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 "Opinion wanted on first build ever"

  • 19 hours ago
  • 1 point

Sorry for the delayed response - been a little tied down of late. Back in full swing!!

My only doubt is about the motherboard, as I need a wireless network adapter or a wi-fi capable mobo. I could also pick an older B450 mobo with a wi-fi module and flash an updated BIOS via USB key, as MSI motherboards have this capability.

  • You could dial down to a non-MAX variant and produce a working system. Problem being, the MAX series mobos came to fruition with purpose - essentially what you get is a larger BIOS chip which delivers sufficient memory for 3rd GEN CPU functionality (full feature activation) + a kinder bedrock for future optimisations/updates. With WIFI being a necessary function, you can either opt for a dedicated WIFI PCIe card with a B450 or grab a X570 mobo with built-in WIFI.

I have mixed feelings about the 2080 super. I don't know if the fps improvement it's worth the extra money I should spend to get it. Maybe for the moment I'll pass and change the 2070 s in the future when new cards will come out.

Great thinking!! Personally i'd fancy a 2070 SUPER too (great for 1440p) with an earlier upgrade path down the road. These cards are already rather expensive for my personal liking hence it makes sense not having to fork out a bombshell for not so much of a bombshell performance spike with a 2080-S.

Last but not least... CPU cooler. In a build like this it's worth to spend extra money in an aftermarket cooler or the stock one (Wraith Stealth) coming with the cpu is ok? I could also change the 3600 with a 3600X if the stock cooler (Wraith Spire) that comes with it is a better combo than the 3600/stock or 3600/any other aftermarket cooler.

This ones down to user preference. For my personal taste, i'd fancy either the 3600 or 3600X with an aftermarket $30-$35 cooler for lower thermals and more importantly achieving a lesser acoustic range (ramped up noise levels). The 3600X does come with a better cooler but it's justified considering it's a higher binned CPU which achieves a marginal performance boost (the performance gain won't make hardly any impact in higher resolution gaming performance). Spire is definitely better than the stealth but when ramped up it does get a little loud.

If you're saving money opting for a 2070 super and fancy a small performance gain on the CPU side, you could just grab the 3600X and fly with it. Upgrading coolers later (if desired) is effortlessly easy.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "CPU Advice Needed"

  • 19 hours ago
  • 1 point

Agreeing with your statements that I fabricated everything.

As are you but you use it in that manner so I'll agree to it even though we both know its wrong.

Your statements in the original post and yours to abide with.

In order to finish this I'll agree to your statements right or wrong and reference them back to you as your ready to deal with your own statements.

Absent of definitive rationalism and playfully fenced remarks = doesn’t require any attention!! What requires lengthy consideration is the following remark:

No need the young lady deleted the thread figuring it would lead back to her, I paid for a new cooler to fix the issues your statements there lead to.

Shocking!! I don't know how you pulled that one off, but then again the Gilroar Magic Show must go on. I don't have the energy to wrap my head around this one for tonight but considering the weight of this newly acclaimed story, expect a more in-depth reply tomorrow evening.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "CPU Advice Needed"

  • 7 days ago
  • 1 point

Fine I fabricated you posting this.

Keep in mind the 3800X's default TDP is rated at 105w, whereas the more efficient 65w 3700X delivers pretty much on-par performance

And the point is?

So users should chuck the Wraith Prism that comes with it and downgrade to a lower cooler since that isn't needed as you have pointed out multiple times.

Huh? I’m baffled.

So from my initial following statement….

“Keep in mind the 3800X's default TDP is rated at 105w, whereas the more efficient 65w 3700X delivers pretty much on-par performance - "efficiency" alone is an excellent selling point for the 3700X opposed to a higher binned power munching and poorly scoring 3800X”

…..how on earth did you “dream-up” the wraith prism downgrade encouragement? …something I have supposedly pointed out “multiple times”? Show me where (explicit evidence, please!!)?

Also, why are you projecting the manufacturer rated TDP number as the CPUs maximum thermal output value. It seems like you’re paving Dorothy’s yellow brick road again with yet another falsely attributed invention from the ‘Gilroar fabrication factory’. You are perfectly aware that the assigned “base-clock” encroached TDP value has nothing to do with the CPUs “max” heat dissipation potential. You are also perfectly aware that the 3700X’s TDP value does not in any shape or form encourage buyers to purchase a capped 65w rated cooler which would ultimately limit the cycling boost-clock potential. You are also aware the Wraith Prism is a 105w TDP rated unit which is better suited for 3700X’s boost-clock performance.

This fictitiously implied assertion is yet another example of your irresponsible and self-contrived absurdity. And to think anyone would encourage “buyers to pay more money” for a lesser performing cooler opposed to sticking with an adequately and excellent value propositioned Wraith Prism is “MADNESS” re-invented. Now you are once again duty-bound to provide explicit evidence to support these outlandish claims. You should have ZERO problems in providing evidence as you so candidly suggested that I had made such references ”multiple times”.

I thought you might have learned your lesson from a similarly previous “misrepresenting TDP all over the site” outrageous lie. After persistently begging for evidence, eventually it took you around 10 days to finally withdraw the claim. That too with a ridiculous excuse of being drunk at the time of writing (oddly enough, but unsurprisingly, later contradicting yourself with a supposedly missing thread). I hope we don’t end up spending another 10 days to shed some light on this one.

They should always look at efficiency before performance.

And the 3800X scores worse then the 3700X across the board.

Gilroar, really? distressed NPD kicking in again?

(to think of it… before submitting this post, I just sat back for a bit just to ponder over the vast number of false accusations formed in this thread… all stemming from my initial post. I was wandering how many – maybe your 7th-8th bogus perversion. I mean it’s just relentless, one after the other, cherry picked and loosely fitted bullets spiralling all over the place. Oddly enough I can’t even tell if I’m shocked, annoyed, baffled or rationally stimulated in trading this sort of onslaught. You’ve given trolling a whole new meaning, something I would have imagined was impossible. To get some perspective, (maybe tomorrow) I’ll run through the entire thread and put together a list of all the cunningly crafted false accusations, hopefully for a more inclusive glimpse of the madness in its entirety. Along the way, we can use this list to add all the follow-up upcoming blank bullets which are inevitably imminent. This could be like our actively updated products catalogue - courtesy of the burn-rampant 5.8Ghz explosively overclocked ‘Gilroar Fabrication Factory’, which I’m assuming is using a Live_Ammo propelled 65w capped cooler or some sort, hehe)

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Opinion wanted on first build ever"

  • 7 days ago
  • 1 point

Build looks great, with some changes:

  • A MAX-series Ryzen 3000 ready motherboard. Your current selection will require a BIOS update which is possible 1) either using a previous GEN CPU 2) or a CPU-less flash button update, if the motherboard supports this feature

  • 16GB RAM is more than sufficient for gaming

[OPTIONAL] Another possibility - being higher resolution gaming is more GPU-bound, you might fancy the RTX 2080 SUPER (10-20% avg increase fps performance depending on game type). This ones optional - more in favour for the higher FPS ensuing enthusiast @ 144hz. To make this possible, depending on your immediate storage requirements, you could opt for a single 1TB SSD + throw in another 50 euros on top:

PCPartPicker Part List

Type Item Price
CPU AMD Ryzen 5 3600 3.6 GHz 6-Core Processor €205.89 @ Amazon Italia
Motherboard MSI B450 TOMAHAWK MAX ATX AM4 Motherboard €129.00 @ Amazon Italia
Memory Patriot Viper Steel 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3600 Memory €94.99 @ Amazon Italia
Storage Sabrent Rocket 1 TB M.2-2280 NVME Solid State Drive €129.99 @ Amazon Italia
Video Card EVGA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER 8 GB XC GAMING Video Card €797.00 @ Amazon Italia
Case Cooler Master MasterBox NR600 (w/o ODD) ATX Mid Tower Case €77.05 @ Amazon Italia
Power Supply FSP Group Hydro G 650 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply €99.00 @ Amazon Italia
Monitor LG 27GL850-B 27.0" 2560x1440 144 Hz Monitor €499.99 @ Amazon Italia
Keyboard Logitech K840 Wired Standard Keyboard €96.18 @ Amazon Italia
Mouse Logitech MX518 Wired Optical Mouse -
Speakers Logitech Z200 0 nW 2.0 Channel Speakers €36.48 @ Alternate Italia
Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts
Total €2165.57
Generated by PCPartPicker 2020-01-21 23:03 CET+0100

or save 50 eu and grab a more affordable Romer-G Tactile mech keyboard: https://www.amazon.it/Logitech-Tastiera-Giochi-Meccanica-Italiano/dp/B071XW5FW8/ref=sr_1_2?fst=as%3Aoff&keywords=mechanical+keyboard&qid=1579644337&refinements=p_89%3AAzio%7CCooler+Master%7CCorsair%7CHyperX%7CLogitech%7CLogitech+G%7CRedragon&rnid=1688663031&sr=8-2

Comment reply on Forum Topic "CPU Advice Needed"

  • 9 days ago
  • 1 point

“Unsurprisingly”, you’re at your best by repeating the same nonsense AGAIN.

No you used it as a selling point in favor of the 3700X when it isn't a fixed number and has no meaning as a selling point.

No i did not use "TDP" as a "selling point". We have been through all of this already. Let's examine the statement again:

  • "Keep in mind the 3800X's default TDP is rated at 105w, whereas the more efficient 65w 3700X delivers pretty much on-par performance - "efficiency" alone is an excellent selling point for the 3700X opposed to a higher binned power munching and poorly scoring 3800X"

Again adding bold highlights to emphasise a super-clear-cut statement which you are deliberately misrepresenting. Let's repeat it. "Efficiency" alone is an excellent "selling point". Stop throwing TDP into the mix. Let me guess, now you're going misconstrue matters further by suggesting "Efficiency was referred as TDP". Actually, you've already done that. Whatever you're going to produce next from the "Gilroar Fabrication Factory", please present clear-cut evidence alongside the claim.

Referring to the 3800X as poorer scoring after stating they had parity only makes matters worse contradicting yourself.

