/pcbg/ - PC Building General

>Assemble a part list
pcpartpicker.com/
>Example gaming builds and monitor suggestions; click on blue titles to see notes
pcpartpicker.com/user/pcbg/saved/
>How to assemble a PC
youtube.com/watch?v=69WFt6_dF8g

Want help?
>State budget & CURRENCY
>Post at least some attempt at a parts list
>List your uses, e.g. Gaming, Video Editing, VM Work
>For monitors, include purpose (e.g., photoediting, gaming) and graphics card pairing (if applicable)

CPUs based on current pricing:
>Athlon 200GE - HTPC, web browsing, bare minimum gaming (can be OC'd on most mobos with the right BIOS)
>R3 2200G - Recommended minimum gaming
>i5-8400/8600K or R5 2600/X - Great gaming or multithreaded use CPUs
>i7 8700/K - Extreme solution for absolute max FPS
>R7 2700/X - VM Work / Streaming / Video editing

RAM:
>Always choose at least a two stick kit; 2x 8GB is recommended
>CPUs benefit from high speed RAM; 3200CL16 is ideal
>AMD B and X chipsets and Intel Z chipsets support XMP

Graphics cards based on current pricing:
>Used cards can be had for a steal; inquire about warranty
1080p
>RX 570 8GB - good performance with great value
>GTX 1660 - standard
>RTX 2060 - high framerates (requires complementary CPU and monitor)
1440p
>RTX 2060 - standard
>RTX 2080 - high framerates (requires complementary CPU and monitor)
2160p (4K)
>RTX 2080 - standard
>RTX 2080Ti - better fit for 4K but expensive

General:
>PLAN YOUR BUILD AROUND YOUR MONITOR IF GAMING
>Don't bother buying a new monitor for gaming unless it's 144Hz with adaptive sync
>A 256GB or larger SSD is almost mandatory; consider m.2 form factor
>Bottleneck checkers are worthless

Previous:

Attached: Carrot Juice.jpg (736x1104, 160K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=Sytapy-WNs8&feature=youtu.be&t=1087
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>8600k
>multithreaded use
idiot

checked

It's not "more demanding" its an entirely different task. You can't pre render audio, you cant buffer it - it is a linear process than will causes latency before it will entirely fail. It is imperative to reduce latency, it is imperative to remain transparent - the gold is made from capturing good performance and being able to monitor precisely. You don't get a second chance, either you do it properly or its gone. That last part isnt stricly true but I don't have time to tell a band to redo a performance because there was one pop or crackle during the recording because for .4 of a second a core was maxed or some other slip up.
Do you understand? They are not the same thing.
Whatever I dont give a fuck about your fanboy wars.
Yes I understand that, I am talking about max overclocked speeds that will allow the machine to boot.
I will definitely change it out for 4x8 instead, thank you. Is there any particular brand or model that performs particularly well within the price range of around 200-250$?

Any suggested motherboard for the X299 chipset?

this

No, it's great for gaming, idiot. Read that line properly.

Intel for gaming, AMD for multithreaded use.

>Any suggested motherboard for the X299 chipset?
No one really knows since no one buys that.
Threadripper outsells Skylake-X by something like 20-to-1.
Buildzoid does have a few X299 analysis videos but... he goes purely by hardware pretty much, and by that he's recommended Gigabyte boards which are garbage because of their reliability and BIOS/UEFI.
All I know is that X299 is full of some really shit boards which can't actually run the CPUs for shit since they're housefires.

LOL it's supposed to be an exclusive or? How are you supposed to know which?
And 2600/X is great for gaming at the price so it can't be an exclusive or for them. How can you have a sentence which is an exclusive or for one and inclusive or for the other?
You're retarded.

