add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube

Comments

Comments

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Why did Intel make the i9-9980XE?"

  • 13 months ago
  • 1 point

You really need to recheck those benchmarks the only way the 2700X wins is in price for what You get in almost all of them.

You are correct, in the hands of an enthusiast overclocker, he/she could push the Intel over the line against Ryzen. Without OC, given vast majority of people run at stock settings, the results are a lot more interesting, 4 of the 5 Intel chips bench lower than Ryzen.

Ryzen 7 2700X > i7-7800X (1396 Pts vs 978 Pts)
Ryzen 7 2700X > i7-9700K (1396 Pts vs 1060 Pts)
Ryzen 7 2700X > i7-7820X (1396 Pts vs 1338 Pts)
Ryzen 7 2700X > i7-9800X (1396 Pts vs 1375 Pts)
Ryzen 7 2700X < i9-9900K (1396 Pts vs 1504 Pts)

I am not sure the 7820X is still available, stock looks dead online, old stock moving for more it seems. The other 4 chips seem to be alive but I do wonder why the 7800X is still being produced, it looks really really weak for an 8 core.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Why did Intel make the i9-9980XE?"

  • 13 months ago
  • 1 point

I am guessing AMD have been squeezing their HEDT market. With the Threadripper destroying Intel in every benchmark going while being half the price, Intel's response has been "some action is better than none". A lot of weird releases and weird chips been coming out on their HEDT platform.

A good example of Intel's strange activity is their 8 core lineups. A total of 5 chips. This alone was in response to the Ryzen 7 2700X. Funny thing is the Ryzen 7 2700X obliterates all of these 8 core chips in every benchmark going for every performance indicator (one exception might be the i9-9900K but given all it's issue, most people agree the 2700X is overall the better chip). Quite honestly, I do not know why AMD did not release the 2800X this generation, a 10 or 12 core Zen chip would have essentially killed off Intel.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "The motherboard M.2 slot #2 shares bandwidth with several PCIe expansion slots.When the M.2 slot is populated with a PCIe M.2 drive, four PCIe expansion slots are disabled."

  • 13 months ago
  • 1 point

It is normal that many motherboards share share resources and bandwidth. You simply do not use the Sata Slots that are disabled when you install an M.2 drive. In your case, that four slots are disabled because of one M.2 slot being occupied sounds odd, it is usually one Sata port being disabled. If this is the motherboard's design I would either:

1- Get/Choose another Motherboard that does not disable over 50% of your resources if only one resource is used.

2- If you are stuck with this Motherboard (already purchased), use only the first M.2 slot and avoid using the others. if you have another M.2 drive that you must install on this PC on the second slot, you may find a workaround using an adapter on one of your free PCIe slots.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "SSD Sacrafice"

  • 13 months ago
  • 1 point

Heck no, get as much performance for your pc as possible. Nuts to a big SSD, that can wait. An SSD, for most users, translates to faster boot time. Get a small SSD for booting system and maybe to store on game, the rest can be traditional HDD. Nothing wrong with this, majority of folks go this route. HDD's are a necessary evil for the budget minded. A 4TB SSD is over $500, a 4TB 7200RPM HDD can be picked up for $100.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "is it worth upgrading from 2200g to 1700?"

  • 13 months ago
  • 1 point

It has already been revealed. The 3300G will be a 6 core 12 thread, MSRP of $130, base clock 4.2GHz, Boost Block 5.1GHz. Here is the Link to the article: http://www.ClickIfYouBelieveMe.com

Comment reply on Forum Topic "just a question."

  • 13 months ago
  • 1 point

Agreed, I would take Ryzen 5 2600X over non K i7 as well unless I was building a super miniature rig in which case the i7 - 8700 non-K might be a little easier to cool.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "What is your preference: Ryzen or Intel CPU's?"

  • 13 months ago
  • 2 points

It does not matter. You can find a chip from both brands that will hit the performance targets you want (as long as you have reasonable expectations). It is no longer a choice between a Ferrari and a Pushbike.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "just a question."

  • 13 months ago
  • 1 point

Oh yeah definitely if you are going to overclock the Intel wins hands down. With a bit of silicon lottery luck, you could be a whole GHZ up on the Ryzen. There is no way the 2600X can compete with 25% less clock speed. At the other end though, stock settings, there is not a large difference, Intel a smidge faster across the board but Ryzen 2600X certainly good enough to be in the same class.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "College Laptop - $2500"

  • 13 months ago
  • 1 point

I cannot really recommend Alienware Laptops, way too much bloatware and a Bios I am not very keen on. Outside of that though, of course, the Alienware laptop works well and runs everything you throw at it within the benchmarks that are posted online.

