I can see two extra cores you're never going to use for 11-15% more money being tempting, but for almost 30%?

[quote=jnki]
9700k(f) while being more "futureproof" costing 50% more seems like a reasonable albeit more expensive option, but 8350k/9350k(f) are incredibly tough to reccomend to someone who already owns a 6 core, especially when the price difference between a 9600k(f) and the 4-core options(that do not even have hyperthreading mind you) is 20$ with almost identical power draw
i wouldnt ever consider dropping 80USD on a cooler for a [b]4 core chip[/b]

Setsul i hope you can see where im getting from, those 4 cores kind of dont even "todayproof" in a sense[/quote]
Nah, you're falling for a classic trap there.
First of all the 9350KF and 9600KF having almost the same TDP is so utterly meaningless I won't even bother to say more than that.

Secondly, a 9350KF would very much be "todayproof" if TF2 is all he'll use it for. It is a big if but like I said, there's a trap. Why do we recommend a 9600KF and not a 9900KF? Not just because it is a lot more expensive, but mostly because the extra cores/threads do nothing for TF2 so it's a tiny benefit in performance through clockrate for an exorbitant increase in price. And if he does nothing that benefits from more than 4 cores the exact same applies to the 9350KF vs 9600KF.
I mean why even bring up the TDP? When looking at a CPU that does everything you want it to do better than your current one, do you even care about the TDP as long as it's not outrageous? They've both got a higher TDP than the 8400.
The 9600KF doesn't have Hyperthreading either and I'm really not seeing any use case here where a 6c/6t or 4c/8t would be perfect while a 4c/4t would be unusable.
Also while in my opinion the shops thinking that the price difference between the 9600K(F) and 9350KF should be ~25$ (197-200$ vs 174$) instead of the 99$ Intel thinks it should be, is more of a point in favour of the 9350KF than against it, since that's about in line with my assessment of their relative value, it is also utterly irrelevant here.
He'll either buy a used one or a new one from a British shop, where the cheapest 9600K(F)s in stock go for 180£ and the cheapest 9350KF in stock for 140£.
I can see two extra cores you're never going to use for 11-15% more money being tempting, but for almost 30%?
3797
#3797
0 Frags +
Setsuljnki9700k(f) while being more "futureproof" costing 50% more seems like a reasonable albeit more expensive option, but 8350k/9350k(f) are incredibly tough to reccomend to someone who already owns a 6 core, especially when the price difference between a 9600k(f) and the 4-core options(that do not even have hyperthreading mind you) is 20$ with almost identical power draw
i wouldnt ever consider dropping 80USD on a cooler for a 4 core chip

Setsul i hope you can see where im getting from, those 4 cores kind of dont even "todayproof" in a sense
Nah, you're falling for a classic trap there.
First of all the 9350KF and 9600KF having almost the same TDP is so utterly meaningless I won't even bother to say more than that.

Secondly, a 9350KF would very much be "todayproof" if TF2 is all he'll use it for. It is a big if but like I said, there's a trap. Why do we recommend a 9600KF and not a 9900KF? Not just because it is a lot more expensive, but mostly because the extra cores/threads do nothing for TF2 so it's a tiny benefit in performance through clockrate for an exorbitant increase in price. And if he does nothing that benefits from more than 4 cores the exact same applies to the 9350KF vs 9600KF.
I mean why even bring up the TDP? When looking at a CPU that does everything you want it to do better than your current one, do you even care about the TDP as long as it's not outrageous? They've both got a higher TDP than the 8400.
The 9600KF doesn't have Hyperthreading either and I'm really not seeing any use case here where a 6c/6t or 4c/8t would be perfect while a 4c/4t would be unusable.
Also while in my opinion the shops thinking that the price difference between the 9600K(F) and 9350KF should be ~25$ (197-200$ vs 174$) instead of the 99$ Intel thinks it should be, is more of a point in favour of the 9350KF than against it, since that's about in line with my assessment of their relative value, it is also utterly irrelevant here.
He'll either buy a used one or a new one from a British shop, where the cheapest 9600K(F)s in stock go for 180£ and the cheapest 9350KF in stock for 140£.
I can see two extra cores you're never going to use for 11-15% more money being tempting, but for almost 30%?

idle tdp? yes; under load? anywhere close to 5ghz its going to be just shy of 200w and frankly i think people arent buying unlocked intel cpus to run it at turbo boost clocks

now i know he isnt going to play cinebench or blender, but in newer games 4 cores are potentially going to see 80%+ cpu usage and if that is the case have fun cooling 200w with a mediocre cooler

speaking of newer games

bat_Also looking to future proof my build for current and future games.

i dont think i misunderstood it, he intends to use the build for other games too

now regarding the price delta, i was not aware of a gap this large between the 2 cpus(at least not in the UK), if that is the case then my bad, but otherwise at literal 10% price difference the 6 core part is a no brainer

and while neither of the options have hyper threading, the performance gap between 4 and 6 pure cores in multithreaded games and applications isnt going to be mitigated by an overclock at least not within reasonable measures

if achieving 6 core like performance with a 4 core part requires you a 5ghz overclock, pushing VRM on this not exactly incredible in the power delivery department motherboard, and an AIO/dark rock pro 4 level cooler, why not just get the incrementally more expensive 9600k/9700k and have it run on turbo boost clocks with like an i dont know, 212 evo

even a 9900kf on its own is a cheaper and more reasonable upgrade than a 5600x(new motherboard, new ram and not just any ram) judging by the pcpartpicker UK prices, with a 9700k(f) and a decent cooler being just about the price of a 9900kf

if his ultimate goal is just tf2 exclusive performance than feel free to disregard any of this shit, but from my point of view: he is still going to pay money for a stepdown in cpu cores, a need in better cpu cooling solution and a necessity to upgrade his cpu again down the line if even 6 cores arent going to cut it down the line let alone 4

[quote=Setsul][quote=jnki]
9700k(f) while being more "futureproof" costing 50% more seems like a reasonable albeit more expensive option, but 8350k/9350k(f) are incredibly tough to reccomend to someone who already owns a 6 core, especially when the price difference between a 9600k(f) and the 4-core options(that do not even have hyperthreading mind you) is 20$ with almost identical power draw
i wouldnt ever consider dropping 80USD on a cooler for a [b]4 core chip[/b]

Setsul i hope you can see where im getting from, those 4 cores kind of dont even "todayproof" in a sense[/quote]
Nah, you're falling for a classic trap there.
First of all the 9350KF and 9600KF having almost the same TDP is so utterly meaningless I won't even bother to say more than that.

Secondly, a 9350KF would very much be "todayproof" if TF2 is all he'll use it for. It is a big if but like I said, there's a trap. Why do we recommend a 9600KF and not a 9900KF? Not just because it is a lot more expensive, but mostly because the extra cores/threads do nothing for TF2 so it's a tiny benefit in performance through clockrate for an exorbitant increase in price. And if he does nothing that benefits from more than 4 cores the exact same applies to the 9350KF vs 9600KF.
I mean why even bring up the TDP? When looking at a CPU that does everything you want it to do better than your current one, do you even care about the TDP as long as it's not outrageous? They've both got a higher TDP than the 8400.
The 9600KF doesn't have Hyperthreading either and I'm really not seeing any use case here where a 6c/6t or 4c/8t would be perfect while a 4c/4t would be unusable.
Also while in my opinion the shops thinking that the price difference between the 9600K(F) and 9350KF should be ~25$ (197-200$ vs 174$) instead of the 99$ Intel thinks it should be, is more of a point in favour of the 9350KF than against it, since that's about in line with my assessment of their relative value, it is also utterly irrelevant here.
He'll either buy a used one or a new one from a British shop, where the cheapest 9600K(F)s in stock go for 180£ and the cheapest 9350KF in stock for 140£.
I can see two extra cores you're never going to use for 11-15% more money being tempting, but for almost 30%?[/quote]
idle tdp? yes; under load? anywhere close to 5ghz its going to be just shy of 200w and frankly i think people arent buying unlocked intel cpus to run it at turbo boost clocks

