/pcbg/ PC Assembly General

Just OC your RAM. You should reach 3000CL16.
Yes you'll see improvements.

>why is it cheaper
It's QLC NAND. It's designed to be cheap (and worse).
Get an MX500 or at least an SU800 quality of SSD for a main drive. QLC drives are for secondary drives or you pair them with StoreMI as that'll also reduce writes to them.

I'm pretty sure there is a newer model of Acer 1440p 75hz IPS that's better with thinner bezels.
But if you want large, idk I guess it seems okay.

Gaming plus has a slightly better VRM afaik. But getting Ryzen 2000 series to 4Ghz is easy anyway.

i'm taking an educated guess here to say that you need at least a 1070ti to run it decently, judging the gpu alone, maybe a bit more.
i'd look for either an used 1080ti or maybe a 2070, that'd probably do the trick.

>Gaming plus has a slightly better VRM afaik. But getting Ryzen 2000 series to 4Ghz is easy anyway.

Where can I check regarding this? I am worried about people not getting 4GHz and only landing around 3.9GHz not that its a problem but feels a big of a bummer.
I am wondering if I can mix and max with X470 and R5 2600 or B450 and R5 2600x

I don't really care on the size, but my old Samsung was 24" and I guess I would buy one a little bigger than that. The Samsung lasted 11 years. I bought a 28" for my mom and it's ok, but I don't really want to upgrade anything else. I might try it.

Buildzoid.
You can sort of judge by the chokes and caps, but while MSI uses the same motherboard layout for most of their boards they do change to lower quality components on the A PRO. That mistakenly makes people think the A PRO and Tomahawk have the same VRM when they don't.

There are tons of 27" 1440p monitors. 75hz ones around $200-$300 and 144hz $300-$450. That is a good size for 1440p, though you could need 25% or so DPI scaling, depends on your preference for the size of things and how close you put it.

1070Ti or Vega56 I think is what you want for the Vive Pro.
1070 and 1660Ti is a bit too weak.

Alright, thank you. Kidna hesitant to buy a used card, I'll keep those in mind when I decide next month

OC'ing ram from 2400 to 3000mhz
wat

>That is a good size for 1440p, though you could need 25% or so DPI scaling,
maybe at 25", but 27" is perfect at 100% scale for the vast majority of people and their normal desktop viewing distance.

pretty sure he's saying don't use the XMP and just manually OC to the proper settings.

???
2400 is at 1.2v.
You can run at 1.35-1.45v perfectly fine. Same way you OC a CPU by increasing voltage to run higher clocks.

I got 2133CL15 RAM because I needed 32Gb and don't care much about games, but I was able to OC it to 2800CL16-17-17-34.

Read the paste that the retard took out of the OP. I'm pretty sure it covers overclocking RAM, doesn't it? Again, I said preference. For me I prefer 25% at 1440p 27" at about arm's length away.
Others might like things smaller or like it closer.

Just get one that has a transferrable warranty.
I think Vega56 has still been going on sale for around $300, as well.
And really, Vega 64 Nitro+ for $420 ain't bad. I saw someone link that the other day. It's not as good price:performance as a $300 Vega56, but it's a high end model and still a bit better performance. But I have the feeling that might be out of your price range. Navi is also coming and presumably will have a card similar to Vega56 performance in games for under $300.

Right, I mean I didn't know you could OC ram to such extent. I thought I could get 2666mhz tops. Will try.

2133-2666 are typically stock timings at 1.2v.
RAM that is 2666CL15 @ 1.2v can typically reach 3200 or 3333 CL16 @ 1.35v
RAM that is 2133CL15 @ 1.2v will typically only reach 2800-2933 CL16 @ 1.35v
This is also why 3200CL16 RAM tends to cost around the same as 2666CL15 RAM.

XMP profiles are just a predfined OC and higher voltage dude lmao. They are guaranteed to run at that OC.
Doesn't the paste also say that? I thought it did.

my computer is 5 years old with hardly any upgrades
its time to do another pc
so is this a good build? ca.pcpartpicker.com/list/yF4s29

Based, thanks.
Will educate myself on RAM OCing then.