You could go with the general Sager/Clevo Laptops which can be optimized at sites given below:

https://www.originpc.com/gaming/laptops/

https://www.xoticpc.com/

I did purchase an Origin laptop a few years ago. Came with full desktop i7 at the time. Cost a lot but the paintjob was nice. Went with a white and black panel.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "I5-9600k v i7-9700k"

  • 13 months ago
  • 1 point

OP's opening post quote:

was wonder which CPU would suit me right now. I’m not doing the most intense gaming,

Nothing here says $550 for an i9-9900K (which would be an extremely poor purchase).

Agreed a 9700K is a good CPU in his use scenarios.

You do not know how gaming developers will use cores in future. With 4c-6c most common on gaming PC's, no gaming developer will have the guts to make a title with minimum requirement of 8 cores. Money talks in this business.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "I5-9600k v i7-9700k"

  • 13 months ago
  • 1 point

I can run BFV on an i7-7700K. My brother uses an i3-8350k which is also 4 core. My nephew has a Pentium G5500 CPU which is only two cores and he plays the game. Let us not mislead the OP believing that he needs to purchase an overpriced CPU for gaming where nothing else will do. This is not Reddit where someone may ask for a gaming CPU recommendation and get a 32-core Threadripper as the response for minimum requirement.

The OP does not need a 9900K. 9900K is Intel's half hearted response to the 2700X, and it barely does any better than that for double the price.

The CPU's recommended, the i5-9600K, i7-9700K, and the Ryzen 5 2600X and Ryzen 7 2700X will be good for his needs. Perfection? Unobainum, no such thing. Technology moves forward, today's CPU is tomorrows Paperweight.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "just a question."

  • 13 months ago
  • 1 point

but do I need to overclock my gpu

No, not really. Some games will perform extremely well at 4K with your 2080, some will not. Adjust settings for the games that run a little slower, nothing wrong with medium settings if that is what it takes to play smoothly.

its just an ryzen 5 2600x I just want no bottlenecking to happen

Had this Ryzen released just three years ago, it would have been the best consumer CPU by a mile. It is far more powerful that you think. It trades blows with an i7-8700K CPU which is still considered one of the best CPU's for gaming. It will not be holding back on any GPU available now or released in next 5 years.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "cpu done, ram pick (16-64 ram)"

  • 13 months ago
  • 1 point

Yeah technology is like that. You buy something or build it and within a few months it is outdated. For the sake of your inner peace of mind, accept it as a fact of life. Own what you need, upgrade when there exists a need, and you will be fine. There is no reason to stall on building a PC because "something better is coming out". Something better will always come out, it is the nature of enterprise. Either you build a PC that will work for you now, or never build a PC citing that technological progression will always impact on your ability to settle on a build you can be happy with. Option 2 means you lose. Winners take option 1, better to have something than nothing.

says 'ram speed' doubles, so maybe this means entire computer performance doubles....

It does not work like that. Ram performance may double but PC performance will not, not anywhere close. There are still a good 50% plus of PC owners that are on DDR3 RAM and the machines still work fine. I have a gaming rig with a i7-4790K CPU and 16GB DDR3 RAM that runs a modern title 15% below what a modern machine produces. It is not half performance. There are CPU's double the power of that, RAM double the speed of that, yet with identical GPU to a modern machine it is only 10 - 20% behind - at least under the scrutiny of gaming. Under certain productivity tasks that may not be GPU dependent, a different outcome may be observed. I might not be the best to give advise for I do not care how it performs under productivity tasks, gaming performance is my end game.

If you want to build a Productivity machine or gaming PC or mix of both, you will be wise to post here:

https://pcpartpicker.com/forums/forum/27-create-a-part-list-for-me/

Specify exactly what you want, budget, and expectations, and someone will respond. Please keep your posts specific and concise and someone will certainly take the time to assemble a list of best possible parts that can be bought at this time for the budget you require.

Forget Ryzen 3000 series or DDR5, they are not out and are unknown entities. If you are not comfortable building under the constraint of future upgrades then what will happen is Ryzen 3000 series comes out, an article appears that Intel 10nm is coming out and is better than Ryzen 3000 series, you then wait for Intel 10nm and then an article says Ryzen 4000 series comes out with DDR5 compatability, then Intel say they will release first Quantum consumer computer with DDR "10Million" RAM... Result, endless loop, no personal ownership....

Comment reply on Forum Topic "2070 Overkill for Ultrawide?"

  • 13 months ago
  • 1 point

2070 nowhere near overkill if you like to dabble with new games. If you want highest in game settings and smooth 60fps plus gameplay, you could easily be in 2080 Ti territory. 2080 at a minimum. 2070 will work fine though, I would not worry. PC games are great in that you can tweak settings.

