/pcbg/ - PC Building General

amd doesn't work well with basic overlays like msi afterburner. shit drivers.

Yes, but that form factor facilitates PCIe, not SATA.

Dont be a nigger.

Can you recommend me mobo for 2700x which is future proof for Zen2+?

every single motherboard out there

am4 is all there is right now and good until 2021. whether that makes it futureproof for 2+, who knows.

>Currency
Euro
>purpose
1440p gaming and basic 3-d modelling.
>list
de.pcpartpicker.com/list/JFXVmq
any comments on what to improve?

How much fps gain will I get if I have 3200mhz ram instead of 2666mhz for the i5 8400? @1440p

>1440p gaming
wait for Turing

Should I reuse my old Zalman cnps10x performa cooler with 2600X or the stock cooler is better?

Intel doesn't really benefit that much from faster ram like Ryzen does.
>8400
>1440p
You'll be bottlenecked by your CPU/GPU anyway.

It's just an example of how people can make benchmarks misleading.

A few months ago shills were spamming pcbg and all of Jow Forums that the 1080 is now faster than Vega even in Doom with Vulkan all because of one Benchmarker's video.

Turns out the youtuber used MSI Afterburner overlay to "benchmark" and MSI Afterburner overlay was bugged on some version.

Just things like that which you should keep in mind before you get mislead by people who are trying to be manipulative or who are simply too retarded to know what they're spamming like the Geekbench guy.

>open air rig
One like this?

Attached: Open-air rig.png (1024x689, 1.19M)

Do your own research, but benchmarks show the i3-8100 consistently beating the 2200G, even when the 2200G is overclocked (pic related).

youtube.com/watch?v=XrG1D0runY8

The only reason to get a 2200G is if you don't plan on getting a discrete GPU, because the 2200G does have a vastly better iGPU than the i3-8100.

Attached: Screen Shot 2018-08-13 at 20.12.11.jpg (2560x1600, 375K)

But most games were made to run on 4 cores

Thank you for the advice!

>Zalman
absolute kek

Will I get bottlenecked at 1440p with a 8400?

what does "bottlenecking" mean, anyway?

is it something you do with your girlfriend?

I believe it's where your CPU is too slow to allow your GPU to run at its full capacity.

Imagine a water bottle, and imagine pouring water out of that bottle. The neck is the thin point - it limits the rate at which the water can escape the bottle. Similarly, if your CPU is bottlenecking your GPU, it means the CPU is not very performant, and thus restricts the performance of your GPU, and stops it from performing to its full potential.

But its a good cooler.

get the Wraith for the 2600, it will run circles around that chink shit.

>only 3.8GHz at that
>2666 RAM when 2933 is stock speed
>Only manipulating the methodology to be unfairly beneficial to the 8100 counts!!
>It's not fair the b450 and the CPU runs faster memory than a b260 or h370 board!!
>It's not fair that the 2200G is unlocked and can OC to 4GHz easily!!
>It's not fair that you show a whole suite of games that the 2200G is 10% ahead of the 8100 in when I can only cherry pick 2 with a manipulative methodology!!
>Why won't anyone believe my bullshit?!!?!

In most cases, no.
But there are some cases like Witcher 3, and I think like Mafia 3, Watchdogs 2, and so on, really CPU demanding games which it can bottleneck a 1080ti at 1440p. So it depends on what you play.
2600/X with faster memory is a safer bet.
It depends if you care about "most cases", or if you want to never have to worry and for your build to just always run acceptably regardless of the conditions.

Hard drive: dual drive , 128 GB in main, + 2tb storage. Good enough for most gaming PCs?

Storage only matters if you care about loading screens. There's literally no FPS difference when comparing size/speed of your HDD/SSD. As far as "good enough" it depends on how many games you're installing. 10, 20, 100?

if one of your components is holding back the maximum potential of another of your components. you will always be bottlenecked one way or another but your aim should always be to make it a non issue. you wouldn't pair the highest end graphics card with the lowest end processor (and vice versa) because that processor will hold back the full potential of the graphics card. the aim is usually to aim more for a gpu bottleneck at your desired fps/settings target. if you're getting 100% gpu usage and only 50% cpu usage but that translates to a nice smooth 1440p60 gameplay at high settings then it's completely fine. it's better than having a gpu running at 50% utilization and the processor is at 100% utilization because that means the gpu isn't running at its maximum capability. graphics cards are supposed to run at 100% in games, processors aren't supposed to.

I doubt that.

What do you actually need to run world of Warcraft at ultra, seamlessly? I feel like the game is just weirdly optimized and is hard to make it run well

k

Tip for Ryzen users.
I noticed that setting a game's CPU priority to realtime/high gives an FPS boost and removes stutter in older games as well.
I gained an average of 10 to 25 fps on games that were CPU bottlenecked on my 1700, some games gained a 30fps boost and a very solid min fps boost as well.