Ridiculous!!. Why did you repeat this again? Refer back to "POINT NUMBER 2" here https://pcpartpicker.com/comments/thread/3415027/ (this was only recently covered and yet again you're back to your usual school-playground antics). In short, "poorly scoring" was mentioned and not "poorer scoring". In short #2, if you fail to grasp "higher binned and poorly scoring", it's better to inquire rather than running wild with false accusations.

This has been going on for weeks and I'm tired of the PM's asking me to stop and let it go.

First the potential MOD concern and now the PMs. Oddly-enough, it’s a little unusual seeing you encouraging an exit-plan whilst repeatedly hurling the same precariously executed and disingenuous accusations. I cannot allow this type of pathologically narcissistic arrogance to dismiss itself - especially considering I’m on the receiving end.

As long as these “deliberately” prolonged false insinuations, fabricated lies and your nonstop mudslinging approach continues, I reserve the right to stick around and defend myself. If that too, is too hard to understand, simply put: “me no go, me stay”

Comment reply on Forum Topic "CPU Advice Needed"

  • 12 days ago
  • 1 point

I've linked proof already unlike yourself.

Proof? What evidence did you bring forward to explicitly prove a statement from either being a "definition of the TDP value" or "NOT being a definition of the TDP value". That sounds absurd unless you've somehow managed to introduce a statement verification calculator (maybe an underground 'made in china' device which someone needs to inform you: it's a hoax). What you provided was a manufacturers description of TDP which was never in question in the first place and had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with your initial accusation (literally irrelevant and never contested). This is exactly what i've mentioned time and again.... deliberate deviation from the principal discussion.

Any credibility your word carried was gone with manual tuning=stock settings.

Again with the side-tracking antics. Refer to the second para of the top reply: https://pcpartpicker.com/comments/thread/3408208/ You just can't resist can you!

If you want to keep writing chapters hoping nobody realizes you have zero proof backing your claims, and your statement only holds water with chapters in between every line then fine.

The proof is in the pudding - it's called the English language and the initial statement in question requires a 'little' intelligence to grasp. So now we've moved from ".....comes across as....." to 'outright misconstruing again'. You've already withdrawn from one preposterous accusation after a similar debacle, let's not repeat it again.

About the long written chapter concealment of facts - nope, it's a clear cut "rationalised" and deep-rooted and easy to comprehend response to someone who is running away from redeeming themselves from being held accountable. There's no concealment of facts here..... it's a fully accessible, observable and open discussion, you couldn't hide a grain of salt if you tried.

That's on your head to deal with.

Yes, on my head to deal with (indeed) and your shoulders to carry the weight (where it's due).

Now again I've already stated we've both taken up enough of the mods time over the weeks so drop it.

Should the Mods feel this conversation should come to a close at any given time, i'd be more than happy to oblige. This can be achieved with an instruction here in the thread. I'm all about "regulations" or "best-interests" for all. As for you and your relentlessly disingenuous disposition I find it rather odd that all of a sudden, whilst you continue to make ridiculous assertions, you seek a way out with (praying to the Lord)~like call on Mod thoughtfulness (it kinda sounded like 'intervention pls').

BTW, I wouldn't call it quits just yet. You might recall some of your irrelevant (drifting) topics of interest which had frantically emerged throughout the discussion to which I had suggested leaving them for later. I've compiled a small list of these assertions and fancy delving into those. The condition was, stay on track with the current topic and then we can move on to the rest of the wibble-wobble. When you're ready, I'm more than happy to discuss those suspiciously "misconstrued opportunities" which you presented earlier so we can shed some light on the matter (a new thread will be fine if that's the preferred path).

Comment reply on Forum Topic "I Need RGB fan suggestions"

  • 12 days ago
  • 1 point

Is the SteelSeries Core 3 mouse compatible with the MSI RGB software controller? I'm assuming you're looking to sync everything together.

For MSI Mystic compatible RGB fans/other - https://www.msi.com/Landing/mystic-light-rgb-gaming-pc/compatible-products

As for specific recommendations, it's down to user preference in terms of design, lighting elements, user feedback, etc. Have a look at the linked fans and see what you fancy and check the specs per requirement. Personally, the RGB market for me grew too fast to play catch-up with a bunch of newer options available.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "CPU Advice Needed"

  • 12 days ago
  • 2 points

If you need a English degree to understand your posts meaning you shouldn't be assuming the poster has one.

You don’t need an English degree to understand basic terms or word concepts, esp. with the likes of “poorer”, “poorly”, “scoring” or within context, “poorly scoring”.

In basic terms it still comes across as wrong.

So you should really amend your original post to reflect that.

I disagree with this relentless claim which promotes the notion that the following statement somehow forms an unambiguous “definition” of TDP: (“Keep in mind the 3800X's default TDP is rated at 105w, whereas the more efficient 65w 3700X delivers pretty much on-par performance - "efficiency" alone is an excellent selling point for the 3700X opposed to a higher binned power munching and poorly scoring 3800X.”)

I don’t for a second believe the above excerpt carries any sort of obscured or ambiguously complicit characterisation which somehow garbles to explicitly defining the “TDP value”. If this assertion was correct, this would have manifested through (1) distinct inference or (2) representative of an existing query (in relation to TDP). Evidently there is (1) ZERO discernible definition employed or ZERO conceivably referenced possibility and (2) the OPs thread and member participation made ZERO existing query in relation to TDP, no mention of TDP and no observable inclination which gave cause to coerce the definitive aspect of TDP. Therefore, the observable notion could and should never have concluded with a per-chance possibility (or forced accusation). In simple and ‘basic terms’ it just doesn’t make sense.

This type of misinterpretation is understandable from someone who is unfamiliar with the TDP function or it’s relatively indicative nature. Most likely someone who is new to PC hardware and oblivious to the entailed technical intricacies. This doesn’t apply to you. ‘That someone’ would have responded more inquisitively whilst you carelessly threw in the hammer without first observing the observable.

None of this really matters. What matters is the “outcome”. Our small and tolerable exchange right from the start should have quickly discharged itself in a rational and respectable manner. Regardless of all or any clarification provided, you firmly took the position to unscrupulously maintain an inconsiderately irrational approach by ignoring informed actualities. You further demonstrated a ruthless barrage of ballistic-missile-like frenzies comprising of several odd deviating assertions, misinformation and reckless falsehoods. I have done nothing but rectified each and every meaningless strike and fended off falsely attributed accusations. Along the way, many times you had the opportunity to express regret or show some signs of restitution. Each time your CLAIMS were overturned, rather than acknowledging the “resolve”, you came up with something new to further digress/misconstrue matters.

Now, the latest fuelled distraction being, “In basic terms it still comes across as wrong. So you should really amend your original post to reflect that.” So the madness ensues, although I admit you have toned down a little to “…..comes across as….” which is the more healthier approach but ultimately remains inaccurate.

All you have done here by assuming is make an *** of yourself and me.

Let me correct this assertion for you:

All you have done here by assuming is make an *** of yourself and me.

Never consider being “corrected” or plausibly “fended off” as being ridiculed. I have no intent or malice to humiliate/shame anyone - something I genuinely despise. To some degree, within clear context I have been stern in forming an opinion on your personal character, which is something I’m not proud of, but considering the circumstances, it’s justified. This is not “how I usually roll” but let’s not forget I'm not the instigator here but the accused.

You’ve made some wild allegations both from a personal perspective and technical point of view. You have deliberately attempted to undermine me in every conceivable manner without valid contention. Also, let’s not forget the premise of your initial argument which has been inappropriately and exhaustively maintained throughout the exchange – which disturbingly alludes to the following multifarious definition of TDP:

(the premise in the literal sense accuses me of advocating the 3 following beliefs:)

  1. TDP is a measure of power (electrical watts). Which implies heatsinks comprise of electrical components and draw power from the CPU. Which would also imply thermal paste being a raw electric exchanger. Which would also imply this has nothing to do with thermal dissipation and that I’ve been building computers all my life with the assumption that CPU Cooling convection/conduction requires electrical mechanics (seemingly engineered into the chunk of metal we refer to as heatsink).

  2. TDP is a measure of power efficiency.

  3. and purportedly, TDP is a measure of clockspeed performance disparity.

With these types of accusations, how did you expect me to respond? If you misinterpreted an initial statement and were then corrected, why did you relentlessly continue to make these absurd claims? If that wasn’t provocative enough, how about all the other superfluous contentions which were either completely flawed to begin with or tremendously blown out of proportion?

I just can’t grasp how you managed to pull up on this thought-process: “All you have done here by assuming is make an *** of yourself and me.” or was this a well-calculated ambiguity to discharge yourself from fault?

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Do you guys use discontinued CPUS?"

  • 12 days ago
  • 1 point

Apologies for the delay.

Taking the above into account (budget & workload), you'll be better off grabbing a 8-core/12-thread Ryzen 3700X which beats the discontinued i7 7740x by a long shot. Essentially, greater compute resources for core-count/multi-thread intensive audio production/video rendering workloads. Depending on what else the $700 budget entails (or possible wiggle room), you might be able to squeeze in a 12c/24t Ryzen 3900X.

Before suggesting a recommended parts list:

  1. Can i see what you are upgrading from? A fully specced-up parts list would help.

  2. Is that $700 for the CPU and MOBO only, with additional funds directed elsewhere (RAM/PSU/STORAGE/etc)? Or are you looking to upgrade with a fully compatible build within the $700 mark.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "CPU Advice Needed"

  • 15 days ago
  • 2 points

You have once again resorted to desperately juvenile and inappropriate attempts to deliberately misconstrue facts. This has been an on-going process throughout the discourse. Unacceptable!! I can’t make sense of why you are allowing yourself to deplete the possibility of maintaining some credibility. It’s a little hard to digest considering I held you in good regard since joining PCPP around 2/3 years ago. I usually ignore some of the nonsense flying around in online forums but since you’re diligently targeting me (the accused), you leave me no choice but to further expose the coerced onslaught which is cunningly riddled with misconstrued and poorly premeditated falsehoods.