2070 might be overkill if, like me, you spend majority of time on games that are 5+ years old or retro and would run on Intel HD graphics let alone a decent GPU. Do not need much power to run Icewind Dale for instance which is my current game I am playing....

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Rx 580 vs Gtx 1660."

  • 13 months ago
  • 2 points

Life span is tricky to gauge. There are 10000+ games out there right now that a 1660 will play. Two years from now those games will play the same as they do today. Question becomes how new games will play. With a new generation of consoles due in 2020, developers (whom develop for consoles and then port to PC's) will be able to push the graphics, physics and so on to the next level, no longer burdened by the constraints of the old hardware. It is inevitable that games appearing 2020 and onwards could challenge GPU's far more than they do today. We cannot predict the future. The GTX 1660 is a better card than the 580, but the 580 is quite a good price. Your call, but I would not look at futureproofing regarding purchasing one of these GPU's.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "should I downgrade? (seriously)"

  • 13 months ago
  • 1 point

Keep your rig as is. With PS5 and next gen Xbox due for 2020 release, we will see gaming developers no longer developing within the restrictions of current gen technology (which is really weak). Result = complexity of titles is going up considerably, not down or staying same. The 2080TI will get a chance to flex it's muscles on 1440p come 2020. Many of us, by 2021 will be upgrading. Bit like when the 600 series cards released, a good bump up to accommodate the release of PS4/XB1.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Emulation PC - As powerful as needed, as cheap as possible"

  • 13 months ago
  • 1 point

If you can live without Wii/GC or PS2 emulation, the Raspberry Pi 3 is a cool bit of kit that can emulate PS1 and N64 very well. You can even pick up a case that resembles the console in miniature form. Small, and pretty cheap, under $100 for sure, more like $70 or so all said and done.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Data Error: Cyclic Redundancy Check"

  • 13 months ago
  • 1 point

In Win 10, in task manager window (cntrl alt del), run a new task type cmd or command prompt (I do not recall which one) in the window, it should set an icon in start menu. Click to open, and the type chkdsk and take from there. Note, it has been a while since I did this, probably the last time was during the days of XP.

If you bought the disc new, then get a refund and replacement. If you have other drives installed and they work, likely this is the faulty one. I guess you could troubleshoot by switching to new Sata Port. chkdsk is just a windows operation that helps clean up bad drive sectors that are corrupted, it cannot fix hardware.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Best CPU for a 2080Ti?"

  • 14 months ago
  • 2 points

Upvote for you buddy. Unbelievable response, took words right out of my mouth. I have a Kaby Lake i7-7700K which performs very similar to the i7-6700K, I have not run across a scenario in gaming where the i7-7700k did not run handily.

I also have a build featuring an i9-9900K and RTX 2080 Ti. When I switch the GPU out, the i7 plays about the same frame rate as an i9. Easily handles 1440p and 4K without dropping frames. I have no idea on 1080p, but most folks, I suspect, will not purchase an RTX 2080Ti for driving a 1080p monitor.

Gaming companies want good reviews of their products to foster sales. Optimizing a game for 8 cores with it running poorly on 4 cores would be suicide given at least 30% of the target audience would be running on 4cores and 4threads - the reviews would be turgid. Skylake and Kabylake i7, and Ryzen 5 2400g, with 4c/8t should be fine for time being.

I do not really advocate close examination of benchmarks outside of forming a rough idea, each system build has the potential to be different.

https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i9-9900K-vs-Intel-Core-i7-6700K/4028vs3502

The curious thing here - overclock the 4 core i7 and in quad core and single core tests it is not far from the i9. Only in multicore and multithreaded apps does the i9 really show it's muscle.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Do I have to Delid? 8700k"

  • 14 months ago
  • 3 points

If you intend to run stock speeds or play with mild overclocks, delidding a CPU is unnecessary. Folks that fall in the delid category are going to be pushing past 5GHz overclocks or are going to be running their CPU 24/7 at near 100%. For you, delidding is an unnecessary evil, not recommended.

You cooler is fine, actually it is a very good Air Cooler. Whomever advised you probably is in the camp "liquid cool or bust". I will tell you a little something - 90% of all those All in One Liquid coolers are actually worse at keeping a CPU cool than a good quality fan cooler. Subjective, depends on cooler of course. I have owned three All in One Liquid coolers and all three were, at best, fair. DIY liquid cooling is where it is at, but it will add $400 to your build, bare minimum. An Air cooler is mostly the wise choice outside of serious overclockers, those whose PC's cannot accommodate anything other than a low profile air cooler, or those that want to get their builds featured (aesthetics of a custom loop).