You can and should wait for Zen 2.

it's fine if you can't wait another few months.

If you can wait, wait for Zen2

i can only really wait a month and a half for it due to external circumstances
what are odds its released this month or next month?
also is everything else good though?

why can you only wait a month and a half?

in relation to Intel (and AMD's) security holes; if i have a wireless access point in the mobo does that mean, someone could use a lingering wireless signal to prompt my receiver into connection to it, allowing them to utilise an attack vector in the machine?
is there any modern mobo's that do not come with wireless connectivity?
i'd much prefer to completely annihilate any networking capabilities

moving to a different place around that time which will have shittier prices for components, i dont want to have them be bought then be shipped to somewhere else/flown there due to how shitty airport people are
i also dont really want to wait that long due to really old pc plus a family member is helping pay for a quarter of the components as a gift

I'm connected to the internet through a powerline adapter but my connection always randomly drops so i have to go unplug and replug the cord to get internet back it's annoying as fuck. It doesn't disconnect if I'm torrenting or if i'm playing an online game.

Wtf did I do wrong?

Highly unlikely to be out in a month and a half.

What CPU to go with RTX 2060 for 1440p144hz?
I have no budget limitations, but I'm not willing to spend twice as much for 5% extra power.

>shitel

Attached: 1501867726886.jpg (1500x1164, 337K)

>You can sort of judge by the chokes and caps, but while MSI uses the same motherboard layout for most of their boards they do change to lower quality components on the A PRO. That mistakenly makes people think the A PRO and Tomahawk have the same VRM when they don't.

I see, shame I wanted a good ATX mobo. Really worried what motherboard I should be picking up.
The price difference between X470 and B450 isn't huge.

>baiting people to answer with intel so he can fire back with
>I said i'm NOT willing to spend twice as much for 5% extra power (posts shitty handpicked benchmark that "proves" his point)

>RTX 2060
>1440p144hz
Pick one and only one.

NAVI, FUCKING, WHEN?!
I need DETAILS to at least know what I am wainting for. Chirst every day there is new reasons to get 2060, I can't hold out on pure "just wait for it :^)"

Won't matter since the GPU isn't going to handle 1440p well in all games, especially not next gen console ports. Get a better GPU for 1440p.

Stop asking, faggot.

Tomahawk is crazy good for the price. Mortar isn't bad, either, and is mATX.
Gaming Plus is the cheapest that's not bad, afaik. Though really might just have the same VRM as A-Pro. Either would be fine for a 6 core, anyway.

Nah, mate. This is my current setup:

i5-4690
16 Gig of mixed DD3 RAM
GTX 960
Forgot what my mobo was

I think you'll agree that it's maybe time to kill this Frankenstein's monster

>Gaming Plus is the cheapest that's not bad, afaik. Though really might just have the same VRM as A-Pro. Either would be fine for a 6 core, anyway.
Alright I hope I can achieve an OC.

Thank you, very confusing as the OP says 2060 as a standard for 1440p144hz.
I'm honestly just looking for the GPU and CPU to go for, I'll get the rest by comparing easily.

Well if you're serious, you want a 9700k or 9900k.

Though realistically you'll be GPU bottlenecked at 1440p144hz with just a 2060.

You need a 2080 really for 1440p144hz ultra settings.

That being said, at 1440p 144hz, intel CPUs provide higher average fps, and higher 1% minimum average FPS as well as better frame times.

Intel? More like Patel.

Attached: carlos.jpg (600x600, 35K)

>very confusing as the OP says 2060 as a standard for 1440p144hz
no it specifically say it ISN'T

>1440p
>>RTX 2060 - standard
>>RTX 2080 - very high framerates (requires complementary CPU and monitor)

See, 2060 - standard means 1440p 60hz

2080 - very high framerates
means 1440p144hz.

A 2080 is 1440p 144hz, not a 2060.

>Stop asking, faggot.
>The amd shill is mad, because he can't find a single reason.
oh oh oh oh oh

I understood that as "Standard card for 144hz" and the very high framerates as "pushing very much above 144 _fps_".
Thanks for clearing that up for me.