LET'S EXAMINE YOUR PREVIOUS REPLY IN DETAIL

POINT NUMBER 1

Maybe in your mind but to anyone else that isn't how it reads. You directly mention the 3800X being a higher TDP part with no mention of efficiency.

Incorrect!

Read my very first post in this thread again, here’s a quick excerpt:

  • "Keep in mind the 3800X's default TDP is rated at 105w, whereas the more efficient 65w 3700X delivers pretty much on-par performance - "efficiency" alone is an excellent selling point for the 3700X opposed to a higher binned power munching and poorly scoring 3800X".

As highlighted in bold, not once but mentioned twice in the initial post. For double the clarification (a compelled requirement), the first mention being: “the more efficient 65w 3700X”

I don’t believe I need to C&P several other examples where I have clearly addressed efficiency again (in this thread). For me it’s a little baffling considering you yourself had referred to this excerpt several times throughout the thread. Furthermore, 2 or 3 times, I clearly demonstrated the same with finer detail.

Then you directly mention efficiency, TDP, and close performance of the 3700X.

Refer to the above. If you still can’t see it, my diagnosis being: “book an appointment with the opticians”


POINT NUMBER 2

Now this part is both wrong in the 3800X being lower scoring, and misleading after the mentions of TDP and efficiency.

You never once mentioned thermal performance of either part.

"Common Sense" would have you not understanding TDP's meaning making this a simple mistake. Easily understandable after listing the 3800X as a poorly scoring part even though you stated the 3700X was "pretty much on-par performance".

However since you are aware of AMD's TDP meaning not being fixed the way in which you mention it directly when referencing power draw as a selling point switches to misleading through omission in order to push your favored part even to the point of misleading about the 3800X being lower scoring

Another appalling attempt.

“poorly scoring” does not by any means imply “lesser performing”. Had I suggested “poorer scoring” then you’ve got something to play with.

To keep it simple, a quick googling session would have sufficed:

  • Poorly: an adverb - in a way that is unsatisfactory or inadequate

  • Poorer: a comparative adjective - of a low or inferior standard (performance) or quality.

What also ever-so evidently tops it off:

  • Scoring: is generally within context aligned with “gaining” points (in this case performance).

In other words, the 3800X does gain performance but a poorly surmountable run which is not justified with a +$70-$75 CAD asking price. You know very well what was being referenced here and again you failed miserably in misconstruing truth with falsehood.

The annoying part being, at this point you would have further demonstrated this type of absurdity (as you have been throughout the thread) by playing with words and paraphrasing their intended forms. You would have also fought tooth-and-nail to further exploit this avenue by repeating the same accusation. Before you shoot yourself in the foot again (that’s a lot of holes to my count), let me help you with the following……

(keep in mind, this is my very first post in this thread – “word-to-word fully quoted” )

”I agree with Gilroar + Zerk... The 3800X is pointless (not sure why AMD added this one to an already spot-on 3rd GEN Ryzen stack). I guess for $10-$20 on top a small increase in performance would be nice but anything above this sort of premium is more leaning towards enthusiasm opposed to spend-worthy lucrative performance returns.”

”Potential board-maker and AMD driver or firmware I/O instruction updates did initially open up some optimism to get more out of the higher binned 3800X but 5/6 months-on there's nothing worthy of note to report, other then a select number of buyers reporting some favour with a 2-3% performance margin (with expensive coolers/boards or a silicon lotto win). Keep in mind the 3800X's default TDP is rated at 105w, whereas the more efficient 65w 3700X delivers pretty much on-par performance - "efficiency" alone is an excellent selling point for the 3700X opposed to a higher binned power munching and poorly scoring 3800X.”

…..i have highlighted (in bold) three clear-cut, widely transparent and explicit mentions of the 3800X pulling away from the 3700X as the marginally better performer. Being you were too busy digging dirt or trying your best to contaminate self-applauded delusions, you overlooked the observable.

As I queried earlier, I’m not sure why you’re stooping to this level which is clearly undermining your credibility (or better put: integrity). The frustrating part being, if those references weren’t included in the initial post you would have intentionally pursued this line of dishonesty – which is concerning to say the least.


POINT NUMBER 3

The threads I was thinking of were no longer on the site and were 3600 vs 3600X debates, however since they are no longer here I will take the blame for this.

That’s interesting.

Here’s what you replied prior to the above assertion (only yesterday):

Maybe I was wrong about that drinking and posting can lead to mistaken identities.

So which is it? Are we blaming the intoxicating bottle which lead to mistaken identity or a supposedly missing thread/s? …. A pretty frivolous contradiction formed within a 2 hour gap!! I don’t buy it one bit!

Let’s see:

  1. If we’re blaming the bottle you were certainly sober at some point. Your claim: “You have been all over the site misrepresenting the figure” was made 11 days ago. I’ve asked you repeatedly to provide explicit evidence to back up the accusation, which resulted with ZERO success. You’ve deliberately ignored all requests and tried your level best to conceal the blunder. The whole thread on your part is full of similarly fashioned and misconstrued inconsistencies. If we’re going to accept you have a drinking problem then I’m assuming you were sober when making these last 2 recent responses – the first being a sham (already responded to) and the 2nd about to be addressed below in its entirety (heads up – it’s not looking good). Hence I don’t buy the whole bottle exoneration.

  2. If we’re blaming an imaginary thread which somehow slipped and fell into a black hole, let me remind you, you suggested “all over the site”, which is a clear indication that’s there’s many or a ton of other examples which can be brought forward. Again, I don’t buy it. I’ll tell you why: The last time I probably discussed TDP by definition and had a meaningfully in-depth scuffling discussion on the subject was most likely on YAHOO/MIRC chat days (probably 12 years+ ago). That’s amongst colleagues and friends in those private conferences/chats. Considering the nature of TDP, it’s variably tailored function as per manufacturer spec, it's prescribed methods and the improvised prerequisites which are "widely" relative – I would have never of brought these challenges to public forums in the form of “debate” or “definition”, especially with the likes of PCPP where the general consumer barely touches on these subjects. In other words, I can 100% confidently suggest “you are lying” and no one in recent years has ever queried the issue of defining TDP with me nor have I randomly thrown myself in by complicating matters by introducing the subject. If you suggest otherwise, I have the perfect solution – contact one of the PCPP mods and request a black hole probe to find the missing treasure (that shouldn’t be too difficult).

I’ll let you ‘in’ on a heart-felt gesture. When you initially suggested: “Maybe I was wrong about that drinking and posting can lead to mistaken identities.” …. Did you notice I intentionally avoided calling you up on it. The reason given was absurd but I felt some tolerance/leniency is always good for an amicable outcome. With your previous reply, you spat that kind averting compassion out of the window when indulging yourself in yet another preposterous claim with the supposedly missing 3600 vs 3600X thread. It’s hard enough seeing you shave off layers of credibility and integrity but on top where clemency is always achievable, you’re doing a pretty bad job in losing that too.


POINT NUMBER 4

Nope took enough black marks for this so your on your own.

You can say that again.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Budget PC between 500-600 euros"

  • 16 days ago
  • 2 points

Ooops, thanks for the quick fix.

Amended:

PCPartPicker Part List

Type Item Price
CPU AMD Ryzen 5 2600X 3.6 GHz 6-Core Processor €144.90 @ Alternate
Motherboard MSI B450M PRO-VDH MAX Micro ATX AM4 Motherboard €77.98 @ Amazon Deutschland
Memory Crucial Ballistix Sport LT 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3200 Memory €73.90 @ Amazon Deutschland
Storage Crucial BX500 480 GB 2.5" Solid State Drive €54.44 @ Amazon Deutschland
Video Card Zotac GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER 4 GB Twin Fan Video Card €183.80 @ Amazon Deutschland
Case Deepcool MATREXX 30 MicroATX Mini Tower Case €30.34 @ Amazon Deutschland
Power Supply Corsair CXM 550 W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-modular ATX Power Supply €67.90 @ Amazon Deutschland
Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts
Total €633.26
Generated by PCPartPicker 2020-01-13 04:05 CET+0100

Comment reply on Forum Topic "CPU Advice Needed"

  • 16 days ago
  • 2 points

You did though.

No, your selective reading and lack of comprehension has either put you in the dark or the more conceivable notion stands firm "deliberately misconstrued".

TFP, Efficiency, Performance, Efficiency as a selling point opposed to high power draw and poor scoring part in that order.

No matter what you say that is what you posted even though you have stated multiple times that it is wrong.

Nonsense!!

The only description tied alongside the TDP value is "efficiency" which is a clear-cut indication of thermal efficiency. This is then again clearly signified in the second follow up "efficiency ALONE is an excellent selling point". Let me repeat, after all the selective conceptualisation displayed by you does warrant a child-like approach - so lets repeat that ""efficiency *ALONE is an excellent selling point* I'm now having to teach you 2 words from the english dictionary - Alone and Explicit. You still have not provided explicit evidence. Put the ego-trip to rest and hopefully common sense will prevail.

The rest falls in line purely by general CPU characterisation, exhibiting binned clockspeeds, power consumption and rivalled performance. All of which is reflective of the improvised prerequisites which are "widely" relative but not definitive by design. But nah, your lack of familiarity on this subject is ever-so evident.

No matter what you say that is what you posted even though you have stated multiple times that it is wrong.

Are you not able to complete a response without further lies and fabrications? I have never said it's wrong. What is and has been informed as wrong is your deliberately misconstrued claim and then not having anything to back it up. From "all over the site" to nowhere to be found lol

Don't worry mate, i feel you. You're not alone with the err of the slippy sloppy, i've seen this sort of thing before. I get it, for some it's too hard to concede and make amends. We shall fight your 'holier than thou' disease together until 'thy kingdom comes'

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Budget PC between 500-600 euros"

  • 16 days ago
  • 2 points

ive already got gear like a mouse monitor etc. and already got as license.

nice, glad you've got the peripherals and OS sorted already. 600 Euros for the build itself is a decent budget for a moderate gaming platform (well depends on the type of games played).