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Data Error: Cyclic Redundancy Check"

  • 14 months ago
  • 1 point

Sounds to me the HDD was pulled from another build. The CRC is an error detecting code, uses a special algorithm that checks parity bits that get appended to a stream of data to flag an error. You can run chkdsk on command prompt to attempt repair of bad sector or go ahead and reformat drive (you will lose data on the HDD though).

Comment reply on Forum Topic "cpu done, ram pick (16-64 ram)"

  • 14 months ago
  • 1 point

all the mobos support ddr5 right... it's only a year or 1.5y from now...

The CPU probably not.

i havent seen any harmful replies to any of my posts yet, so that's good, i've found this site to be an overall net positive in helpfulness

Not quite what I meant, this site is not Reddit ;-)

Reworded, you would be advised to maximize performance of the 2200G with appropriate RAM. While this advise is correct and good, particularly for Ryzen, this could come at large disproportionate cost to you. My advice is simpler, filter out in the PC Building helper portion of this site a set of RAM that is compatible with your motherboard. Rank by cost, look at aesthetics, and boom, you have two sticks of RAM. Worrying about latencies and so on could lead you to a solution that could outcost your CPU. Bottom line, your Bestbuy gaming PC that happens to have a Ryzen processor is not coming equipped with CL14 Dominator DDR4 3200.

Take this example: the Alienware brand of Laptops and PC's come with the lousiest components all round and... the dang computer works and is fractionally behind a comparable build that comes out here. Interestingly, the PC Building Enthusiast spends 30-50% more on an equal spec build with better components. Difference in benchmark? No more than 5%. This is the point I am trying to make. People spend $1000's for that extra 2-5%. In your case, you do not need to optimize your build towards a goal of perfection - unless you want to, it is your money after all :-)

oh i forgot to say that i dont think this cpu costs less than a 'low latency RAM stick'

I dumped $380 on RAM just yesterday. Equiv to $190 per stick, that is an i5 processor in trade value.

there's also nothing left on this site, maybe that's on mobile or something, or shows on a specific page or something

LHS of screen, a series of checkboxes to filter results.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "1660 ti vs 1070"

  • 14 months ago
  • 2 points

Benchmarks do not seem to suggest that. I would go with the 1660Ti, a newer card. An Open box 1070 should be more like $275. PM the seller maybe he will reduce price.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "cpu done, ram pick (16-64 ram)"

  • 14 months ago
  • 1 point

This is the way I look at it:=>

[] Fine tuning RAM for a CPU that costs less than a single low latency RAM stick to yield a fractional % gain that you will not notice in 99.9% of usage scenarios.

Vs

[] Filtering on PcPartpicker System Build 16GB RAM DDR4 3000 and DDR4 3200 and check list on left of site, check QVL on motherboard and check list on left, will now have a filtered list of RAM. Pick RAM that matches nicely with the aesthetics of your build, CAS is ignored, you have a system that works very nicely at very nice cost.

32GB RAM? Not needed. General purpose PC with some gaming? 16GB will be all you need. Get 32GB by all means, will cost more. Price escalation - not as much as you think, as long as you open Newegg, filter results by price, and then check QVL of your motherboard. Once you locate two sticks, price may not be much more than 50% over the 16GB. I will go back to original point - 16GB is enough. No need to throw money at more when less will do. Order medium Pizza if eating along, large will result in you throwing half away.

Work out what sort of fellow you are. Are you a PC Enthusiast that builds with a constraint as to benchmark score, or a person that just needs a nice PC to use for a variety of tasks. If you are the latter, half of all opinions on this site not be helpful to your end game and will end up costing you a lot of money for something that is only fractionally beneficial.

DDR5 RAM is out in the next year, DDR4 will soon be dead/dying - although manufacturers will keep going if demand exists. No need to overthink the problem, forget upgrading, you are building something that is not upgradable in a contemporary sense (backwards upgradeable yes, contempory, not a chance). Once DDR5 RAM hits the shelves, all our fancy motherboards, CPU's and so on will be outdated on a dying platform. Get 16GB DDR4, use your computer, enjoy it, a few years later you will upgrade hardware. Not any different to a car - you buy one, pay it off, then sell, then get a new one, rinse and repeat....

Comment reply on Forum Topic "1660 ti vs 1070"

  • 14 months ago
  • 1 point

Yeah 1660Ti. 1070 will be good as well, depends on price...

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Vega 56 on a 550W PSU?"

  • 14 months ago
  • 1 point

Nope, not problem at all regarding power. You will be fine.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Cheapest RTX 2080 lead to regret?"