Attached: 13575643949755.png (505x429, 77K)

Just a 4790k with like 1800 RAM should get you around 60 or close in the most demanding cases (raids).
You can spend a lot more money on an 8700k and perf will only be very slightly better.
The game is just "optimized" very oddly and there's no much you can do about it.

That's not true at all. Storage i/o bottlenecks causes stutters when game is poorly programmed and has synchronous waits for the data.
That, or you get much worse pop in.

Did you not already have windows high performance power profiles set?

I did, I'm talking about setting CPU priority in the task manager for specific programs.

youtube.com/watch?v=dt5CNi0aEpI

is wrong to the extent that the GPU cannot be the bottleneck. Any component can be, as per To quote the video and the MAN HIMSELF, if you had no bottlenecks ever you would have infinite performance and we can't let the goyim have that now can we.

Realtime is more effective because the program might be on the another CCX with non-critical tasks.
RPCS3 set to realtime for me definitely improves performance since it specifically targets the second CCX.

>if you had no bottlenecks ever you would have infinite performance and we can't let the goyim have that now can we.

this is bait, right?

What's bait about it?

Especially old games and single-thread heavy games benefit greatly from it.
Some games that would drop below 120fps often before now run at 130+ at all times for me.
A game I play often, Redout, gained about 30fps more. Quake Live gained about 40fps. Quake Champions gained 10 to 15fps and has removed the weird stutters I'd get sometimes.
Haven't tested with too many games yet but it seems to always boost performance and make the experience much smoother.

you can never have infinite performance. no one is holding us back. we're actually progressing so fast rather than being held back by (((them))). all our limitations are due to manufacturing technologies stagnating and all that moores law shit

No, seriously. Look up my cooler. It costs 63$ on amazon.

>costs almost as much as a top end NH D15
>is not a Noctua NH D15
user I

It's mostly sarcasm not to be taken factual, the video portrays the line better.

It's like saying if you're achieving 60fps with little CPU/GPU overhead your bottleneck is the FPS cap. When that's removed, you'll run in to a bottleneck elsewhere. If you could hypothetically remove all of them, you would have infinite performance.

can I get some quick feedback please?

uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/fygJgw

Attached: 1455883926962.jpg (420x300, 20K)

Yes that is a list of pc parts, congrats.

>intel
nope
>be quiet
nope
>GTX 1070 Ti
buying a high end card when the new ones are just around the corner? you're smarter than that user.

Attached: Cases.png (2314x1063, 1.66M)

>you're smarter than that user.

i'm really not

anyone want to trade a 1060 3gb zotac mini for a 480 or 570 or 580? It still has two more years on the warranty. I got a freesync monitor i want to use. Los Angeles

if you're buying a GPU now then stick with low end or at highest 1060 but no more. Next week Nvidia will announce the new GPU's at Gamescom.

strong build for 1440p. I would give the new ryzens a go though, 2600x or 2700x

>[current year]
>buying locked CPU
>buying into dead socket
>buying old gpu when new ones are announced

how is your 1700 cpu bottlenecking? what game? My 1600 doesn't cpu bottleneck.

So, whats your Black Friday shopping list?

Looking at a new GPU and boosting ram to 16 or 32gb personally.

So would it make sense to buy an i3 not instead of an i7?

>announced
since when

i dont want to start a flame war about star citizen but why is it unplayable on hdd, acceptable on ssd, and optimal on optane?

>1700 bottleneck
You're just an idiot. I've been running a 1700 @ 3.8 for a year now and have experienced absolutely no bottlenecking.

I am talking about GPU's not CPU's user. They are different things.

>intel
retard alert

I run it at 3.7Ghz, also I have a Vega 64 so I'm pretty sure the bottleneck in these old and poorly optimized games is the CPU.

And with what GPU? The point is that setting CPU priority to high for most games gives an FPS boost, which indicates that the CPU is holding back my graphics card.

this, and they are upgradable until 2021, unlike the Incel shit which is on an already dead socket.

i'm not looking at buying the new cards, anyway, i've been waiting far too long for these so called new cards to come out

what's wrong with intel? (yes i'm that new)

>pretty sure
don't ever go by your gut when you have the means of testing it. fire up a cpu intense game and pull up your task manager. you can do it now and it will take you a minute and report back please

this is a work in progress for a school build, so idk
pcpartpicker.com/list/DDFmmq

i know i'm retarded but where can i improve? budget is around 900$ and i mostly play games on medium settings for 60 FPS and fighting games these days

>intel and 911
checked, and also fuck intel for the constant socket changes.

GPU is GTX1080ti, but that's irrelevant since you're complaining of a bottleneck. Setting CPU priority doesn't actually do much, you're confusing causation and correlation. There are sooo many more factors at play. Are your SMBUS drivers up to date? How much other software is running when you game? How many services? How much ram do you have? How hot is your 1700 running? How hot are your mobo busses running?

A 1440p monitor, and the year after that I'll probably upgrade to a Zen 2 CPU. Or perhaps I should wait with the monitor until then too, as I won't really have the ability to push that resolution without Navi or something like that.
Thank you for reading my blog.

How good are the chances that two different DDR4 ram sticks play nice with each-other on a Ryzen platform?

I've mixed and matched DDR3 plenty of times without issue or checking any real specifics of the ram.

The two sticks are both b-die 3200mhz sticks with the same latency, but different timings and voltage. One stick is Patriot and the potential candidate is G.Skill. Patriot hasn't stocked the same sticks or rebranded sticks in half a year so I have zero hope to find the same one unless I buy something sketchy off ebay.

>pcpartpicker.com/list/DDFmmq
pretty solid but you will be surprised to fine the 2600 is only about 5 usd more on amazon, go for that. the 1060 will drop in price in two weeks i suggest you get a used one under warranty.

Not much software is running in the background. 16GB at 3200Mhz, running at 60 to 70ºC, drivers and chipset drivers are up to date, BIOS is up to date too.
I don't know what might be at play here exactly, but I have noticed in for example Warhammer 40k: Deathwing that without setting CPU priority to high the game stutters often and has about 90fps average, while setting it to high/realtime removes the stutter and bumps up the framerate to about 110 to 120.

I have already done that, for every game I test CPU utilization is always hovering between 20 and 35% utilization. I don't have a single game that utilizes more than 50% of my CPU. Even Battlefield 1 only ever reaches 40%.

Nothing if you don't plan on upgrading for a very long time, except the security vulnerabilities and the poor cooling performance without voiding your warranty and destroying your CPU if you fuck up.

ok so youre saying its a single thread bottleneck.

last week confirmed name, you living under a rock or something?

>HDD -> SSD -> optane
that's not how it works, lad. it's SATA SSD after HDD and then it's NVME SSD.
optane is for caching, not storage like regular SSD.
also probably cus you dont have enough RAM.

exactly what the greentext said.
>locked CPUs
>less cores/threads
>dead socket
you'll be paying more in the long run cus you need to upgrade sooner and there's no upgrade path so ull have to replace mobo too.

Yeah? That's what I'm saying, it's a CPU bottleneck, and setting program priority to higher gives better results.

Download this and use it to determine where your bottlenecks are coming from. Also, if you incur stuttering in games, reduce lighting and shadow effects.

docs.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/downloads/procmon

So I was gonna get this 2X4 G Skill Ram but the chipset in it is intel. Would that be an issue for a Ryzen build?
newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231900&ignorebbr=1

No. I too am running ram from Newegg that was originally advertised as being for intel and I use a r7 1700. DDR4 is DDR4.

check QVL. that said, if both are b-die they'll more than likely be absolutely fine

get second gen ryzen.
get b450 mobo.
get 3200mhz cl14 or cl15 RAM.
get bigger SSD.
wait for nvidia's next gpus.
get bigger HDD it's like €10 more for double the storage nigga

thanks my man, I'll check the 2600 and a used 1060 in the near future.

Attached: 1500244079325.jpg (192x192, 4K)

thats just marketing memes. but you should get sticks with lower latency

There hasn't been platform specific DRAM since DDR2. This was part of a marketing campaign or something that Intel encouraged when they launced the Z170 chipset, for overclocking DDR4 RAM with Intel Skylake CPUs.
All DDR4 RAM works with both Intel and AMD. As long as you don't get laptop RAM (called SO-DIMM aka 260-pin), because that doesn't fit in desktop motherboards, which use 288-pin.

gotta admit, this jewish tactic worked so well that I started to believe that only specific modules of ram are compatible with Ryzen.

sorry to say this but pretty sure you got the dumbs, mate

Being naive doesn't make you dumb, just inexperienced.

great source, let me just call up last week

>pretty sure you got the dumbs, mate
nah, just not enough time to research facts. It is amazing what working 8 hours and commuting 3 hours every day can do to you.

Anylads with Dell S2716DG?
Is the color banding really that fucked?

any advice on what I should get then? i'm obvoisly interested in 1440p gaming and I don't think i'll be upgrading for a while

>sticks with lower latency
Not him, would that be Samsung E-die? How do you find those, anyway? No 2x4GB kits I can find have timings better than 3200 MHz CL16, unlike B-die.

turing 2080 is 8% faster than a 1080ti lol

that's not how you use naive

>commuting 3 hours/day
then you have 3 hours every day to research unless ur a dumb burger that drives his own car thru rush hour instead of using public transport

>typing 3 words into google is hard waaaaaaahh moooooooom why wont these neckbeards spoonfeed me? WAAAAAAAHH

something like b or e die. they're lower latency than the rest, CL14 3200mhz

How do I use this exactly?