Kulaz has already put together a decent build for this sort of price range. Check your local stores (or online) to see whether you can achieve this sort of build within the suggested budget.

Or preferably something like this - again if possible in terms of local cost:

PCPartPicker Part List

Type Item Price
CPU AMD Ryzen 5 2600X 3.6 GHz 6-Core Processor €144.90 @ Alternate
Motherboard MSI B450 Gaming Plus MAX ATX AM4 Motherboard €100.79 @ Mindfactory
Memory Crucial Ballistix Sport LT 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3200 Memory €73.90 @ Amazon Deutschland
Storage Crucial BX500 480 GB 2.5" Solid State Drive €54.44 @ Amazon Deutschland
Video Card Zotac GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER 4 GB Twin Fan Video Card €183.80 @ Amazon Deutschland
Case Deepcool MATREXX 30 MicroATX Mini Tower Case €30.34 @ Amazon Deutschland
Power Supply Corsair CXM 550 W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-modular ATX Power Supply €67.90 @ Amazon Deutschland
Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts
Total €656.07
Generated by PCPartPicker 2020-01-13 03:02 CET+0100

you might be able to locate a 1650 super for around 150-160 euros - fingers crossed

A more affordable mobo is also very likely, only the MAX edition sees better upgrade potential (although not necessary).

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Cooling and storage for a simple, non-cutom loop Build in a huge Phateks Case."

  • 16 days ago
  • 1 point

Holy shakkamoly,

Samsung 850 Pro @ 1TB for $450 is DAY LIGHT ROBBERY. There are better, faster or newer Samsung models or equally phenomenal performing units from other brands which are far more reasonably priced.

If you don't mind sharing more info: Whats all the storage for? Any particular reason why you're opting for a multitude of storage devices?

I have never used NVMe. Is this the best place to install OS, vs SSD?

I extracted the above question from one of your replies to another user. To answer the question, yes thats where you want to save your OS, applications and active workloads (although not all workloads are capable of utilising NVME superior R/W speeds). There are marginal performance advantages with saving games on NVME SSDs too, although not significant enough by any means to discount higher volume SATA-SSDs (if achievable for less). These performance advantages are limited to game load up times only as both NVME/SATA-driven SSDs are significantly faster when compared to traditional hard drives.


1600W PSU is overkill! A 750W unit for the build as it stands is plenty of juice in the tank. Not sure whether you're targeting a multiple-GPU arrangement for specific workloads which may benefit.


Just double checking: You already have the Alienware aw3418dw at hand and want a second 1440p higher refresh rate panel? If yes, are you looking for a similar panel arrangement with ultra wide higher pixel count (3440x1440) unit or a standard 27" 1440p (2560x1440) unit?

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Budget PC between 500-600 euros"

  • 16 days ago
  • 2 points

Help us, help you :)

  1. Whats the build for? (general productivity/gaming/basic office applications/etc)

  2. Does the 600 euro target include the operating system? what about peripherals (display/mouse/keyboard/etc)

  3. Where are you based in EU? Depending on your region the recommended spec may differ with your immediate local/online store prices. If your local region is not listed with PCPP's supported retailers (top right, drop down list), which of the listed European countries best represents your local pricing/stock availability?

EDIT: ImperiousBattlestar BEAT ME TO IT - that was weird, almost an identical narrowed down reply. My long lost twin - located lol

Comment reply on Forum Topic "CPU Advice Needed"

  • 16 days ago
  • 2 points

I've already linked you both a deep dive with AMD and three different cooler manufacturers opinions on the subject and the AMD statements on the subject proving that TDP doesn't mean what you think it means.

But according to you neither AMD or cooler manufacturers agree with your viewpoint so they are wrong, so in whatever world you live in I'm wrong.

Again, the Desperate Deviating Dirty Dancing (something I didn't expect from a regular PCPP member). This is yet another misleading and insincere claim "pulled out of the wind". I have never disputed with the manufacturers assigned representation of TDP nor have i contested to any shared information in this regard. You have not once queried this matter with me in a responsible manner, and from the get-go just flaunted mostly fictitious (or misconstrued) accusations. Therefore, there is absolutely no need for me to check any of the sources provided and I refuse to entertain fabricated side-tracking antics. For your information, I'm more than familiar with the tailored TDP variable function as per manufacturer spec, it's prescribed methods and the improvised prerequisites which are "widely" relative but not definitive by design. 15+ years of hardware curiosity and rhythmic enthusiasm somehow makes avoiding the subject impossible. Hence it's not a matter of excluding myself from benefiting from the sources provided but a clear protest in not having to review material i'm already familiar with.

Throughout the process, you have been employing diverging tactics which are clearly engineered to digress from the original accusation. Here's some timeline substance to bring you back to purpose:

  • Our discourse initiated from an extract of my initial post, comprising of the following:

"Keep in mind the 3800X's default TDP is rated at 105w, whereas the more efficient 65w 3700X delivers pretty much on-par performance - "efficiency" alone is an excellent selling point for the 3700X opposed to a higher binned power munching and poorly scoring 3800X."

  • to which, without any attempt to consult first, you threw yourself in and formed the opinion that the following was in reference to strictly defining the TDP value: ".....opposed to a higher binned power munching and poorly scoring 3800X”

  • you were immediately corrected in the follow-up exchange where you were clearly and forthrightly informed:

"No one is suggesting TDP is a measure of "power efficiency" or "power usage"

  • according to me, there was no debate to be had as the above reply was sufficient to remedy the misinterpretation AND there was absolutely no reason to escalate the matter any further.

  • you blatantly ignored the above which fell on deaf ears and responded with a quarrelsome:

”You did above as referenced"

  • In other words, your mind was made-up and there was no turning back, regardless of any explanation provided. This form of belligerence was least expected and gave birth to the ensued relentless madness.

  • As if your perpetuated self-misconstrued superstition wasn't enough, you then went on to throw in a preposterously fictitious accusation by adding:

"You have been all over the site misrepresenting the figure as a selling point when it doesn't mean what you think it means."

  • Along the way, I clearly informed that the initial reference is a very clear-cut secondary comparative which clearly results with the ".....3800X's" characterisation. In other words, relatively descriptive of the CPU in general. Had this been a TDP fixed rate characterisation you would have read "opposed to a higher binned power munching and poorly scoring TDP"

  • NOTE: I have never by any means nor explicitly defined TDP to "power consumption", "efficiency" or (equal by the alluded reference) "performance". This is an outlandishly bizarre and down-right foolish claim!! Foolish in the sense that you're essentially accusing me of defining the TDP value to a combined representation of 1) electrical watts, which implies the cooler draws power from the CPU (a preposterous claim), 2) the same value also somehow determines thermal efficiency (God knows how that works), and presumably 3) a measure of clockspeed performance (a dimwitted speculation). This type of imprudent postulation cannot be absent of "explicit evidence".

  • This again fell on deaf ears (intentionally on your part).

  • Several times I requested "explicit evidence" for the above accusation. You have only provided the initial reference which doesn’t even come close to a compelling misinterpretation and makes for a very poor and squandered desperate attempt.

  • I also many times asked for "explicit evidence" which is relative to your second outrageous claim where I am charged with misrepresenting TDP all over the site. “All over” clearly suggests that you have several or a ton of examples to bring forward. Until today, completely ignoring my countless requests, you have provided ZERO evidence. This outrageously adventurous CLAIM, absent of substantiation, corroborates with my earlier thoughts:

"If that was a matter of misinterpretation from the "first statement", this would have been resolved from the get-go. The notion was never contested in it's infancy nor in the vindicated aftermath. Now I'm convinced you have a more sinister agenda either to discredit everything irrationally or play dodge-ball from being stood corrected (edit: conceding to truth is never a bad thing). This sort of self-compromising conspicuous narcissism is the type of social-platformed mediocrity I am quite familiar with."

  • I haven't even mentioned the numerous occasions where you have deliberately attempted to side-track, build smoke-screens and open extraneous doors to capsize the principal basis of the discourse. Of which, certain matters were taken way out of context, disingenuously irrelevant claims were made and on top each time you were corrected you quickly moved onto another self-serving extraordinary offshoot (or better summarised: a frantically tailored deviation to cover your backside).

Now, considering the above, I have no other option but to once again request genuine and existent substantiation of your claims. As you know very well, the mandatory 'case form factor' here is "explicit evidence" and anything else is deemed incompatible and tediously irrelevant. Don't force me to define "explicit" with a simplified easy-to-learn meaning, as it seems you are failing to grasp the basics here.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Do you guys use discontinued CPUS?"

  • 16 days ago
  • 1 point

i7-7740x - discontinued. I don't believe you're going to find these at a reasonable cost even opting for the used market.

There are alternative higher core count options available for this platform, whether it's worth investing in these entirely depends on your intended workload.

How much were you looking to spend?

Workload type?

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Need some advice. I messed around with some parts and this is what i got for a gaming/streaming/editing pc. Thought?"

  • 16 days ago
  • 1 point

this looks good!!

Have you looked into hardware accelerated encoding? (basically lesser performance hit on the gaming side whilst streaming). Preferably with a RTX 2070 SUPER graphics card. If the budget is tight, you can maintain the GPU encoding principle and drop the 3700X for a Ryzen 3600/3600x. 6 core (12 thread) 3rd GEN CPUs for are more than sufficient to get the best out of modern day demanding gaming titles.

Depending on your storage requirements, there's the option of ditching the 2-drive solution for a single 1TB FAST NVME SSD. eg. https://pcpartpicker.com/product/9nhKHx/intel-660p-series-1tb-m2-2280-solid-state-drive-ssdpeknw010t8x1 Benefit being, faster game load times with all titles installed to the SSD + lesser cable clutter to deal with as these M.2 sticks simply snap onto the motherboard with a single screw (no cables).

Comment reply on Forum Topic "1st pc build"

  • 16 days ago
  • 3 points

What are your thoughts with Ryzen 3700X's multi-threaded performance advantages? At stock, the 3700X's single threaded performance closely competes with the 9700K and sees greater benefit with far exceeding multi-threaded performance. The SMT branch enables faster rendering and adds greater compute resources for multiple tasks on the go or running 2/more projects simultaneously (incl. hefty bulk image editing).