  • 14 months ago
  • 1 point

Nope, no need to worry. Lower versus higher = question of aesthetics, cooling, overclocking. At silicon level, the lower end card will differ little with the higher end models.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "ELI5: how do you advise we pick a cpu?"

  • 14 months ago
  • 1 point

If you go for modern CPU, anything from Intel i3 - i7, anything Ryzen 3 - Ryzen 7, any old Ryzen Threadripper or anything from Intel's "X" series CPU's, and you will be able to build a fine PC. Bottom line, that is what it is. Never mind about what software you are going to Run (outside of certain encoding applications or editing programs that require enormous parallel'ism to the computations or compression/decompression algorithms). If such a CPU was in your use scenario you would have stipulated that. Since you did not, it is moot, a program app you need not waste money on matching up a CPU.

Modern CPU's, examples I have given, are going to run 99% of all applications with astonishing speed and efficiency. This includes gaming. The other 1%, if you were in the use category, you would have indicated that in your post.

If you want to pick a CPU, the middle path is the best one. This is the i5 or Ryzen 5 series. From there on it is a question of enthusiasm. A chart / list of CPU's from most powerful to weakest is of little use or importance, it is the PC Enthusiast's equivalent of ranking his female colleagues looks wise out of 10. The list is not going to get him a girlfriend.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "ELI5: how do you advise we pick a cpu?"

  • 14 months ago
  • 2 points

Ryzen 3300G does not exist, it is nothing tangible right now. It is likely a product in latter stages of development with a launch date of "insert anyone's best guess". The CPU might be a six core beast with 12 threads for $130 or it could be a 100MHz 486 clone that squirts sulfuric acid on your fingers when you mount it on the motherboard. We the consumer know nothing.

Logic suggests purchasing the 2200g if you need a computer now.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "How worth it would buying the 9400F be?"

  • 14 months ago
  • 5 points

The i5-9400f punches it's weight. The Ryzen 2600 crushes it in performance for multi threaded tasks. In gaming realm, they are about even once you push the clock on the 2600. However, if you just insert CPU and leave as is, no clock tweaks, gaming will slightly favor the Intel chip. This is actually one of the few examples where an AMD build would actually cost more than a competing Intel build out of pocket. There are many that consider the i5-8400/9400f the best bang for the buck CPU's this generation. It is hard to argue with that point, excellent chips, and few issues. Will handle any gaming scenario you throw at it and then some. One may argue that the Ryzen build opens the door to their Zen 2, a marvel of engineering technology according to some despite the fact that nobody has a clue what to expect out of the chipsets. To be honest, it would be really quite silly to purchase a Ryzen CPU now and then upgrade to Zen 2 six months from now. Either stick or swim.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "SSD Help"

  • 14 months ago
  • 1 point

You are looking at some very nicely priced M2 2280 NVMe drives. Out of the three, the HP one impresses me most. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07MZG2LF7/?tag=pcpapi-20

I picked up this one not too long ago, I can vouch for it. A little more pricey but you get what you pay for IMO. https://www.amazon.com/BLACK-SN750-500GB-Internal-Gaming/dp/B07MH2P5ZD/

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Help with an OS/Game Drive"

  • 14 months ago
  • 1 point

If your mobo has an M2 slot, use it. That would be one less Sata Cable to route in your case.

The Intel is not expensive for what it is and slots very neatly on your motherboard, thus taking up no real estate in the case.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "800$ pc"

  • 14 months ago
  • 1 point

But the case is awesome and something you can keep. Once we have a PC, from there on it should be about upgrading components with the case and PSU last to be retired.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "HELP PICKING A GPU FOR MY MONITOR"

  • 14 months ago
  • 4 points

Go with the RTX 2060 - performance money trade off is about right. Complements Ryzen 5 2600 very well.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Im thinking of upgrading my GPU"

  • 14 months ago
  • 1 point

RTX 2070 would be the logical upgrade.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Owned i7 6700 or a new 2600x"

  • 14 months ago
  • 1 point

It will be a while before a 4core/8thread CPU is outdated to the point it will not be at least a reasonable Gaming CPU. As things stand I would not be too concerned about it's performance bottlenecks. I would not recommend having an upgrade path to i7-7700K, upgrade path should be for a contemporary CPU. In this context, do not bother with a Z270 board which will cost a pretty penny even used. Go for a different board B250/H110 or something like that, cheaper. Should hold up for a 2/3 years with a good GPU. Upgrade completely then.

Or...

Sell what he has on eBay, use money to reinvest in 2600X build.

Just remember, there is no such thing as futureproofing. That Ryzen 2600X will not give him much more mileage than the i7. Technology moves forward, when the install base is high enough, applications will be developed with that new technology in mind.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "9700k vs 9900k for Streaming"

  • 14 months ago
  • 3 points

As you suspect, performance difference for task at hand is not enough to justify cost.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Sweet spoot for 100+ fps AAA 1080p games (RTX 2060?)"