>Is there any particular brand or model that performs particularly well within the price range of around 200-250$?
Actually now that I'm lookign there isn't.
What the hell? Why are 16gb DIMMs so cheap right now?
Yeah man, scratch everything i said, Unless you've heard faster ram is good for your work go for those 2x16GB because they're selling cheap as hell right now

>buttangry AMD fanboy trying to sell ryzen as a gaming cpu
Holy shit you're stupid, lmao.

Does getting a 144hz, 1080 monitor with a 2060 make any sense? I've been reading mixed results.

>less than 5% behind in IPC = shit for gaming
>lmao
fuck off

yes, as long as you dont get the gimped 3GB version

Look at steam usage, majority are using Intel. Therefore Intel is best for gaming, you AMDfags are a minority, fuck off.

P gud
youtube.com/watch?v=Sytapy-WNs8&feature=youtu.be&t=1087

They're also like 15% behind in clockspeed

>5% difference in performance justifies 50% increase in price

I think you're stupid

>because of their reliability and BIOS/UEFI
Any information on what is "more reliable" ?
>All I know is that X299 is full of some really shit boards which can't actually run the CPUs for shit since they're housefires.
Do you know of literally any examples that arn't really shit, considering that I will invest in any cooling necessary? Furthermore, is there cooling you would suggest to tame my fireplace?
There are pretty specific circumstances where I think it helps but still, i'm sure its not going to be a negative thing to fill all 4 slots though?.. Unless getting 2x16 leaves me with room for potential upgrades in the future, but desu i'm not concerned with that.
I don't have money to burn, but I certainly have some to play with.

still does not mean amd is shit for gaming but nice try with your brainlet fallacy, fucktard

Is it alright to grab a 60hz monitor if I don't play to game on it?

Is 21.5 monitor fine if I'm not planning to game?

lol oh yeah man, its not like steam isn't the largest platform for PC games. Peope who play games go with Intel. End of story.

At this point should I be getting a 1440 monitor instead? Will that work okay with a 2060?

>Is it alright to grab a 60hz monitor if I don't play to game on it?
yes
>Is 21.5 monitor fine if I'm not planning to game?
uhm... what you should ask is "is the monitor size and resolution enough for me?"

yes, 2060 is fine for 60hz 1440p

9400f is cheaper and better than the 2600x

I'm asking, because people are saying 24' is the sweet spot for 1080p, but I don't know if that is for gaming or just in general?

Still does not prove AMD is shit for games, you shit-for-brain retard.

Radeon RX 560 vs RX 550, which one is better?
>Third world fag asking for a friend.

Attached: 1519234802008.jpg (462x500, 46K)

depends how far from the monitor you will be

If all you care about is gaming performance right NOW in 2019, that's accurate.

Potentially a 2600x will have longer legs and be viable for longer with games that use more cores due to the PS5 and next xbox using 16 thread CPUs.

I'll just be arm's length.

it's literally all determined by viewing distance.

If you sit close, 21" is fine, if you sit further back, 24" or even 27" might be fine.

It's why a 1080p 40" TV looks decent, cause you generally sit 6+ feet away. If you sat 2 feet away it'd look like ass.

Most people in the universe own Intel that doesn't mean its the best at everything either.
I'd be willing the bet the vast majority of faggots (sorry i mean gaymers) wouldn't even notice the difference while they play Fortnite or whatever shitty games most people are playing.
Anyone who spends a lot of time playing video games is a retard anyways, off the top of my head I cant think of a bigger waste of time. Maybe smoking? At least those people arnt screeching autists.

It's so fucking frustrating, the market being aimed at gaming as if that's in any way an important field for anyone other than (man)children.

But not for a 144hz 1440p?

I use steam on my ivy bridge cpu all the time!

Sure? It's really your only option.
The GPU is too much for just 1080p@60.
But it doesn't have the VRAM for higher resolution.
So 1080p@144 is your only reasonable option with it.
It'll work until it doesn't.
Just like the 970, or the 1060 3Gb, you'll run into a game that uses more VRAM than it has and you'll have to turn settings down for it to not shit the bed.