The only compelling argument for the 9700K at this point it's "overclocking" potential. If OC is part-n-parcel with the build requirement, go for it, otherwise the 3700X for your type of workload makes a pretty compelling case for the finer balance for a multitude of single/multi-threaded workloads.

You could save more money:

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Good graphics card"

  • 16 days ago
  • 2 points

RobertL90 has you covered nicely (assuming this is for 1080p gaming)

Those options may be limited if you're targeting higher resolution gaming displays (1440p/4K/etc).

Display resolution?

budget?

Comment reply on Forum Topic "advice/opinions wanted !"

  • 16 days ago
  • 1 point

the list is set on private. Open list, hit "edit parts" and uncheck "private". You'll want to paste the link which is located directly above the parts list (a fixed snapshot) rather than the one in the browsers URL.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "3K-4K Build Help"

  • 16 days ago
  • 1 point

.... heck, when did AMD come back?

lol they've always been there at a competitive clash since Ryzen but now with their current 3rd GEN arsenal, the battlefront is bloodier. They don't plan on taking any prisoners either :)

For the CPU, are you looking at a custom liquid cooling solution or a closed-loop AIO?

Is that 3K/4K USD/CAD/AUS/GBP/etc?

Assuming you have a display already at hand, what are you running in terms of resolution and refresh rates? (eg. 1080p 144hz).

Also, Windows OS required?

Comment reply on Forum Topic "CPU Advice Needed"

  • 20 days ago
  • 2 points

Which you stated was incorrect so you have lowered yourself to trolling.

Amazing. Further misconstrued and deliberate attempt to conceal another false statement. Let's not forget what the basis was, as you recklessly put:

Thermal efficiency of the products are identical since the products are identical in that context.

There is no context to be had in the first place. The distinct manufacturer specification for both models (3700X/3800X) is officially listed and the specified irregularities are undeniably FACT and actionable in real-time observation. The "designated specifications" of any given product is relative by 'product' definition (including designated clockspeeds and specced TDP values). You absurdly attempted to undermine this fact by throwing in the following (to cover your backside):

Thermal efficiency of the products are identical since the products are identical in that context. Ryzen CPU are only made in two models. 1-CCD for the 3500X-3800X 2-CCD for the 3900X and 3950X

Which was completely irrelevant. 'Performance irregularities' between the 2 models is a clear indication for the end-result "product specification" and held ZERO relevance to higher core count 3900X+ core complex or CCX cluster arrangements. Ad the irony here is .....you're calling me a troll. All you've done so far is present a number of misinterpretations or deliberate deviations throughout the thread, which quickly materialises when any subject in question is contested. Speaking about deviations:

Except as already linked it doesn't apply to heat dissipation only the cooling required to achieve manufacturers desired specs, which is not fixed and have no real bearing on actual heat dissipation needed for that part.

here's another one. This is what I call a PHD in trolling!! 1) it has never been contested, 2) the TDP heat dissipation value and what this is in relation to (CPU cooler) hasn't been discussed as it's common knowledge and now you have mysteriously and impudently taken the position that I'm suggesting otherwise. 3) a clear side-tracked and finely manipulated scheme to once again cover your backside from presenting evidence for the initial falsified accusation. Which brings us back to the following (my long-due request):

  • I do not need to view additional documentations or other material and certainly made no claim in defining the TDP number as power draw (electric watts). That is a ridiculous supposition, loosely executed from a relatively indicative structure opposed to an explicitly distinct statement. In other words, you're simply over-exaggerating and deliberately taking things out of context - even though the conferred premise has remained in agreement from the get-go and further reiterated several times. I asked you clearly to provide explicit evidence as to where this suggestion was made and yet nothing.

  • Show me where I have "distinctly" propelled the notion that the TDP number defines to the actual power draw/consumption. What you are essentially insinuating is, that I at some point informed others that the CPU exchanges electric watts with the CPU cooler, as if the CPU cooler necessitates operational power directly from the CPU. That's a largely irresponsible and absurd accusation to flaunt around - one that absolutely requires clear-cut validation. This should be super easy on your part to deliver, especially considering one of your other outlandish suggestions informs "You have been all over the site misrepresenting the figure......" (show me).

So, be a honourable gentleman and stop playing child-like games and deliver the goods as expected. And if you're going to create further discrepancies to shove down my throat, as suggested, kindly provide "explicit" evidence and not your usual produce from the "Gilroar gone nuts fabrication factory".

Comment reply on Forum Topic "CPU Advice Needed"

  • 22 days ago
  • 2 points

You removed those from the context.

They are the same product when you remove designated rating and actual output.

lol which is the same as the previous statement: "The product line/architectural footprint can be considered identical by design but intended performance irregularities do not share the same principle" thank you for repeating the same and maintaining the illusion of a contrary contention. It's amazing, it almost hides away the fact that you did class both the 3700X and 3800X as the same product when those "designated ratings" and "actual output" is a pre-configured reality out-of-the-box (by default). But do not worry i'm not going to continuously use this as a means to undermine you.... or the other baffling/obscured claims which have come to light.

I've linked you the relevant information from AMD showing the manufacturer definition, it has nothing to do with efficiency, power draw, or thermal output of their CPU/APU.

This type of perpetual superstition can be told a thousand times but no matter how many times you repeat it, it won't cultivate itself as truth. You were not asked to provide information in defining TDP. You were explicitly asked to provide evidence where TDP had been "explicitly misrepresented" by me. We can continue down this route until *thy Kingdom come"!

I will once again request:

Kindly provide where I have "explicitly defined" TDP to "power consumption", "efficiency" and I believe you're also suggesting "performance". These are the 3 characteristics mentioned alongside the 3800X which was the boiling point for your misinterpretation (or quite frankly; premeditated fabrication). In addition, also provide explicit evidence as to where I have misrepresented TDP all-over the PCPP forums (as you quite assertively suggested). If you don't know what "explicit" means, look it up.

So your still using it as a "Selling Point" when it doesn't mean what you think it does and has a different meaning for each model.

Hold on a minute, I informed you earlier that I do not contest that TDP can be used as a selling point (yep, still using that one). Selling point, both for it's heat dissipation value (actual TDP) and other factors which are relative as a projected indicator. I also informed you earlier, as soon as we have achieved the above request (explicit validation of misrepresenting TDP), I would be more than happy to discuss this matter in detail. Now kindly stop side-tracking, building smoke-screens and opening extraneous doors to capsize the earlier accusation.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "CPU Advice Needed"

  • 22 days ago
  • 2 points

Thermal efficiency of the products are identical since the products are identical in that context.

Incorrect. The product line/architectural footprint can be considered identical by design but intended performance irregularities do not share the same principle. Again, side-tracking!!

The problem is your first statement which the comparison is based against.

If that was a matter of misinterpretation from the "first statement", this would have been resolved from the get-go. The notion was never contested in it's infancy nor in the vindicated aftermath. Now I'm convinced you have a more sinister agenda either to discredit everything irrationally or play dodge-ball from being stood corrected (which is never a bad thing). This sort of self-compromising conspicuous narcissism is the type of social-platformed mediocrity I am quite familiar with. I’ve observed such behaviour on other public forums with users at each other’s throats with zero intention to conclude on any matter. To-date this hasn’t been the experience on PCPP….. or has it.

You are also ignoring the weightiest of accusations which does require some substantiation. So i'll remind you with yet another C&P:

How about you try validating your claims again from the plethora of examples which should be available at your finger tips - as you did assertively suggest "all over the site"

Comment reply on Forum Topic "CPU Advice Needed"

  • 22 days ago
  • 2 points

Or that AMD doesn't intend for that model to be run at full capacity since TDP only relates to cooling required to meet manufacturers desired performance for that model.

You don't need to worry about full capacity TDP runs unless disputed/queried or it maintains some element of "constructive" benefit to the discussion at hand. For these types of additional trivial and derailed oscillations, make a note of the topics of interest and we can discuss them later. Don't worry I have plenty of time, the more the merrier but at a constructive pace. For now, stick with the topic. Sticking with the topic - regardless of the manufacturers designated rating or actual output, the 3800X is simply the lesser thermally efficient of the 2 CPUs (@base clock). Unless you disagree there's no point in concocting further unrelated avenues to runaway from the issue at hand.

It is a single statement and you directly mention TDP, efficiency, and power munching.

No, that's your selective reading exploit kicking in.

"opposed to a higher binned power munching and poorly scoring 3800X" - a very clear cut secondary comparative which clearly results with the ".....3800X's" characterisation. In other words, relatively descriptive of the CPU in general. Had this been a TDP fixed rate characterisation you would have read "opposed to a higher binned power munching and poorly scoring TDP"

I think it's my 3rd time asking, here's a C&P (i put in bold too....you can't miss it this time):

How about you try validating your claims again from the plethora of examples which should be available at your finger tips - as you did assertively suggest "all over the site".

Comment reply on Forum Topic "CPU Advice Needed"

  • 22 days ago
  • 2 points

The TDP reference here is clearly associated with thermal efficiency. The higher value TDP rating is a clear indication of higher thermal output in contrast to the lesser heat dissipating 65w.

The second statement (higher binned power munching and poorly scoring 3800X) is a relative induction and does not in any shape or form explicitly implicate the TDP number as a power consumption reference. If this is the correct logical method employed, wouldn't this also imply that the TDP value is also a measure of favourably binned CPUs and over-all performance?? Why did you allude to only power consumption from the second statement when it also mentions "higher binned ......... and poorly scoring 3800X".

That was a futile attempt. How about you try validating your claims again from the plethora of examples which should be available at your finger tips - as you did assertively suggest "all over the site".

Comment reply on Forum Topic "CPU Advice Needed"

  • 22 days ago
  • 1 point

I do not need to view additional documentations or other material and certainly made no claim in defining the TDP number as power draw (electric watts). That is a ridiculous supposition, loosely executed from a relatively indicative structure opposed to an explicitly distinct statement. In other words, you're simply over-exaggerating and deliberately taking things out of context - even though the conferred premise has remained in agreement from the get-go and further reiterated several times. I asked you clearly to provide explicit evidence as to where this suggestion was made and yet nothing.