  • 14 months ago
  • 1 point

The RTX 2060 will not play AAA 1080p games at 100+ fps, at least for titles released last few months. Assassins Creed Odyssey does not even push 60fps on high settings here.

We do not know the future, but if things continue on the current path, and with PS5 and new Xbox likely to arrive in 2020, the RTX 2060 will not be enough. Developers tend to develop games for consoles as their primary market. If the PS5 hardware is up to scratch (and it is likely to be designed to at least render 4K at 60fps), I would imagine PC ports of AAA titles designed around console hardware would struggle to run high settings with an RTX 2060.

That said, RTX 2060 would get my vote for best card this generation. Good price great performance. The issue is the bar is constantly being moved. Nothing is future proof.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "What is lithography?"

  • 14 months ago
  • 1 point

Natural laws.

Propagation of information => light speed is constant for a particular medium. Time Delay = Derivative of Phase Delay, for very trivial linear phase velocity, Time Delay = velocity of light x distance. Larger distance results in larger time delay. Period (Duty Cycle) is inversely proportional to the clock frequency, more GHZ = lower Period. Once the Period is within an order of magnitude of the Propagation Delay, can have phase distortion effects which affects edge detection which must be equalized. Result = cannot make chips too large by putting too many transistors in them. Solution = shrink Transistors.

Fabrication of Transistors also is an issue. Larger Gates require more power and yield larger switching latency (think of a gate as a capacitor). Shrinking the Transistor helps on this front.

Issue is we will one day hit the Quantum Wall where Quantum Tunneling and other Quantum effects will come into play. There is a limit to how small we can ultimately make Transistors to be usable in a sense that Engineers are familiar with.

Comment reply on friku's Completed Build: Little Liquid Nightmare

  • 14 months ago
  • 2 points

I mix both hard and soft tubing. Hard tubing for long straight paths, short or curved, use soft.

Comment reply on friku's Completed Build: Little Liquid Nightmare

  • 14 months ago
  • 2 points

A+ for novelty. A+ for build looks. A+ for improvisation in a remarkably unfriendly case for liquid cooling.

If I were tasked with this build, I would have given up. The only solution I could come up with would be to install a Res+D5 Pump combo 100ml to cool two components that love to blow out heat and then run through a single slim radiator. Result = you do not want to know. BTW, I did do this.....

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Samsung 850 evo 1tb for 120 used. Good deal?"

  • 14 months ago
  • 1 point

850 Evo is years old. $120 is not worth it. There are so many quality SSD's out there now a used old Samsung drive has no business flipping for $120.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Advantage NVMe...for all storage?"

  • 14 months ago
  • 1 point

If you purchased an NVMe drive, typically lower capacity to operate as a boot drive, if you want an additional high capacity NVMe drive to store your files/games/movies etc, you have to make sure your motherboard can support it. Not all motherboards have two M2 2280 slots. Those that do have two or more slots will often have one dedicated for NVMe/Sata and the others Sata only. Some very good motherboards/chipsets do indeed have two or more slots that are compatable with NVMe. You have to research your motherboard and make sure whats what. One can always use a PCIe slot to install an NVMe drive with an adapter but if you have a single slot (i.e. as is typical for an ITX board) you would be out of luck....

Advice: If your motherboard has additional slots compatible with NVMe drives, then by all means fill these up. High capacity NVMe drives are awesome, used either as single drives or in RAID configuration. If you think about it, the price gap has significantly decreased. I picked up three Intel 760p 2TB drives for a song recently, a mere $250 each. These drives are slower than a 970 EVO but faster than the 660p that people usually purchase as their go to bargain NVMe drive. I also picked up a Samsung 970 EVO 2TB for $350. The 2TB 860 EVO which is Sata III sells for around this. The price gap has decreased, and in many ways, it can be cheaper to get an NVMe drive than a Sata one - at least if you really shop around. I no longer buy Sata SSD's/HDD's - less cables to manage.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Stupid Question Alert"

  • 14 months ago
  • 1 point

I always buy a PSU for the long haul and the power must also factor in upgradability of hardware - always buy more than you need. As it is though, 450W PSU is plenty for what you have, you are absolutely fine.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "What is the cheapest GPU that supports 4K gaming, and also what CPU GHz would generally be enough?"