I am serious, but I don't blame you, I've been looking on Jow Forums for close to three weeks now and I've become dumber with time.

So 9700k with an RTX 2080? Looks like 1440p144hz is quite a lot more expensive than 60hz

>So 9700k with an RTX 2080? Looks like 1440p144hz is quite a lot more expensive than 60hz
Correct.

You can skate by with a 2070 and a Ryzen 2700, but you'll sacrifice some performance, especially at 144hz.

The OP is trash. But it might mean 1440p@60 or something.

Yes, and even then you'll often not get over 100fps or near 144fps because tons of games simply won't run that high no matter how powerful your PC and how low your settings are.
Same with 1080p.

It's better to set your expectations more reasonably. 2600X plus 1070Ti or Vega56 will get you around 75-144fps.

anyone ???

Surprised there's not much information of this new major Intel security vulnerability.

There was seemingly a lot of state sponsored hacking using it.
youtube.com/watch?v=zZB7RU1L8jM

The 4 screw you use to screw in the PSU? Do they come with the PSU or with the case you buy?

Are there any gsync/freesync monitors out there yet which have the same quality as a Dell Ultrasharp? Seems like every gaming monitor has some serious QA problems.

Bros, is asus software worse than MSI? Some people say MSI software bricks your system, others say Asus AI suite is buggy and laggy as hell.

whats the best benchmarking tool to measure a cpu for gaming?

ill be honest with you and say its the game itself.

the case most of the time. its their screwhole, even tho its standarnized if the case were painted so would the screws need to be painted

get a ryzen 2600 or 2600x to replace a 4690k?
yes or no boys

gaming? not really, i'd go for the just wait™ route and see what's what when benches roll. it is an upgrade, but not a very big one, although you'd be set if zen2 turns out as based as people shill. ymmv. gpu would make a much bigger impact if gaming is priority here, even if it bottlenecks.
for actual work, it's a matter of if you need the extra cores and threads. rendering, vm work and so on.

well im just gaming but the i5 is kind of cucking me sometimes a little bit
any news when ryzen 3 is coming out?

Then what the fuck does the 4k gaming meme mean?

An RTX2080 is between 800€ and 1200€ here, I can't even tell the difference apart from amountsof cooling fans.
The 9700k is 420€.
Seeing how I'm a filthy casual that won't have enough time to make full use of the system that sounds like an immense waste of money.

Is 1440p144hz an illusion? I already have a 1080p144hz monitor, I am now thinking about just upgrading for my current monitor. Hate how I'm taking three steps back every day.

You can get 1440p 144hz in some cpu intensive and older games with the 2060. I'd get an 8700k since it's ~20% more the price of a 2700x, and will get you ~20% more performance when overclocked to 5Ghz + low input latency relative to the 8 core Ryzen. If you have no overclocking experience, get an asus z390 f. if you do, i'd go with an asrock taichi.

we'll know at ces in may, hopefully

The safe option is the 2600x, since they always overclock to 4.2GHz. You can go with the 2600 if you want to gamble. I've heard anons getting a max clock rate anywhere from 3.95 high voltage to 4.2 undervolting.

If the stutters with your i5s are bothering you, yes a 2600/X would fix that.

4k is generally not much over 60fps. You are always GPU bottlenecked there.

I'd say 144fps isn't really that much better than 90-120. You'll usually only see a difference between 90 and 144 in FPS. VR is 90, after all, too. That's a pretty acceptable framerate.
I'd just save your money and get a 2600X+1070ti/Vega64/2070. You'll get 144 in the games which are made to go that fast, but I'd just limit most other games to 100fps to keep the system cool and such. The whole point of Freesync is that lower framerates still look good.