Show me where I have "distinctly" propelled the notion that the TDP number defines to the actual power draw/consumption. What you are essentially insinuating is, that I at some point informed others that the CPU exchanges electric watts with the CPU cooler, as if the CPU cooler necessitates operational power directly from the CPU. That's a largely irresponsible and absurd accusation to flaunt around - one that absolutely requires clear-cut validation. This should be super easy on your part to deliver, especially considering one of your other outlandish suggestions informs "You have been all over the site misrepresenting the figure......" (show me).

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Highest CPU for my Mobo"

  • 22 days ago
  • 1 point

How much are you willing to spend? Preferably a preferred fixed budget target and then a second figure if you're able to stretch the budget more for some meaningful performance gains.

If you're gaming and running core-hungry workloads at the same time, you might want to consider opting for a higher core count CPU with the likes of a 3900X/etc (on the AMD platform).

Alternatively, if you're happy with the current performance or if it's workable, you might want to consider holding out a little longer for Ryzen 4000 series CPUs (expected in mid-2020 or so) or Intels next GEN arsenal. The i7-6800K for gaming, dev and lesser core-count intensive workloads is a pretty nifty chip. Anything better at this point will see some nice performance improvements but nothing overtly significant. Since your rendering workloads are an "occasional" endeavour, if you're happy with the i7-6800K's performance i'd stick with it. For faster rendering, or lesser time consumed higher core count process, there are some excellent Ryzen options with 12/16 core double threaded chips which will see significant gains (50%+) in faster project completion times.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "CPU Advice Needed"

  • 22 days ago
  • 2 points

Your system doesn't use factory settings so any data from your system is irrelevant other then what tuning can achieve.

Again you're repeating the same - a self-imposed purposeless attempt to derail the initial query. Read again:

"The comparison was evidently a request from independent reviews/benchmarks opposed to using my personal system as a placeholder. Your concerns here are meaningless. You don’t need to be concerned with our personal builds and their respective over-all performance expedience. Personalised configurations account for desirable expeditious clockspeeds with an equally desirable balance of preferred thermal output & noise level preference – regardless of subdued peak-feasible clock frequencies (although with the stock cooler, the off-set sought presents zero compromises). If you are adamant - all systems are tested with stock configurations first at purchase and tested during BIOS updates with default mechanics and we can easily revert back to the same default profiles for testing purposes. But let’s keep things practical > unbiased independent reviews/benchmarks"

Yet you did.

Yet you did - what?

You are using a thermal number as a to quote yourself as a "selling point" versus.

I see. So we've moved on already from the primary attributed contention of defining TDP to power consumption, efficiency, etc. This was a false insinuation on your part directed at myself.

Before we move onto whether the TDP holds grounds for a "selling point" (a massive affirmative from me) which is a different topic all-together, lets polish up on the more immediate areas first so we can discuss the matter with clearer depth. This type of persistent approach is necessary considering there are a number of variables at play, from consumer preferences/confines right down to manufacturer hardware limitations/peaked noncomformities.

When it doesn't apply or mean what your stating.

I have no idea what you are suggesting here. A more in-depth or concisely precise explanation would be nice.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Highest CPU for my Mobo"

  • 23 days ago
  • 1 point

There are possibly a couple of variants available but nothing to justify the upgrade in terms of raw performance (not enough perf uplift, or any). Where higher core count optimised workloads may benefit with a little push on 8/10 core alternatives, the cost for the upgrade just doesn't cut it.

The more rewarding upgrade path > newer platform. Judging by your saved parts list, this would entail a simple mobo and cpu swap.

For a more diligent approach, whats the intended use? (gaming/rendering/editing/etc)

Comment reply on Forum Topic "CPU Advice Needed"

  • 23 days ago
  • 2 points

I didn't expect this sort of short-sighted explosiveness and deliberate misconstruing of exchanges. But i'll give you the benefit of doubt considering you are usually well-behaved.

The system is no longer operating within factory specs because you altered them so you have no basis for comparison.

The comparison was evidently a request from independent reviews/benchmarks opposed to using my personal system as a placeholder. Your concerns here are meaningless. You don’t need to be concerned with our personal builds and their respective over-all performance expedience. Personalised configurations account for desirable expeditious clockspeeds with an equally desirable balance of preferred thermal output & noise level preference – regardless of subdued peak-feasible clock frequencies (although with the stock cooler, the off-set sought presents zero compromises). If you are adamant - all systems are tested with stock configurations first at purchase and tested during BIOS updates with default mechanics and we can easily revert back to the same default profiles for testing purposes. But let’s keep things practical > unbiased independent reviews/benchmarks.

You want to argue numbers that no longer apply to Ryzen since the systems have changed.

Wanting to argue is an odd assertion! I was curious as to how the supposed "revamped voltage profiles" were panning out in real-time full packaged workloads.

It’s a ridiculous assertion to “indirectly” insinuate ‘irrelevancy’. When we discuss improvements or performance gains or anything of that matter, this type of contested/superseded data is crucial to assess the scale of enhancement. Without such data, you’re essentially flying blind at the helm of commercial devices.

No TDP is a thermal dissipation number for cooling needed to achieve manufacturer target specs which vary depending on model.

You're repeating the obvious once again, "as if it were contested". Another deliberate ploy, maybe? No one is denying TDP is anything other than a loosely applied measure of thermal tolerance via manufacturer conferred designation. This was clearly demonstrated by not disputing the matter in the first place and clearly informing the following from the get go:

  • “No one is suggesting TDP is a measure of power efficiency"

  • “No one is suggesting TDP is a measure of power usage"

At this point I believe it’s fair to suggest; stop, pause, rewind and read the last few lines again. Absorb this piece of information before moving onto the next chapter. I have a feeling you will deliberately misinterpret the above again with “no, no, no, TDP is a thermal dissipation number…..” (this has never been disputed and I am yet to see evidence where I have explicitly made such a claim)

Now moving on from what the TDP number represents….

You introduced “relativity” alongside TDP with the following assertion

  • ”Now your still pushing that power and efficiency are related to the subject of "TDP"

I can sure as hell bet my house it is. Don’t confuse “related to the subject of” with “TDP rating”. To simplify, the manufacturer ascribed rated value (TDP) itself is purely in reflection of heat dissipation at any given spec. But when you throw “relativity” into the mix you cannot exclude power consumption or the comparative measure of thermal efficiency. If anything is relative to TDP, it’s the variable correlation of power consumption, component design, manufacturer administered binning practices, etc. The relative-logic is “indicative” and as informed in previous posts > not a definitive source for actual power consumption.

The madness of it all; It’s my third time reverting back to the initial post which supposedly ignited this exchange – and I’m still baffled as to where the disputed claim was made. Then you further added:

So you stop misinforming people with "TDP" as a selling point when your way off base. You have been all over the site misrepresenting the figure as a selling point when it doesn't mean what you think it means.

Show me where I have explicitly proclaimed the TDP travesty? I’m sure you’ve got plenty of examples available to share – afterall it’s “all over the site”, right?

If you are unable to find anything, in the least, kindly pin-point just one tiny shred of evidence from this thread alone.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "First PC, help wanted"

  • 26 days ago
  • 1 point

Is there a big difference between the Ryzen 7 3700x and the Ryzen 7 3800x? In gaming?

Minimal performance headroom achieved with a 3800X. Won't do much hardly anything for gaming. Save $50 and grab the 3700X.

Do I need a better CPU cooler or motherboard if I want to overclock the CPU?

Even a $45-$55 air cooler will have you covered nicely. 3rd GEN Ryzen CPUs are already, i guess you can say, overclocked. The little headroom offered is minuscule by design and you'll end up with performance issues. Best left alone with AMD's AUTO config as the boost clocks will scale higher and more consistently with the in-house complex intelligent auto-configurator.

If overclocking is something you absolutely desire with a $135 AIO > intel 9700K/9900K paired up with a $160-$200 Z390 mobo.

If sticking with Ryzen 3000, consider a "MAX" B450 motherboard or X570. Previous B450 models will require a BIOS update prior to running with the 3000 chip and further may present feature limitations by design (BIOS chip).

You don't need a 970-evo for gaming. For $10 more you can pick up a DOUBLE CAPACITY 1TB NVME ssd which will deliver the same performance for your type of workload. Premium NVMEs with saturated performance bearings are a better fit for specific workstation class builds which are capable of utilising the performance offered (games or general-productivity is far from that).

For a revised recommendation, let me know what your thoughts are with the CPU path?

Also, what display resolution and refresh rate are you intending on running with this build? (eg. 1080p 144hz)

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Is there a huge difference between $1,000 and $1,500ish gaming pc's?"

  • 26 days ago
  • 1 point

The 8-core 2700X was going for around $160 incl. a decent heatpiped cooler = excellent value proposition and definitely worthy of 1440p gaming.

What the 3000-series chips do better are those faster single threaded speeds on 6 cores which drives in better potential to scale higher with FPS returns when lowering quality-settings in games (for the higher FPS enthusiast). Even at ULTRA game configurations, the faster 3600 possibly achieves around 5-10fps more (more in some lesser demanding CPU-intensive titles).

Comment reply on Forum Topic "CPU Advice Needed"

  • 26 days ago
  • 2 points

You invalidated those by meddling with the system.

Once you touch anything in voltage you remove AMD's boost clock benefits or fixes so the fault is your own in not seeing the impact since you set control of voltage.

Incorrect and presumptuously over-exaggerated. A light off-set barely touches the encroached voltage profiles and thermal conditioning can be achieved within the set profiles with compliant parameters provided there-in (R-master). Not sure what you're on about but I sense you intend to continue this method of "over-charging" or deliberately misconstruing with your selective reading approach. Manual overclocking is one thing, aligned real-time system performance controls within the parameters is another - I'm beginning to question whether you have any experience with Ryzen 3rd GEN CPUs.

Old figures don't matter now that they no longer apply, new CPU will have the newer firmware preloaded, so looking at old figures doesn't apply anymore.

performance improvements with nothing to compare with? really?

Now your still pushing that power and efficiency are related to the subject of "TDP" hopefully people will read this through and look into it themselves to understand why you are wrong in that assumption.

I've never denied that. TDP is related to "power" and "efficiency" and a number of other factors but not a "definitive source which determines the thermal design power number". And why are you concerned with what others think? I'm more concerned about what you think and what your intentions are?

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Is there a huge difference between $1,000 and $1,500ish gaming pc's?"

  • 26 days ago
  • 3 points

For higher res 1440p gaming, the better the GPU the better the performance (visual quality/FPS). In this regard the 2070 SUPER is the better card (moderately appreciable enhanced performance with the addition of a more efficient GPU + overall better driver support for games + added bonus: RAY TRACING).

3600/3600X - doesn't matter. If you want the faster chip between the 2 with the moderately improved stock cooler, grab the 3600X. If you want something that runs quietly and delivers pretty much the same performance at 1440p, grab the Ryzen 3600 + a $30/$35 aftermarket cooler.

(note: the second build also adds a 2TB HD hence the cost comparison is lopsided - although there is some offset with the first sharing a more pricier Mesh C case)

The question is how much are you willing to spend? In this sort of price range, something like this has you covered very nicely for 1440p gaming.

PCPartPicker Part List

Type Item Price
CPU AMD Ryzen 5 3600 3.6 GHz 6-Core Processor $189.99 @ Best Buy
CPU Cooler Cooler Master Hyper 212 Black Edition 42 CFM CPU Cooler $34.99 @ Amazon
Motherboard MSI B450 TOMAHAWK MAX ATX AM4 Motherboard $114.99 @ Best Buy
Memory G.Skill Ripjaws V 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3600 Memory $78.99 @ Newegg
Storage Crucial P1 1 TB M.2-2280 NVME Solid State Drive $99.99 @ Newegg
Video Card NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER 8 GB Video Card $499.99 @ Best Buy
Case Phanteks ECLIPSE P350X ATX Mid Tower Case $69.99 @ Newegg
Power Supply Corsair CXM 650 W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-modular ATX Power Supply $83.98 @ Newegg
Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts
Total $1172.91
Generated by PCPartPicker 2020-01-02 14:46 EST-0500

Areas you may require/fancy spending a little more on:

  • Additional HD storage (if your games library exceeds the 1TB limit <10% trim for drive consistency)

  • Maybe a more future-proof 8 core Ryzen 3700X. Not necessary and personally i'd prefer the 3600 with an earlier exit plan (UPGRADE) in a few years.

  • Your previously selected motherboard offers integrated WIFI. If this is a necessary requirement, you can opt for a dedicated WIFI pcie card for $25-$35. Keep in mind you'll want a "MAX" B450 motherboard for Ryzen-3000 compatibility out of the box.

  • Preferably an aftermarket partner GPU for improved thermal/factory-OC/noise levels/etc. Something like this: https://pcpartpicker.com/product/xxrYcf/evga-geforce-rtx-2070-super-8-gb-xc-gaming-video-card-08g-p4-3172-kr

  • A more premium case or whatever suits your fancy

  • A fully modular gold rated (better efficiency) PSU for around $100

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Iracing trip screen build"

  • 26 days ago
  • 1 point

I thought i'd mention, there are a couple of a nice CASE options available at a similar price range.

This one I've come across only recently and it's caught my attention: https://pcpartpicker.com/product/pwzFf7/metallic-gear-neo-air-atx-mid-tower-case-mg-ne520a_bk01 .....comes in white too: https://pcpartpicker.com/product/QW3mP6/metallic-gear-neo-air-atx-atx-mid-tower-case-mg-ne520a_bw01

I haven't plunged myself into viewing in-depth reviews just yet.... but will have a crack as I'm looking for a new case to spruce things up. You might want to check some reviews/user feedback/video representations on YT to get a better feel of what to expect. Mettalic Gear is a sub-brand owned by Phanteks and Phanteks does deliver "quality" where it's needed hence it already has my vote of confidence.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "CPU Advice Needed"

  • 26 days ago
  • 2 points

I'm not really bothered with idle/moderate workloads nor the hard-pressed observer effect which was resolved 2-3 months from launch. The query is more in reference to:

The original voltage profile ran with a 1.1v average and has since been increased to a 1.3-1.35v average depending on models according to AMD to solve models not hitting boost and stock clock speeds even with extreme cooling.

Which I believe you have now backtracked and responded to:

Current desktop load without running anything major should run in the "1.2v range" with normal background tasking after the change.

This is more in line with our current systems employing 3rd GEN Ryzen chips. The 1.3v+ reference seemed a little too excessive. Anyway, moving back to the heavier load scenario.... again even after the update/s we haven't seen hardly any performance gains nor thermal improvements. At best 50Mhz shift to what was supposedly a 100-200Mhz mark-up (stock cooler).

Coming back to:

Let alone that figure was set before AMD revamped the voltage profiles for the entire line to better fit the listed boost and stock clocks, now that they are all running 1.3v-1.4v at stock clocks the thermal and power draw across the line has increased.

Fixing invalid polled exertions is one thing and revamping voltage profiles is another. Prior to the update, the 3700X was already boosting up with hard-pressed loads at a similar range and I haven't seen any changes in this regard in terms of temps/draw. The 50Mhz uplift isn't consistent either and has nothing to with the observer effect fix but refined algorithms or the fine-tuning of multitude factors which are representative of clockspeed achievements and power consumption. As for idle/moderate conditions I don't believe GPU-Z was a culprit (observer effect) as manually configured tweaks characterised similar/same end-goal performance metrics. This remains consistent to-date. To clarify, I am not contesting whether the updates are limited by design (performance) but within the means of a stock cooler and favourable cooling conditions (decent airflow) - the achievements were minimal. Which does beg the question: Are there any representations of peaked performance comparisons where we can clearly identify the difference in power consumption > performance achieved in contrast to what we were getting prior to the AGESA load up?

Comment reply on Forum Topic "CPU Advice Needed"

  • 27 days ago
  • 1 point

sounds like we're hitting a tit-4-tat curve ball with some elements of selective reading.

The efficiency reference is purely from an indicative representation and not by definition - oddly enough, explained previously but..... oh well!

The 65W reference is purely based on base-clock thermal "ability" and not limiting or sacrificing Wraith Prism's potential for a higher scaled thermal output. Not sure why the 135w reference was made unless you're speculating within selective means.

The original voltage profile ran with a 1.1v average and has since been increased to a 1.3-1.35v average depending on models according to AMD to solve models not hitting boost and stock clock speeds even with extreme cooling.

Can you provide a legitimate source which establishes the 1.1v skirmish across the board prior to the later AGESA/BIOS patch/s? As far as I'm concerned the earlier adoption had me tinkering into voltage off-sets to slash that volatile 1.4v+ brawl. I hope the reference provided is "real-world" materialised outcomes opposed to firmware/software poorly addressed 'would have beens'.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Iracing trip screen build"

  • 27 days ago
  • 2 points

PCPartPicker Part List

Type Item Price
CPU AMD Ryzen 5 3600 3.6 GHz 6-Core Processor $194.99 @ Walmart
CPU Cooler Cooler Master Hyper 212 Black Edition 42 CFM CPU Cooler $34.99 @ Amazon
Motherboard MSI B450 TOMAHAWK MAX ATX AM4 Motherboard $114.99 @ Best Buy
Memory G.Skill Ripjaws V 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3600 Memory $78.99 @ Newegg
Storage Crucial P1 1 TB M.2-2280 NVME Solid State Drive $99.99 @ Newegg
Video Card EVGA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER 8 GB XC GAMING Video Card $729.99 @ Amazon
Case Phanteks ECLIPSE P350X ATX Mid Tower Case $69.99 @ Newegg
Power Supply FSP Group Hydro G 750 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply $107.98 @ Amazon
Operating System Microsoft Windows 10 Home OEM 64-bit $99.99 @ Amazon
Monitor MSI Optix MAG240VC 23.6" 1920x1080 144 Hz Monitor $169.99 @ Best Buy
Monitor MSI Optix MAG240VC 23.6" 1920x1080 144 Hz Monitor $169.99 @ Best Buy
Monitor MSI Optix MAG240VC 23.6" 1920x1080 144 Hz Monitor $169.99 @ Best Buy
Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts
Total $2041.87
Generated by PCPartPicker 2020-01-01 20:26 EST-0500

If you want to keep it closer to $2000 - grab 3 of these: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07GD7H18F?tag=pcpapi-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1

You could opt for 75hz panels and save a little but 144hz offers greater FPS headroom with in-game quality configurations. Plus, makes for the better future-proofer assuming you're most likely to upgrade the GPU earlier opposed to the display.

3 displays = more graphically intense rendering demands on the GPU. Hence more GPU and less CPU will open up better opportunities to achieve a respectable FPS rate across the board. Although if you are able to increase the budget and a fancy a long-term solution for the CPU, the 8-core 3700X would be nice but not necessary.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "CPU Advice Needed"

  • 27 days ago
  • 2 points

TDP isn't power efficiency

No one is suggesting TDP is a measure of "power efficiency"

TDP isn't ...... usage

No one is suggesting TDP is a measure of power "usage"

And that number isn't fixed any longer and varies depending on.......

The "rated" TDP was never fixed in the first place nor intended to fit a predetermined constant. It just doesn't work that way. Thermal throttled limitations with a number of variable factors can achieve the result closer to home but that's not the intended goal with a dense and split DIE double threaded CPU. What we do know is the 3700X comfortably hits it's rated base-clock frequency with a 65w TDP cooler.

Let alone that figure was set before AMD revamped the voltage profiles for the entire line to better fit the listed boost and stock clocks, now that they are all running 1.3v-1.4v at stock clocks the thermal and power draw across the line has increased.

The 3700X was already boosting up with a 1.3v-1.4v power drive. The vehemently "opportunistic" voltage profile was always apparent from the get-go. Later optimisations at the code level (firmware/BIOS) maintains pretty much the same opportunistic approach with a fine-tuned 100~200Mhz improvement. As we know very well the "AUTO" CPU_CORE voltage preset has always been set high through-out the 1st/2nd and now 3rd GEN platforms - something we can easily off-set/fine-tune to reduce the thermal output. This can be achieved more effectively with the 3700X whilst maintaining stability/stock performance under load.

Bottom line: At the sweeping consumer-level, we don't need to introduce complex design frameworks of TDP and what it defines to.... where it can help for the ordinary consumer is forming "some idea" as to which CPU runs hotter.... or consumes more power to achieve it's rated stock/boost clocks... which is where TDP can be used as an "indicator" and not a definitive source. When comparing the 3700X and the higher binned 3800X, initial power consumption with the stock cooler saw the 3800X demanding 12% more power which is where "efficiency" comes into the equation. 3800X demands a higher TDP rated cooler to comfortably manage a 3.9Ghz base-clock and where achievable on the bundled stock cooler, the temps will be least favourable.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "My Final List of Parts. Any Issues?"

  • 27 days ago
  • 1 point

Definitely Gaming, possibly some streaming and editing.

If streaming or multi-core intensive editing workloads are a probable, you'd be better off grabbing a Ryzen 3900X opposed to a 9900K. Although, where casual possibilities may not materialise, the better optimistic approach would be the more affordable Ryzen 3700X. It's a perfect sweet-spot in terms of performance and price.

On the monitor that I plan to get, resolution is 1920x1080 and the the refresh rate would only be around like 75hz.

A 75hz panel will cap your game performance to "75fps max". The 9900K and 2060 SUPER combo is capable of achieving 100-120fps in demanding games or 140fps+ in lesser demanding games. At 1080p resolution, you'd be better off opting for a 144hz panel to avoid the bottleneck. Alternatively, grab the RTX 2070 SUPER with a Ryzen 3700X CPU which matches the previous arrangement and adds some additional performance gain with FPS achievements.

[OVERCLOCKING] Probably not unless for some reason I absolutely had to.

Another good reason to consider Ryzen CPUs. Intel's key selling point at the moment is it's overclocking potential (more for the performance enthusiast). If this is something you want to keep open, i'd be more inclined to grab the 9700K with a 2070 SUPER.... and run stream-encoding via the GPU hardware encoder for lesser performance hits on the gaming side.


  • Good thing you've already purchased an AM4 socket compatible cooler. The following platform is compatible with the included cooler mount.

  • As you're looking for a display too, also thrown in a 1080p 144hz panel (capable of achieving 144fps). Other features: GSYNC compatible, 1ms response time, VA panel for improved colour reproduction and better viewing angles)

  • All items purchased already are marked as "$0 - purchased"

PCPartPicker Part List

Type Item Price
CPU AMD Ryzen 7 3700X 3.6 GHz 8-Core Processor $322.99 @ SuperBiiz
CPU Cooler Noctua NH-D15 SE-AM4 82.52 CFM CPU Cooler Purchased For $0.00
Motherboard MSI B450 TOMAHAWK MAX ATX AM4 Motherboard $114.99 @ Best Buy
Memory Corsair Vengeance LPX 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3000 Memory Purchased For $0.00
Storage Western Digital SN750 1 TB M.2-2280 NVME Solid State Drive Purchased For $0.00
Video Card EVGA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER 8 GB XC GAMING Video Card $539.99 @ Best Buy
Case DIYPC Skyline-06 ATX Full Tower Case Purchased For $0.00
Power Supply FSP Group Hydro G 750 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply $107.98 @ Amazon
Operating System Microsoft Windows 10 Home OEM 64-bit $99.99 @ Amazon
Monitor MSI Optix MAG24C 23.6" 1920x1080 144 Hz Monitor $189.98 @ Newegg
Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts
Total $1375.92
Generated by PCPartPicker 2020-01-01 20:01 EST-0500

I'm just wandering whether your budget has any flex to explore other avenues - with the likes of a sharper image 1440p display paired up with either 2070 super or a 2080 super graphics card.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Iracing trip screen build"

  • 27 days ago
  • 1 point

Are the 3 displays included in the $2000 budget?

Operating system included in the budget or don't need one?

What about other peripherals: mouse, keyboard, speakers, headset, etc?

Comment reply on Forum Topic "My Final List of Parts. Any Issues?"

  • 27 days ago
  • 1 point

The compatibility note is nothing to worry about. It just means, when using the M.2 connector on the motherboard, one of the SATA ports will be disabled. M.2 runs on the same lane as one of the SATA ports hence only one end can be utilised at a given time. You don't need to anything other than check the mobo manual to see which SATA port is disabled and avoid it when adding additional SATA devices (you have 6 SATA ports in total, which will leave you 5 - plenty for the vast majority of users)

If you're looking for a recommendation on the entirety of the selected parts:

  1. Purpose of use (gaming/streaming/editing/rendering/etc)?

  2. If gaming, display resolution and refresh rate (eg. 1080p 144hz)

  3. Are you planning on overclocking?

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Multiple SSDs"

  • 27 days ago
  • 1 point

Modern-day motherboards deliver excellent audio functionality. I take it you're eyeing up the Gigabyte B450 AORUS M Micro ATX mobo. These ports will be available on the motherboards rear I/O panel so you don't need invest in external hardware to achieve good quality sound. Same applies for the cam. You already have all the required connectivity built-in.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Need high end streaming/gaming pc"

  • 29 days ago
  • 1 point

If cost, efficiency and space isn't of concern, for best performance nothing beats a dual-build system for gaming and streaming workloads, with a capture card. A single platform works a treat with modern day higher core count Ryzen CPUs but sharing system resources is never absent of performance hits (FPS taxation) on the gaming side. Other benefits with a 2-build solution is the more adaptable/flexible cost-effective and expedient upgrade path + you get 2 real-time interactive platforms with dedicated peripherals which makes multi-tasking simpler without having to minimise the game.

If the 2-build solution is of interest, help us with the following:

  • Are these your casual 1080p higher quality streams or are you looking at higher resolution output (1440p/4k)?

  • For the gaming build, what display resolution and refresh rate are you targeting? (eg. 1080p 144hz, 1440p/etc). This will help to determine the graphics card as we don't want to grab something extraordinarily powerful to then be limited by display (bottle-necked).

  • Does the build include peripherals? (display/keyboard/mouse/etc).

  • Does the build include operating system (Windows)?

Comment reply on Forum Topic "CPU Advice Needed"

  • 29 days ago
  • 1 point

I agree with Gilroar + Zerk... The 3800X is pointless (not sure why AMD added this one to an already spot-on 3rd GEN Ryzen stack). I guess for $10-$20 on top a small increase in performance would be nice but anything above this sort of premium is more leaning towards enthusiasm opposed to spend-worthy lucrative performance returns.

Potential board-maker and AMD driver or firmware I/O instruction updates did initially open up some optimism to get more out of the higher binned 3800X but 5/6 months-on there's nothing worthy of note to report, other then a select number of buyers reporting some favour with a 2-3% performance margin (with expensive coolers/boards or a silicon lotto win). Keep in mind the 3800X's default TDP is rated at 105w, whereas the more efficient 65w 3700X delivers pretty much on-par performance - "efficiency" alone is an excellent selling point for the 3700X opposed to a higher binned power munching and poorly scoring 3800X.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "1440p 144hz monitor?"

  • 1 month ago
  • 3 points

To narrow things down, give the 32" TUF panel a miss. 1440p (2560x1440 pixel density) sits sharply on 27" panels. If image sharpness at a arms-reach viewing distance (desktop) is key, 32" ends up stretching those pixels with some washed out detailing. Looks pretty but prettier on 27". The VG32VQ is also a VA panel. Great for gaming but my personal preference is the richer and more vibrant colour reproduction IPS vehicle.

Both the Dell S2719DGF and ASUS VG27BQ are TN panels. Bottom line, TN's are still great for gaming but with VA/IPS panels being more affordable now and capable of achieving 1ms refresh rates, it's a tough one to pass.

That leaves you the LG 27GL83A-B!!

I was going to suggest a VA panel MSI "OPTIX" 1440p 1ms gsync compatible display but seeing the LG is going for $330 (used) - that's a solid deal if it's in good shape with some level of warranty included (6 months+)

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Is my ram holding back my cpu?"

  • 1 month ago
  • 3 points

If you're hell-bent on achieving maximum FPS returns on a 240hz panel, yes there are benefits opting for a faster RAM kit.

Although, I wouldn't bother. The performance gains are not sufficient enough to warrant an exchange and already a 2666Mhz 16CL rated spec sits perfectly in line with these 9th GEN intel CPUs. In more graphically challenging demanding games on a 240Hz panel you're mostly limited by the GPU. If the 180-240fps endeavour is the focal point, i'd save every penny I can for a GPU upgrade (preferably next GEN RTX 3000 cards when they launch next year or AMD releases..... "if the price is right").


Other methods to achieve better performance without emptying your wallet:

  • MEMORY OC: manually fine-tuning timings/overclock the existing kit.

  • Overclocking the CPU (assuming you've got a decent cooler installed).

  • OC GPU (if capable)

  • In-game lower quality compromises for higher FPS returns.

  • Keep background processes at a minimal to unleash MAX CPU resources for gaming

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Is this ok for 1k"

  • 1 month ago
  • 1 point

Yes you will want more core/threads for streaming.

Keep in mind, there are 2 methods for encoding video whilst gaming.

  1. Using the CPU - this is software encoding (x264). You can expect 20-35% performance hit on the gaming side going this route.

  2. Using the GPU - this is hardware encoding (NVENC). 8-10% performance hit.

The GPU encoder makes sense if you're looking to secure lesser performance hit on the gaming side (essentially achieving better FPS returns). In other words you can stick with the RYZEN 3600 and use the RTX 2060 SUPER's hardware encoder to manage your streams. If you prefer software encoding or want both options on the table (CPU/GPU encoding), the 2700X makes sense. This is down to user preference.

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