  • 14 months ago
  • 1 point

Monitor wise, if you want to move to 4K, a good one is very expensive. You do not want to get a 60Hz monitor. Hold tight, game with a really nice 1440p monitor, regular wide or ultra wide. Two years or three years from now will offer a different hunting ground, and those 4K monitors we all covet will have dropped considerably in price. Your GPU requirement need not drop - a good 4K GPU will run splendidly with 2K content. GTX 1070 is still a good card, although for 1440p it is starting get stretched. Upgrade? Maybe worthwhile.

AMD? Cards are looking better on DX12 but they still come up short against Nvidia. Power, noise, and performance all favor Nvidia right now. The Radeon VII is a very good card though, as is the Vega 64 and Vega 56. If you want to upgrade your 1070, look at The RTX 2080 or get used GTX 1080 Ti.

1440p gaming is so much fun with a fast card, 4K can wait a couple of years....

Just remember this - the end product of the hardware is what comes on screen. 4K pops slightly nicer than 2K on a small'ish screen, but that slightly nicer image will not get appreciated when it struggles to update beyond 60Hz. 1440p is where it is at.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "What is the cheapest GPU that supports 4K gaming, and also what CPU GHz would generally be enough?"

  • 14 months ago
  • 1 point

You are good with the 2600X.

Staggering? No solution to stagger free gaming, 4K is brutal on hardware. No number of GPU's will fix that, 64GB of 4800MHz RAM will not fix that (assuming such RAM exists), and a $10000 Xeon CPU overclocked to near melting point will not fix it. It will be many many years before 4K levels off into the mid to lower tier of the market. [STAFF REMOVED]. We are years away, at least two GPU generations, before we can finally say that the bridge has been crossed and every title we throw at it will run 60fps or higher at maxed out settings. But we have been on the bridge since the 980Ti (perhaps even the 780Ti). The 1080Ti took us to within a stone's throw, and 2080Ti has stalled progress slightly simply because, due to a mix of factors, there is a lot of software that requires too much computation from the 2080Ti. If developers stopped moving the goalposts we may have made that 4K/60fps goal this generation. Not to be.

However, if we temper our expectations things look considerably more positive. We engage in the "in game settings" to carefully tune performance, we turn off AA or choose moderate settings, and the world of 4K gaming at 60fps or better is surprisingly open. The GTX 1080 (or RTX 2070) can certainly play a great number of titles at or near 60fps if we tweak settings. The RTX 2060 will also surprise you at 4K in that you will not get a migraine headache playing with lower settings. I have even seen GTX 1060 running games at lower settings without looking or playing pathetic (albeit not quite 60fps for titles I played around with). Heck, the Xbox One X technically renders games (some of them at least) at 4K and delivers 30fps or better. GPU wise it is pretty weak but packs what can be best described as an RX 580 (a value oriented mid-low range GPU). The less said about the Xbox CPU the better. In any case, this $400 console has proved itself able to run 4K despite the very modest hardware. Anything is possible if the settings are tweaked.

So, if you are willing to drop settings and turn off non essential filters, you can get good results at 4K with a card like the GTX 1070 (RTX 2060). If you are willing to play around at medium settings, mix in a couple of high, the RTX 2070 and RTX 2080 will deliver well. High/Ultra settings, even the 2080Ti / Titan RTX will chug below 60fps for many AAA titles.

Of course, there are thousands of games out, I guarantee 98-99% will run buttery smooth at 4K with even relatively modest hardware. Most games are not very demanding for today's hardware. Some games are though, and there are a number of titles out there that modern hardware is not enough to nail 60fps at max settings. PS4 Pro and Xbox One X have given developers some room to stretch their legs, even if not too much. But it does not take much to break the performance of a PC for 4K.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "GTX 1660 Ti vs RX 590"

  • 14 months ago
  • 1 point

You will enjoy more fps with the 1660Ti for majority of titles. The performance gap narrows for DX12.

RX 590 is around $70 cheaper give or take.

If you are willing to invest in the 1660Ti, get the RX 2060.

Otherwise RX 580/590 makes more sense.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Emulation PC - As powerful as needed, as cheap as possible"

  • 14 months ago
  • 1 point

Oh yes my friend, Emulation. Believe it or not, emulation is the very thing that got me involved in PC building all those years ago. Do not forget the Dreamcast - an oldie but goodie!

One quick piece of advice before I get started. I will assemble builds that will guarantee get the job done. There are cheaper builds using dual core processors like the Celeron than can run many titles close to full speed, but will also tank on a good number of titles. Stuff like Skyward Sword, Twilight Princess, Xenoblade Chronicles need better CPU than Celeron to run full speed.

Also, please note than used hardware can be great for emulation. An old i5/i7 Haswell CPU would be wonderful, a GTX 750Ti splendid. Good old hardware for good old fashioned console emulation.

The following builds below will account for modern available hardware.