now i know he isnt going to play cinebench or blender, but in newer games 4 cores are potentially going to see 80%+ cpu usage and if that is the case have fun cooling 200w with a mediocre cooler

speaking of newer games
[quote=bat_]Also looking to future proof my build for current and future games.[/quote]
i dont think i misunderstood it, he intends to use the build for other games too

now regarding the price delta, i was not aware of a gap this large between the 2 cpus(at least not in the UK), if that is the case then my bad, but otherwise at literal 10% price difference the 6 core part is a no brainer

and while neither of the options have hyper threading, the performance gap between 4 and 6 pure cores in multithreaded games and applications isnt going to be mitigated by an overclock at least not within reasonable measures

if achieving 6 core like performance with a 4 core part requires you a 5ghz overclock, pushing VRM on this not exactly incredible in the power delivery department motherboard, and an AIO/dark rock pro 4 level cooler, why not just get the incrementally more expensive 9600k/9700k and have it run on turbo boost clocks with like an i dont know, 212 evo

even a 9900kf on its own is a cheaper and more reasonable upgrade than a 5600x(new motherboard, new ram and not just any ram) judging by the pcpartpicker UK prices, with a 9700k(f) and a decent cooler being just about the price of a 9900kf

if his ultimate goal is just tf2 exclusive performance than feel free to disregard any of this shit, but from my point of view: he is still going to pay money for a stepdown in cpu cores, a need in better cpu cooling solution and a necessity to upgrade his cpu again down the line if even 6 cores arent going to cut it down the line let alone 4
3798
#3798
0 Frags +
SetsulYou are aware that most GPUs have "target temperatures" like 83°C? Are you going to stop buying those too?

So you want to buy a CPU with a boost mechanism designed to pour on voltage as long as the temperatures are safe, which AMD considers anything below 90°C, you want to overclock it, cool it with a single tower air cooler, and not have it reach 70°C under load.
Do you see how that might be a problem?

Accept the temperatures or disable PBO, maybe even boost, and don't even think about overclocking.

My question was solely meant to clarify whether or not I should be worried about such temperatures being reached. Obviously if those are the intended temperatures like on GPUs for which I am aware that there are such "target temperatures" indeed and AMD deem them perfectly normal and safe, I am willing to accept them. I had already heard about Ryzen chips running quite hot in general so I wasn't scared or anything, just asking to make sure doesn't hurt for a 450 euros CPU upgrade. I think I've said a couple times that I'm not really intending to overclock the 5800X anyway, PBO should be my go-to probably, with Noctua NH-U12S or be quiet! Dark Rock 4. Unless you think I should secure a double tower for PBO ? Again it's not so much about the temperatures per se, I'm not going to freak out if I see 80°C in Hardware Monitor, but I am if I get a shutdown. I also need to clarify whether Ryzen Master or BIOS is best to optimize boosts, voltage and the resulting temperatures. Do you know more about this ?

SetsulWhat do you mean, the architecture is unoptimized in terms of surface area? If AMD wanted a larger area they could just go back to 14nm, where Intel is stuck, and produce 8 core CPUs that need 200W instead of 100W. Are those easier to cool thanks to their larger surface area? Well, not really, because 200W.

What do you mean, "some sort of nerfed 5950-5900X"? How does having the same TDP imply them being similar CPUs? Why did you think CPUs with the same architecture would be completely different? What is the 5600X in your opinion, since it got a different TDP? What are the 5800 and 5900 (non-X) with their 65W TDP? A beefed up 5600X? Because those are all the same chips. 5600X and 5800(X) is one 8 core chip and the 5900(X) and 5950X are two chips. Yes, two chips are exactly twice as large as one.
Yes, to absolutely no one's surprise having twice the cores at half the power consumption each spread across twice the area (because, you know, the cores are the same size?) is easier to cool. You can get that by simply underclocking the 5800X massively and running it at 3.775 GHz when all cores are active, just like the 5950X would, instead of the 4.450 GHz the 5600X and 5800X usually run at with all cores active.
If you overclock the 5950X to get the same clockrate as the 5800X on all cores then suddenly, magically, the power consumption doubles and it is much harder to cool.

Why do you expect a BIOS update to lower temperatures?

I must admit I completely fucked up on clarifying whatever I meant with that, not even sure now what it was, guess I mostly wanted to show that I'm not asking here stupidly before having done any personal research and taking your free time for granted. Thanks for the explanation.

SetsulWell for PCIe 4.0 to matter for SSDs you'd need an SSD that saturates the bandwidth of PCIe 3.0 x4. So if you don't plan on getting an SSD capable of more than 4 GB/s the difference will probably be marginal. The USB 3.2 is more interesting. SLI support is kind of pointless since you'd need to first find an nVidia GPU that even supports SLI these days. x8 vs x4 would make a difference for Crossfire though, if you were planning on doing that.

I'm pretty sure I'm getting the Mushkin Pilot-E 500 which maxes out at 3,5 GB/s so I probably won't benefit from it in that department. No GPU upgrade is on my mind for the next 1 or 2 years, let alone two GPU upgrades so I don't think I'm interested in securing potential for Crossfire or SLI. As for the USB 3.2, I guess I would care for when I do backups, but since I only do them once every couple of weeks (maybe a bit more often if I've been working a lot), unless the gain in time is massive, I probably don't mind sticking with PCIe 3.0. Am I missing any potential impact from 3.2 outside of that ? I can't think of any in gaming at least.

SetsulMindfactory is reliable.

Thanks !

[quote=Setsul]You are aware that most GPUs have "target temperatures" like 83°C? Are you going to stop buying those too?

So you want to buy a CPU with a boost mechanism designed to pour on voltage as long as the temperatures are safe, which AMD considers anything below 90°C, you want to overclock it, cool it with a single tower air cooler, and not have it reach 70°C under load.
Do you see how that might be a problem?

Accept the temperatures or disable PBO, maybe even boost, and don't even think about overclocking.[/quote]

My question was solely meant to clarify whether or not I should be worried about such temperatures being reached. Obviously if those are the intended temperatures like on GPUs for which I am aware that there are such "target temperatures" indeed and AMD deem them perfectly normal and safe, I am willing to accept them. I had already heard about Ryzen chips running quite hot in general so I wasn't scared or anything, just asking to make sure doesn't hurt for a 450 euros CPU upgrade. I think I've said a couple times that I'm not really intending to overclock the 5800X anyway, PBO should be my go-to probably, with Noctua NH-U12S or be quiet! Dark Rock 4. Unless you think I should secure a double tower for PBO ? Again it's not so much about the temperatures per se, I'm not going to freak out if I see 80°C in Hardware Monitor, but I am if I get a shutdown. I also need to clarify whether Ryzen Master or BIOS is best to optimize boosts, voltage and the resulting temperatures. Do you know more about this ?

[quote=Setsul]What do you mean, the architecture is unoptimized in terms of surface area? If AMD wanted a larger area they could just go back to 14nm, where Intel is stuck, and produce 8 core CPUs that need 200W instead of 100W. Are those easier to cool thanks to their larger surface area? Well, not really, because 200W.

What do you mean, "some sort of nerfed 5950-5900X"? How does having the same TDP imply them being similar CPUs? Why did you think CPUs with the same architecture would be completely different? What is the 5600X in your opinion, since it got a different TDP? What are the 5800 and 5900 (non-X) with their 65W TDP? A beefed up 5600X? Because those are all the same chips. 5600X and 5800(X) is one 8 core chip and the 5900(X) and 5950X are two chips. Yes, two chips are exactly twice as large as one.
Yes, to absolutely no one's surprise having twice the cores at half the power consumption each spread across twice the area (because, you know, the cores are the same size?) is easier to cool. You can get that by simply underclocking the 5800X massively and running it at 3.775 GHz when all cores are active, just like the 5950X would, instead of the 4.450 GHz the 5600X and 5800X usually run at with all cores active.
If you overclock the 5950X to get the same clockrate as the 5800X on all cores then suddenly, magically, the power consumption doubles and it is much harder to cool.

Why do you expect a BIOS update to lower temperatures?[/quote]

I must admit I completely fucked up on clarifying whatever I meant with that, not even sure now what it was, guess I mostly wanted to show that I'm not asking here stupidly before having done any personal research and taking your free time for granted. Thanks for the explanation.


[quote=Setsul]Well for PCIe 4.0 to matter for SSDs you'd need an SSD that saturates the bandwidth of PCIe 3.0 x4. So if you don't plan on getting an SSD capable of more than 4 GB/s the difference will probably be marginal. The USB 3.2 is more interesting. SLI support is kind of pointless since you'd need to first find an nVidia GPU that even supports SLI these days. x8 vs x4 would make a difference for Crossfire though, if you were planning on doing that.[/quote]

I'm pretty sure I'm getting the Mushkin Pilot-E 500 which maxes out at 3,5 GB/s so I probably won't benefit from it in that department. No GPU upgrade is on my mind for the next 1 or 2 years, let alone two GPU upgrades so I don't think I'm interested in securing potential for Crossfire or SLI. As for the USB 3.2, I guess I would care for when I do backups, but since I only do them once every couple of weeks (maybe a bit more often if I've been working a lot), unless the gain in time is massive, I probably don't mind sticking with PCIe 3.0. Am I missing any potential impact from 3.2 outside of that ? I can't think of any in gaming at least.

[quote=Setsul]Mindfactory is reliable.[/quote]

Thanks !
3799
#3799
0 Frags +
jnkiis your memory single or dual channel? single or dual rank? what timings? what brand and model even is it?
you can overclock and or reduce timings on your memory for free considering you have already got a z370 getting performance boost in tf2

Dual Channel, HyperX FURY Black 16GB 2666MHz CL16.

jnkido you play in 1440p or something, 8400 is more than capable to handle tf2 at 144fps even with generic oem 2666 ram at 1080p
is certain maps and or areas youre talking about are 32 man versus saxton hale? please be more specific, casual specifically never was and still isnt 240hz ready in this game

1080p 144hz, benchmarking gets me about 170fps with no other programs running but that was using mastercom's benchmark demo. Mostly noticing the issues when playing hl, namely in vigil this week its been pretty normal to get 100 fps, especially while trying to stream.

jnkibat_edit: being told to consider an i5 9600k to avoid buying a new mobo, thoughts?yes this is the cheapest conventional way of getting the most out of your motherboard, especially considering you can(and should) still be able to sell 8400 for a decent pocket change

in the grand scheme of things cost isn't too much of a swaying factor, so i'm not necessarily looking for the cheapest option and if it comes to it am happy/excited to do a complete amd overhaul if it'll do more overall.

jnkibat_edit: forgot to add, I have 500w power supply - something I am keeping in mind when selecting CPUcould you kindly look up the exact model, Setsul has a point, this could be a chinese knock off brand

[/quote]

Yeah, apologies. It's 550W Corsair CS550M, Hybrid Modular, 80PLUS GOLD, 1x120mm, ATX v2.92.

jnkii dont think i misunderstood it, he intends to use the build for other games too

correct lol, im not just a tf2 player so don't wanna get something that will only help tf2, and if spending £550 now for a new amd cpu, mobo and fast ram means im not spending any money in the next five years (apart from on a gpu) then that is good with me. don't really want to get a 9600k if i'm changing it in 2 years anyway, and form some searching it isn't too different from my 8400.

[quote=jnki]
is your memory single or dual channel? single or dual rank? what timings? what brand and model even is it?
you can overclock and or reduce timings on your memory for free considering you have already got a z370 getting performance boost in tf2
[/quote]
Dual Channel, HyperX FURY Black 16GB 2666MHz CL16.

[quote=jnki]
do you play in 1440p or something, 8400 is more than capable to handle tf2 at 144fps even with generic oem 2666 ram at 1080p
is certain maps and or areas youre talking about are 32 man versus saxton hale? please be more specific, casual specifically never was and still isnt 240hz ready in this game
[/quote]
1080p 144hz, benchmarking gets me about 170fps with no other programs running but that was using mastercom's benchmark demo. Mostly noticing the issues when playing hl, namely in vigil this week its been pretty normal to get 100 fps, especially while trying to stream.

[quote=jnki]
[quote=bat_]edit: being told to consider an i5 9600k to avoid buying a new mobo, thoughts?[/quote]
yes this is the cheapest conventional way of getting the most out of your motherboard, especially considering you can(and should) still be able to sell 8400 for a decent pocket change
[/quote]
in the grand scheme of things cost isn't too much of a swaying factor, so i'm not necessarily looking for the cheapest option and if it comes to it am happy/excited to do a complete amd overhaul if it'll do more overall.

[quote=jnki]
[quote=bat_]edit: forgot to add, I have 500w power supply - something I am keeping in mind when selecting CPU[/quote]
could you kindly look up the exact model, Setsul has a point, this could be a chinese knock off brand[/quote]
[/quote]

Yeah, apologies. It's 550W Corsair CS550M, Hybrid Modular, 80PLUS GOLD, 1x120mm, ATX v2.92.

[quote=jnki]i dont think i misunderstood it, he intends to use the build for other games too[/quote]
correct lol, im not just a tf2 player so don't wanna get something that will only help tf2, and if spending £550 now for a new amd cpu, mobo and fast ram means im not spending any money in the next five years (apart from on a gpu) then that is good with me. don't really want to get a 9600k if i'm changing it in 2 years anyway, and form some searching it isn't too different from my 8400.
3800
#3800
2 Frags +

#3809

jnkiidle tdp? yes; under load? anywhere close to 5ghz its going to be just shy of 200w and frankly i think people arent buying unlocked intel cpus to run it at turbo boost clocks

now i know he isnt going to play cinebench or blender, but in newer games 4 cores are potentially going to see 80%+ cpu usage and if that is the case have fun cooling 200w with a mediocre cooler
jnki[...]difference between a 9600k(f) and the 4-core options(that do not even have hyperthreading mind you) is 20$ with almost identical power draw

I'm sorry, I'm not sure what you're trying to tell me.
1. There is no such thing as "idle TDP". TDP is TDP and always under load and always a lie.
2. You're saying that it's going to use 200W anywhere near 5GHz?
3. You're saying a 9600K will consume almost the same power?

Yeah, I'm having some trouble believing that a 9350KF would need almost twice the power of a 8350K (which is literally the same chip) but a 9600K is magically 50% more efficient.
https://www.gamersnexus.net/images/media/2017/CPUs/i3-8350k/i3-8350k-power-prime.png

jnkiif achieving 6 core like performance with a 4 core part requires you a 5ghz overclock, pushing VRM on this not exactly incredible in the power delivery department motherboard, and an AIO/dark rock pro 4 level cooler, why not just get the incrementally more expensive 9600k/9700k and have it run on turbo boost clocks with like an i dont know, 212 evo

What are you even arguing for at this point? Buying a 212 Evo because it's overpriced and not worth buying in europe and overrated everywhere else? A 4 core at 5 GHz beating a 4.3 GHz 6 core in multithreaded workloads?

jnkiif his ultimate goal is just tf2 exclusive performance than feel free to disregard any of this shit, but from my point of view: he is still going to pay money for a stepdown in cpu cores, a need in better cpu cooling solution and a necessity to upgrade his cpu again down the line if even 6 cores arent going to cut it down the line let alone 4

If only I wrote "For TF2" before that. Oh wait, I did.

SetsulFor TF2 even a 9350KF would do.

#3810
Yeah, there'll be no shutdowns, don't worry about that.
At the 150W or so you'll most likely be pulling with a 5800X there shouldn't be much of a difference between single and dual tower.
8700K@4.8GHz should be similar power consumption, so for reference:
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/noctua-nh-u12a/6.html
Dark Rock Pro 4, NH-D15 and NH-U12S are all in there. Also the NH-12A, single tower with two fans, just for fun.

Realistically 200W and beyond is where dual towers really matter.

Of course testing every core individually and manually setting offsets would be the best, while just letting PBO throw voltage and power at the problem is the lazy approach, but realistically the best use of your time should be PBO2 + Curve Optimization. Which is really just standard boost with higher power/voltage limit and some undervolting applied so it doesn't start needlessly choking on the power limit when multiple cores start boosting to high-ish frequencies. There's should be guides out there for this.

My rants sound a lot angrier then I really am, otherwise I wouldn't keep doing this.

Yeah, USB is just USB. Safe to go for B450 then.

#3809
[quote=jnki]
idle tdp? yes; under load? anywhere close to 5ghz its going to be just shy of 200w and frankly i think people arent buying unlocked intel cpus to run it at turbo boost clocks

now i know he isnt going to play cinebench or blender, but in newer games 4 cores are potentially going to see 80%+ cpu usage and if that is the case have fun cooling 200w with a mediocre cooler
[/quote]
[quote=jnki][...]difference between a 9600k(f) and the 4-core options(that do not even have hyperthreading mind you) is 20$ with almost identical power draw
[/quote]
I'm sorry, I'm not sure what you're trying to tell me.
1. There is no such thing as "idle TDP". TDP is TDP and always under load and always a lie.
2. You're saying that it's going to use 200W anywhere near 5GHz?
3. You're saying a 9600K will consume almost the same power?

Yeah, I'm having some trouble believing that a 9350KF would need almost twice the power of a 8350K (which is literally the same chip) but a 9600K is magically 50% more efficient.
https://www.gamersnexus.net/images/media/2017/CPUs/i3-8350k/i3-8350k-power-prime.png
[quote=jnki]
if achieving 6 core like performance with a 4 core part requires you a 5ghz overclock, pushing VRM on this not exactly incredible in the power delivery department motherboard, and an AIO/dark rock pro 4 level cooler, why not just get the incrementally more expensive 9600k/9700k and have it run on turbo boost clocks with like an i dont know, 212 evo
[/quote]
What are you even arguing for at this point? Buying a 212 Evo because it's overpriced and not worth buying in europe and overrated everywhere else? A 4 core at 5 GHz beating a 4.3 GHz 6 core in multithreaded workloads?
[quote=jnki]
if his ultimate goal is just tf2 exclusive performance than feel free to disregard any of this shit, but from my point of view: he is still going to pay money for a stepdown in cpu cores, a need in better cpu cooling solution and a necessity to upgrade his cpu again down the line if even 6 cores arent going to cut it down the line let alone 4[/quote]
If only I wrote "For TF2" before that. Oh wait, I did.
[quote=Setsul]For TF2 even a 9350KF would do.[/quote]

#3810
Yeah, there'll be no shutdowns, don't worry about that.
At the 150W or so you'll most likely be pulling with a 5800X there shouldn't be much of a difference between single and dual tower.
8700K@4.8GHz should be similar power consumption, so for reference:
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/noctua-nh-u12a/6.html
Dark Rock Pro 4, NH-D15 and NH-U12S are all in there. Also the NH-12A, single tower with two fans, just for fun.

Realistically 200W and beyond is where dual towers really matter.

Of course testing every core individually and manually setting offsets would be the best, while just letting PBO throw voltage and power at the problem is the lazy approach, but realistically the best use of your time should be PBO2 + Curve Optimization. Which is really just standard boost with higher power/voltage limit and some undervolting applied so it doesn't start needlessly choking on the power limit when multiple cores start boosting to high-ish frequencies. There's should be guides out there for this.

My rants sound a lot angrier then I really am, otherwise I wouldn't keep doing this.

Yeah, USB is just USB. Safe to go for B450 then.
3801
#3801
7 Frags +

you will know tf2 is dead whenever setsul stops posting in this thread

you will know tf2 is dead whenever setsul stops posting in this thread
3802
#3802
5 Frags +

Tbf I haven't played it in a while. On the other hand I've been saying TF2 is dead for 10 years and it didn't stop me back then.

Tbf I haven't played it in a while. On the other hand I've been saying TF2 is dead for 10 years and it didn't stop me back then.
3803
#3803
-2 Frags +

i have a graphics card. i just want to buy a prebuilt then stick the 1050 ti in there and go, since all i care about is running tf2, (i do all of my school work on my laptop). any recommendations/alternatives below $150-$180?

i have a graphics card. i just want to buy a prebuilt then stick the 1050 ti in there and go, since all i care about is running tf2, (i do all of my school work on my laptop). any recommendations/alternatives below $150-$180?
3804
#3804
5 Frags +

Why do you have a GPU? Do you not have a pc attached to that, just the GPU?
Getting the shittiest and cheapest pre-built you can find with a shitty CPU and putting in a good GPU seems like the worst way to build a pc for TF2, which doesn't care about the GPU, only the CPU.

Why do you have a GPU? Do you not have a pc attached to that, just the GPU?
Getting the shittiest and cheapest pre-built you can find with a shitty CPU and putting in a good GPU seems like the worst way to build a pc for TF2, which doesn't care about the GPU, only the CPU.
3805
#3805
0 Frags +

Hello

My younger brother is building a PC to take to university and has asked for my help. His budget is around £1600 and he wants to be able to play fairly modern games at 1080p 100+ fps. He also plans to do some light CAD work and wants the PC to be VR capable. He doesn't plan on overclocking.

This is the list he's made: https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/user/simpoc02/saved/6B4DZL

I haven't built a computer since around 2016 so I'm massively out of the loop regarding price, performance, etc., so I thought I'd come here to get some advice/opinions on the list, thanks!

Hello

My younger brother is building a PC to take to university and has asked for my help. His budget is around £1600 and he wants to be able to play fairly modern games at 1080p 100+ fps. He also plans to do some light CAD work and wants the PC to be VR capable. He doesn't plan on overclocking.

This is the list he's made: https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/user/simpoc02/saved/6B4DZL

I haven't built a computer since around 2016 so I'm massively out of the loop regarding price, performance, etc., so I thought I'd come here to get some advice/opinions on the list, thanks!
3806
#3806
3 Frags +

Seems ok.
Does he really need 8 cores?
Good luck finding a 3060 Ti.
Could go for a lower wattage, higher quality PSU.

Seems ok.
Does he really need 8 cores?
Good luck finding a 3060 Ti.
Could go for a lower wattage, higher quality PSU.
3807
#3807
0 Frags +
SetsulSeems ok.
Does he really need 8 cores?
Good luck finding a 3060 Ti.
Could go for a lower wattage, higher quality PSU.

isnt cad fairly processor dependent? perhaps the 8 cores will speed up certain processes in that

[quote=Setsul]Seems ok.
Does he really need 8 cores?
Good luck finding a 3060 Ti.
Could go for a lower wattage, higher quality PSU.[/quote]


isnt cad fairly processor dependent? perhaps the 8 cores will speed up certain processes in that
3808
#3808
0 Frags +

Yeah, but it has to be multithreaded for that to matter. So the question is what does "light CAD" mean? And are 8 cores/16 threads really necessary/useful/at a reasonable price-performance point?

Yeah, but it has to be multithreaded for that to matter. So the question is what does "light CAD" mean? And are 8 cores/16 threads really necessary/useful/at a reasonable price-performance point?
3809
#3809
-1 Frags +

=

=
3810
#3810
9 Frags +
pirateVideo Card: Asus GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER 6 GB TUF GAMING OC Video Card

I know it's hard to get recent graphic card, but man, you can't go with a GTX 1660 for a config at 2477$

[quote=pirate]
[b]Video Card:[/b] Asus GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER 6 GB TUF GAMING OC Video Card
[/quote]
I know it's hard to get recent graphic card, but man, you can't go with a GTX 1660 for a config at 2477$
1 ⋅⋅ 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 ⋅⋅ 134
Please sign in through STEAM to post a comment.