Following this post up:

I am now looking at these options:

GTX 1060, GTX 1660, RTX 2060, RTX 2070

Honestly I don't think 1440p@144 is even feasible at the moment, I'd rather go for 1080p@144 instead.

if its a i5 you might feel no difference if you OCed it well

if its a i7 its a real loss for you

if you are feeling the age of the 4th gen, like, less cores, long load times even on a SSD, it will be good for you. but do what user said and at least wait for computex.

shop for a i7 4th gen, your mobo should be able to take it. the cheapest route ever considering they are not supported anymore

You could try msi afterburner if you already have it installed

:(

Attached: intel btfo.png (1800x850, 216K)

The Asus Ai suite works fine for me, but I think msi has better manual overclocking tools in their bios

1440p144 is really 2080 grounds
i hear a lot of people swearing by 1440p60, but if you are used to 120+fps then thats troubling

bear with me for a moment, and consider this
get a 1440p144hz monitor that can do gsync/freesync, go with the 2070 and have the best of both worlds that your GPU can deliver by tweaking settings. 2070 can tecnically do 1440p90 at max setting in many triple A games, downscaling would work well to max 144fps, just not in quality

This is from fortnite and apex legends streamers and youtubers turning the console players into pc gamers. I wonder how this large transition from console to pc will affect gaming over the next decade.

next gen playstations will have a GPU formfactor to please gamers

That sounds very reasonable as I rarely pick up triple A games, but as you said there's no way to go back to 60hz. Theoretically I should be able to play 1080p@144hz worst case?
Honestly I'll just stop thinking about it from here and look for a CPU from here on, there's just too many options to choose from.

Now that I might be going 1440p@90 I suppose the 2600X or the 9400F won't suffice, right?

Hi guys, need advice with 2 builds I made, I can't decide which one should I get, hope you can help me.

Build 1 (1.032,68 €)

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X 4.3 Ghz
MSI B450M PRO-M2
Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 PC4-24000 16GB 2x8GB CL15
Cooler Master Hyper 212 RGB Black Edition
Samsung 970 EVO Plus 500GB SSD NVMe M.2
EVGA BQ 750W 80 Plus Bronze Modular
Gigabyte Aorus Radeon RX 580 8G 8GB GDDR5

Build 2 (1.072,59 €)

Intel Core i5-9600K 3.7Ghz
MSI Mpg Z390 Gaming Plus
Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 PC4-24000 16GB 2x8GB CL15
Cooler Master Hyper 212 RGB Black Edition
Samsung 970 EVO Plus 500GB SSD NVMe M.2
EVGA BQ 750W 80 Plus Bronze Modular
Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1660 OC 6GB GDDR5

If you know any improvement to the builds that would improve perfomance while keeping the budget let me know. Thanks in advance bois

>do I buy AMD or Intel, guys?
This will lead nowhere.

I mean if stadia is anytging to go off of, the power of a vega 56 should let console players play high framerate or 4k. I legitimately don't know how developers are going to use the power of the new gpu for

considering how you are going midrange to highrange, id ask you to avoid i5 and try a i7 or even a i9. asides that might wait for the new amd stuff. ill be honest and say i dont know what amd processors to pick to make a 2070 not choke on it.

1440p scales terribly to 1080p, i think only 4k and 1080p scales correctly. might consider windowned mode, or maybe even in game settings of scaling

both build are gimped by mid tier GPUs

the ram is solid
212 is fine, But I would go with the be quiet pro rock for the same price
get a seasonic gold 650 or bronze 620 instead of the 750 bronze
you can get a wd black nvme 500 gb for cheaper
I'd go with the 1660 over the 580

2600X, stock cooler (can upgrade later), MX500 1Tb SSD, and 1660Ti would be better than all 3 for that money.
Like the other user said, you have too much CPU and too little GPU

2600X is fine for that, yes.
For competitive FPS like R6 Siege, Overwatch, etc, you'll get 144 fine. But setting your sights on around 1440p@90 for mainstream games will make things A LOT more affordable.

I mean it appears that Navi mainstream GPU is going to be around Vega 56 gaming performance (though significantly less raw compute), and that's likely the same chip which will go in consoles.

It's highly unlikely the next Xbox and PS4 will have divergent designs like the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X, simply due to the new architecture and infinity fabric, and how much lower cost it is to make 1 chip for consoles, desktops, and servers. AMD really leapfrogged their business strategy

I'm pretty sure 16:10 1440p scales poorly since 1080 is 16:9. 2560 1440 should scale correctly

i forgot the ratios, you should be right actually

if you go with the 2600X, i'd get an asrock phantom, msi pro carbon, or strix based on whichever one is cheapest . I wouldn't go itx

1440p is 16:9 you retard.
And 16:10 has no "scaling issues". Holy fuck you are ignorant.

no there is 3440x1440 and 2560x1440

3440 is 21:9, which has scaling issues. 2560 is 16:9

2440x1440 isn't 16:10 either, you knucle dragger.
Quit posting.

Will a B450 mobo be good enough for the 3000 series Ryzen CPUs, or should I spring for something better?

Wow, I'm literally getting nowhere. I've been waiting for almost a month now, the new Zen is nowhere close to be released so I think I'll be making my choice this week.

The only competitive game I play is CSGO where I really enjoy the 144hz monitor and would never go back. I think 1080p@144hz is the way to go for me.

So, I just got a nh-d15. I'm thinking if removing the fans, putting them in the front of the chassis as intake, then two more in the back and top as exhaust. The cooler would be passive. I'm using a 2700x, would that be retarded, especially if I plan on overclocking to 4.2ghz?

Attached: nh-d15-top-large.jpg (2000x1723, 248K)

I was wrong about 16:10 being a common monitor ratio, but the point is that if you plan on playing fullscreen and downscaling to 1080p, you want to make sure the dimension ratios match. (yes you can downscale to different 1080p ratios based on what is supported, but it's reccomendable to get a 16:9 ratio screen since the most supported resolution is 16:9.) I don't know why you're hung up on 16:10

*the most supported ratio is 16:9

I'm not saying that user shouldn't get a 144hz monitor.

But with Freesync, he can set a framerate limit on them to 90 and it'd be fine and smooth. But CSGO will run 1440p@144hz even on an RX570 and a 4 core CPU. That's easy.

That is fine but why would you underclock the 2700X?

Look on Craigslist for 144hz monitors. I got mine for $100, most of the sellers are kids so it's really easy to talk them down. It's evil but I got him to go down from $140 to $100. I'm glad I did though because when I got home it had a weird row of pixels that were faint in color to the rest. Not bad though.

Attached: 1554108772360.jpg (506x716, 86K)

That's underclocking? I haven't looked much into yet, how far do you think I could push it with my cooling plan?

>I'm glad I did though because when I got home it had a weird row of pixels that were faint in color to the rest.
lmao sounds like you're the one who got jewed

Stock is 4.35Ghz on 2 cores and with PBO enabled gets all core up to 4.124 or so.
Old fashioned overclocking on the 2700X is generally worse for real-world performance.

I've been using 16:10 for like 10 years. I've almost never seen a "compatibility" problem. Only example I can think of is Lobotomy Corporation, some Korean indie game, which while it supported 16:10 resolutions it would only let me select 1 resolution lower (on 2560x1600. IT supports that resolution, but will only let me select 2560x1440 or 1920x1200). That's one game out of literally hundreds and just a dumb early access bug.

I've seen some games only support a couple resolutions, but you're right that the majority of new games support a mountain of resolutions, However, older games usually don't have support for everything so your options are to install a mod (deus ex comes to mind first for me), or play in windowed mode. I just don't like tgose blacks bars in fullscreen. A total immersion killer

no, that would be a bit beyond retarded actually
get extra fans for your case and leave your cpu cooler alone
fanless coolers are fuckhuge for a reason, you'll throttle like a madman doing this, if your rig actually runs for more than 10 minutes

Also to add to that, I can play 2560x1440 games in windowed mode, still showing the task bar ...
There is literally no downside except that 2560x1600 is about 10-12% harder to run than 1440p.
The only downside is you can't get a 120hz panel in that resolution afaik.

But with new 1920x1200 monitors coming out, maybe 2560x1600 will as well.

How good is the MSi Titanium 1070TI for $400 Cad? That or the !070ti Zotac Amp edition for 300 Cad?