The key to emulation is this:

A CPU with strong single core/single thread performance is key. A dual core, surprisingly will work on Dolphin for 95% of games. A quad core is absolutely fine. The PS2 similarly can run on just two cores very well indeed, four will nail it. N64/PS1 I could run on a Pentium 3 back in the day. I believe a Raspberry Pi can emulate them. Requirements are very low - negligibly low. An Intel Atom will do it and you could still be running background tasks...

I propose two builds - Build #1 for your requirements, cheaper, functional, nice. Build #2 is much higher end, primed for expansion into more demanding emulation, i.e. Wii U/PS3/XB360/Switch etc... when some emulators are running full speed in future....

Build #1

To run your emulators, in reality, a Pentium G4560,G5400-G5600 would perform well, with only 8GB of RAM, and no GPU if one is willing to render at native resolution (or at least no more than 720p). If you want to upscale with AA anything past 720p and play at full speed, you will need a GPU in there, even if a weak one. I will slightly adjust one up to a 4 core processor. More demanding Wii/GC or PS2 games can chew up two cores pretty fast. We want to hedge our bets here. I will stick with Intel here. I will also focus on small form factor for you, no need to build a full tower for emulation.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

Type Item Price
CPU Intel - Core i3-8100 3.6 GHz Quad-Core Processor $129.00 @ Amazon
Motherboard ASRock - H310M-ITX/ac Mini ITX LGA1151 Motherboard $79.99 @ Amazon
Memory G.Skill - Ripjaws V Series 8 GB (2 x 4 GB) DDR4-2666 Memory $50.98 @ Newegg
Storage Team - MS30 128 GB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive $20.99 @ Newegg
Storage Team - L5 LITE 3D 480 GB 2.5" Solid State Drive $49.99 @ Newegg Business
Video Card Gigabyte - GeForce GTX 1050 2 GB OC Video Card $119.99 @ Newegg
Case DAN Cases - A4SFXV2-B Mini ITX Desktop Case -
Power Supply Silverstone - 300 W 80+ Bronze Certified SFX Power Supply $54.99 @ Amazon
Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts
Total (before mail-in rebates) $515.93
Mail-in rebates -$10.00
Total $505.93
Generated by PCPartPicker 2019-04-01 18:47 EDT-0400

Build #2

The build I will put together for you will also account for the possibility you may one day want to emulate the Wii U or the PS3. Both systems require slightly beefier hardware. 16GB of RAM required, a reasonably good GPU (but nothing crazy), and a strong CPU is needed. PS3 will strongly favor multicore performance but the Wii U will run full speed on 4 cores. My preliminary tests with OC i3-8350K was amazing. What ran, ran at full speed. Demons Souls PS3, now we talking! Breath of the Wild, oh yeah! BTW - no AMD recommended here for GPU, Wii U ran extremely poorly with an RX580 I had. Not GPU fault but drivers. I do not know if the Cemu emulator has been updated for better AMD support. Last but not least, it goes without say that spec wise this build is a full blown gaming PC as well.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

Type Item Price
CPU Intel - Core i3-8350K 4 GHz Quad-Core Processor $169.00 @ Amazon
CPU Cooler Noctua - NH-L9i 33.84 CFM CPU Cooler $39.95 @ Amazon
Motherboard ASRock - Z370M-ITX/ac Mini ITX LGA1151 Motherboard $139.89 @ OutletPC
Memory G.Skill - Ripjaws V Series 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3200 Memory $99.99 @ Newegg
Storage Team - MS30 128 GB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive $20.99 @ Newegg
Storage Team - L5 LITE 3D 480 GB 2.5" Solid State Drive $49.99 @ Newegg Business
Video Card MSI - GeForce GTX 1660 6 GB VENTUS XS OC Video Card $219.99 @ Newegg
Case DAN Cases - A4SFXV2-B Mini ITX Desktop Case -
Power Supply Corsair - SF 450 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular SFX Power Supply $89.98 @ Newegg
Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts
Total (before mail-in rebates) $859.78
Mail-in rebates -$30.00
Total $829.78
Generated by PCPartPicker 2019-04-01 18:35 EDT-0400

Comment reply on Forum Topic "2060 or 2070 for 1440p 144hz"

  • 14 months ago
  • 2 points

Agreed, you can always drop settings. Lets be honest though, none of us like dropping settings unless we must ;)

Me too, 7700 and GTX 1080. Still a great combo.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "2060 or 2070 for 1440p 144hz"

  • 14 months ago
  • 2 points

Yup Isorice said it. 1080p would be an excellent fit for an RX 2070. Two years ago one might have considered it overkill, not anymore.

Sort

add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube