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.

What's your current build?
- i5 4690k, r9 390, 16gb ddr3 ram, Z97S SLI krait edition motherboard

Do you actually want to upgrade or is it just because you can't figure out what's wrong?
- I reinstalled windows after making this post (should have done that first tbh) and it helped the problem a bit, but it's still a thing so I think the pc is just old and could use an upgrade. If we can in fact do something for less than half my budget as you said then that makes the idea more appealing as well.

Do you want to reuse any hardware?
- If I can use something sure I suppose, I figure the only thing that could be salvaged is the graphics card though

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.
- I don't really know the advantages and disadvantages of using it but if you think it would be best then sure

Is that information about CXBX doing better on intel recent?
- I know someone in our community runs the game on a ryzen 7 5800x and still has amd specific issues so it's a recent issue I believe

Are you going to overclock?
- Preferably not

Yeah, nothing wrong with wanting an upgrade, as long as you're doing it for the right reasons.

Ok, so a 390 should be somewhere around a 1650 to 1650 Super or 5500 to 5500 XT. If that's still good enough keep it, if not, unless you need a huge upgrade, a used GPU will probably be cheaper.

I think you could and should reuse everything apart from CPU, RAM, and mobo. If there's nothing wrong with your HDD/SSD, PSU, cooler, and case, then I would keep them unless you're trying to sell the entire old build.
Maybe add a new NVMe SSD, but that's it.

GPU encoding would mean basically no CPU load, and that obviously makes a huge difference for a CPU-bound emulator.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLqpVImLPGE&t=305s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0pCpNT4b-Q&t=620s
Basically, thanks to NVENC (the nVidia hardware encoder), CPU encoding (x264 in particular) for streaming stopped being worth it years ago. By now AMD (AMF, formerly VCE) has caught up and even surpassed nVidia in some cases, but it's pretty even. And then there's Intel Quick Sync. It's the one thing the Intel GPUs do really, really well, because they do it better than anyone else. It beats x264 medium preset. You can not afford a CPU that would even run a 1080p 60 fps stream via x264 without choking the emulator completely.
So I do highly recommend going this route.

Yeah, if CXBX still doesn't like Ryzen, and you're fine with GPU encoding and don't want to overclock, then there's no reason not to get an Intel CPU.

Again, the i3-13100 would be a fine upgrade. Should be roughly 80% faster single threaded and you do get 8 threads instead of just 4 as with the 4690K. Still 4 actual cores though. 3.4 GHz base clock, 4.5 boost. 190 CAD.
Then there's a couple of i5s. All with 6 big cores (12 threads), but the i5-13400 only gets 4 small cores on top, the others get 8. Not going to matter unless you go for something highly multithreaded (18+ threads), but worth keeping in mind anyway.
Anyway, so the 13400, 13500, 13600, and 13600K get 2.5/2.5/2.7/3.5 base clock (1.8/1.8/2.0 for the small cores), 4.6/4.8/5.0/5.1 boost.
With the 13400 at 310-320 CAD and the 13500 at 330 CAD, I'm going to declare the 13400 to be pretty pointless.
The 13600 is for some reason not available at all and the 13600K costs 410 CAD, which really isn't worth it if you're not overclocking.

The lower base clocks are to fit 6+ cores into 65W TDP, while at boost clocks they're allowed to draw >150W. Most mobos have very generous settings in that regard by default, and if not it's easily fixed, so I'd mostly pay attention to the boost clocks.
So the 13500/13600 should be 6-11% faster even single threaded than the 13100 when properly cooled, but paying 75-100% (if you can find a 13600) is obviously only worth it if you're actually getting something out of the extra cores.
For CS:GO, TF2, and Dota, I don't they'd matter, but they can be nice for newer games and e.g. Counter Strike 2 performance might be of interest to you, since you're getting it for free.

I could've made this a lot shorter, but I want you to be able to make an informed decision instead of just slapping down "get an i3-13100 or i5-13600 and use Quick Sync" and leaving it at that.

Alright based on your advice I think the best course of action is to keep everything and just replace the cpu mobo and ram. Probably going to go with the i3 13100, I don't think I really need what the 13600 would provide but I'll continue to think about it. Do you have any particular recommendations for the ram and mobo?

I don't think you'll need anything special for the mobo. Just make sure it's either a 700 chipset, or can be updated without a CPU installed or you might run into trouble since the 600 need a BIOS update to support the 13000 CPUs.
B760 would be the cheapest of the new chipsets and completely fine for your purposes.
B660 is fine too, H610 I'd avoid.
Definitely go for one that supports DDR5.

For RAM I'm not entirely up to date, but I think at this point DDR5-5600 or sometimes even 6000 can be reasonably priced enough to get that instead of sticking with the minimum 4800.
2x 8GB should be enough, but I won't stop you if you get 2x 16GB. Though RAM is only going to get cheaper, so if you've got a mobo with 4 slots, I'd stick with 2x 8GB for now.

currently on a 3700X, MSI B450M that maxes out at 32GB RAM (I only have 16 right now), RX 5700

I quite literally NEED 128GB of RAM for work I'll be starting in late June. I could just replace the motherboard and get new RAM but that's gonna spank me for 300 USD EASY and my performance isn't even gonna improve which is absolutely lame

I could also one-up that and grab a 5800X3D too but then thats gonna be like 620 USD just to stay on AM4 which has no further improvement and still DDR4.

Then there's current DDR5 boards which are expensive as shit (like 100 USD more than what I got my current MB for new in 2019) and there's a bunch of bullshit going on with AM5 motherboards right now too
Then there's the 3rd option of sucking it up and going for a full system overhaul which is gonna run me like $1600+ easy since I'd want a new GPU and a new monitor to get off 1080p and I'd have to grab a new PSU too

Setsul I seek your wisdom. am I fucked?

I recommend Make Your Employer Pay For It

in this case they won't because they'll just tell me to connect remotely to some of our computers
I could do that but our remote connections are legit total ass. I don't want to deal with ~5 TB of data (that will grow) over such shoddy connection. I've tried it before and I've witnessed how awful it is. Obviously I'll HAVE to do it for now since I dont have capable hardware but I shit you not when I say doing it remotely is awful (and fuck being onsite)

#3917
MSI B450M what? I mean buying a mobo with only two RAM slots is almost always a mistake because those suck, all the corners have been cut, but even those should allow for 64GB.

I'd argue that being able to actually run a program instead of not being able to run it at all is a 1/0 = infinity% increase in performance. Mathematically that should just about justify 300 USD.

I don't think DDR5 mobos being 100 USD more more expensive is the problem? Just get a 7600X instead of a 5800X3D and it works out to roughly the same price and performance.

Is the job so terrible that it's not worth investing 300$ to be able to work from home? You'd spend much more than that on commuting.

Wanting a new monitor and GPU (+PSU) is completely unrelated, that's a you problem, don't blame your job for it.

this yeah it's not the best board when I got it but at the time (zen2 release) I needed an mATX board with a flashback button and this was literally the only one in stock

correct, I just can't stomach the idea of dropping $300 just for a partial upgrade, I feel like I might as well go full beans and finish everything off. Like the 7600x + mb + ram is still gonna hit me for around $600, this partial upgrade is like 70% of what it took for my entire current system
tldr; Im flabbergasted by everything being a lot more expensive than what I'm used to. A good part of it probably due to DDR5 being "new" and AM5 being new so they have the early-adopters tax. but whatever, I'll figure something out, thanks for the feedback

Your board supports 64GB of RAM, as it should.
https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/B450M-GAMING-PLUS/Specification
Obviously doesn't help if you really need a full 128GB, but it very much does support 64GB.

I swear to god this shit said 32gb two days ago along with a bunch of other spec sheets I was reading
what the FUCK
anyway thanks, now my heart is at ease

Rule of thumb, unless you're way up there with big servers and RAM in the Terabytes, or Intel is playing stupid market segmentation games again (not applicable here), you're basically limited by DIMM size.
If the mobo supports only DDR4 UDIMMs that go up to 32GB and you got 2 slots, you got 64GB max, and with 4 slots 128GB max and so on.

Now if the mobo is old enough that only 16GB sticks were available at launch, then the listed capacity in contemporary sources will be lower, but there's usually nothing stopping you from putting in 2x32GB anyway.

thanks
I should be able to get by with 64GB for maybe the first month and a half until the higher resolution PIV data starts flooding in which is gonna need more than that. I should probably just look into getting some used MB that can take up to 128GB off ebay or something, Ive probably been overthinking this

looking for monitor upgrade from my 144hz(Asus VG248) would like 240hz monitor around 400 dollars, any recommandations?

hi Setsul,

was thinking about upgrading to a rtx 3070 but I have a 620W PSU

I have a i7-9700k also with 16gb DDR4 RAM, do I need to upgrade the PSU also? Or is it fine as is

benq XL2540K should be solid, i'm very happy with my XL2546K and afaik the biggest (only?) difference between the two is the 2546K has dyac+

Depends on overclocking.
Stock it's around 250W for the 3070 and 125W for the 9700K, no problem.
OC on the 9700K would push it to around 180W, if you don't do anything crazy with the 3070, that's still fine.
If it's all watercooling with the 9700K somewhere around 250W and the 3070 far beyond 300W, then I'd get worried.

I must commend your PSU choice by the way, I'm using the 520W version in my NAS/server.
It's a budget PSU, but budget as in affordable 80+ Bronze, not as in "might catch fire". It will actually deliver 620W without issues.
Well, around 20% more than 620W but at some point overcurrent protection would shut it down, because it actually got that. Because it's a good PSU.

Thanks for the reply and I'm glad you agree with the PSU choice :)
Won't be doing any overclocking most likely so I think I'm in the clear