Uh I'd say 21.5"-23" for 1080p. 24" should be at least 1920x1200.
But it depends how far you put it from your face.

I like how you stopped spamming the picture with that statement since your own picture proves you wrong. I'm sure someone else has it saved.

Google benchmarks.
>lower is better for GPUs!

Roughly 85% of Steam is China now. That's why AMD's numbers on Steam tanked.

>Is there reliability information on something virtually no one even buys

Attached: based 6Gb.png (1262x707, 418K)

I mean, if you're fine with medium/high settings instead of Ultra and very high, then yeah a 2060 is still fine.

I play 1440p 144hz with a 1660Ti. Just most games are played at medium settings.

>I'd say 21.5"-23" for 1080p
>24" should be at least 1920x1200.
lmao what the fuck are you even talking about?

21.5" 1080p is 102 PPI
23" 1080p is 96 PPI
24" 1080p is 92 PPI

24" 1200p is 94 PPI

You're REALLY trying to insist that 24" 1200p is fine at 94PPI but a 24" 1080p at 92PPI is somehow unbearable?

Come on.

>Potentially a 2600x will have longer legs and be viable for longer with games that use more cores due to the PS5 and next xbox using 16 thread CPUs.
You are a dead set idiot. AMD fanboys like yourself have been pedaling this for several years and Intel still wins the benchmarks. RPCS3 uses 8 cores and Intel still wins.

Consoles using AMD hardware means nothing in the context of PC Gaming.

That's not even true.
It's ignoring the fact that *no one* installs nothing but a game, disables as many background Windows services as they can, turns off their network i/o, and then boots up a game and NOTHING else.

While the 9400f and 2600X are even in gaming benchmarks, the 9400f is going to lose more performance and fall behind more when you have anything running in the background.
Game benchmarks don't represent real world usage. Anyone who thinks otherwise is just lying to themselves and others to shill.

>AMD fanboys like yourself
lmao okay

Attached: 2019-04-22 22_03_22.png (1025x817, 154K)

>RPCS3 uses 8 cores and Intel still wins.

yeah, wait until they're using 12-14 cores effectively.

95.78 for 1920x1080 @ 23"
94.34 for 1920x1200 @ 24"
91.79 for 1920x1080 @ 24"
That's some nice fucking rounding you did,making an entire 1ppi delta, retard. 1920x1200 @ 24" is closer to 1920x1080 @ 23" by far.
Yes ~95 ppi is the cut off point.

I also said it would depend on how far you put the screen, which you completely ignored because you are mentally ill and had some silly need to sperg and make an idiot out of yourself.

based

>Is there reliability information on something virtually no one even buys
That other user already said that at least one person was offering information, then the user eluded to the fact that there are reasons why the reviewer is incorrect. This in itself is information on the topic, and also means that the user *at least* knows more than he is typing, its quite plausible that someone else reading will know a titbit or two as well. I'm here to learn, not to have a pissing match with a condescending retard. Fuck, i'd love to smash your teeth in, I can smell you from here.

nigger. I rounded up if it was .5 or more and down if it was less than .5

Retard

>Yes ~95 ppi is the cut off point.
>he thinks he can tell the difference between less than 3 PPI
wewlad, get your autism the fuck out of here.

>there is absolutely 0 difference between 1.51 and 2.49
>there is 2 difference between 1.49 and 2.51
This is the biggest I've seen someone BTFO on /pcbg/ for a couple of days. Congrats.

Actual BF benchmark

Attached: untitled-5.png (714x934, 45K)

No one is saying there isn't a difference, but he obviously was rounding to the nearest WHOLE number, you're being pretty autistic if you think you can visually tell the difference between 3 pixels per inch unless you're directly comparing them side by side.

Further, why the fuck should anyone pay 3x the price for 1200p when a quality 1080p monitor of the same size can be had MUCH easier?


$150-200 for a decent prosumer color accurate IPS 1080p

$400+ for 1200p 24" AND you'll be generally stuck with panels that are several years old compared to 1080p panels which are updated and refreshed yearly, sometimes more than once a year.

>having a browser open will tank your fps
imagine being this retarded. There's only a few games that reach 100% utilization on 6 threads and that's because they are AMD sponsored and have denuvo to deliberately stress your cpu as much as possible so they can say "moar cores matter"
You mean this pic? Yeah it proves 9400f is so much better
He is testing with 3400 cl14 ram which no one buys. Using 3000 ram will give you 5-10% worse perf on ryzen and as you see it's not needed for intel cuz 2665 does the job. Also uses water cooler to reach 4.2ghz on 2600x while 9400f is with the shit stock cooler and still beats it.
Pretty much we are seeing ryzen build costing $100 more getting btfo by 9400f

Attached: Screenshot_2019-04-15-18-52-08-974_com.google.android.youtube.png (1920x1080, 856K)

thoughts on the Viewsonic XG2402?

thiccboi bezels and TN panel.

Hope you don't watch movies on it or need to view it at any off-angle.

>not 64 player MP
BTFOs self with own image once again.

Nice he posted the image that shows the 2600X matches the 9400F in pure gaming, while obviously being better in multitasking, multithreaded use, and having anything running in the background like an actual person games instead of just running benchmarks.
Ty friend

i have a nice tv to watch movies on and im not sure why i would ever be viewing my monitor at an off angle.

In larger multiple monitor setups, you're bound to have a monitor or two at an off angle.

VA and IPS panels are great for these, since the image quality doesn't drastically change just by moving your head.

Probably more of a /v/ question but /v/ is never helpful, never bough a PC game controller before. Are there any good ones with analog shoulder buttons so I can use it for GameCube emulation?

Nice you ignored everything I wrote confirming you are a retard.

only gonna be using one monitor.

I never said you would be, simply answering your question

>im not sure why i would ever be viewing my monitor at an off angle

Remember, people on Jow Forums don't live inside your head, they can't just assume you're going to be using a single monitor ONLY from the front forever.

Write something worth reading.

Background processes can easily use 10-15%+ CPU on a 6 thread CPU. Plenty of games use 100% of CPU. Their FPS is going to be tanked much harder than a CPU that a game only utilizes 75% instead. This is a physical fact. You're a moron who is lying to people.

Attached: 6 thread garbage.png (1920x1080, 2.65M)

I posted in the dead thread, now I feel embarrassed.

>State budget & CURRENCY
$1300 CAD, before tax

>Post at least some attempt at a parts list
I'm kind of a retard in this sense because my first was a prebuilt and I'm out of the loop in terms of top tier specs. I'm still looking into Mini ITX builds, as I really like the form factor more. I dont think I'll need an RTX GPU but I'm looking at the R7 CPUs and leaning more towards those. I dont need or want a killer PC. Just something at can do 1080p 60fps without fail.

>List your uses, e.g. Gaming, Video Editing, VM Work
I currently play on a 21:9 1080p monitor and have no plans to go beyond 60fps 1080p. The reason for staying on such old specs is because I only really play MMOs and Sim games so I'm kinda adjusted to current UI sizes etc. I dont care about VR and I dont care about Livestreaming

If mini ITX is a meme then I'm open to mid size towers.

Attached: kamen_rider_thebee_rider_form_by_markolios_d9tjpvt-pre.png (894x894, 37K)

1080ti practically equates to 2080 without ray tracing which isn't powered enough to use yet anyway
>That's nice a nice price for a 2080 but it is massive overkill at 1080p@60
not him but if using persistance based displays (we all are) then increased frame rate equates to better motion clarity so its never overkill. even when it gets to that point of perfect motion clarity (1000hz/fps) at that point we can then implement real time ray tracing which will drop frames considerably. so its never overkill

i bought the 8700k and nothing is built yet but i'm starting to feel buyers remorse and instead should have bought the 9700k. i'm only interested in gaymen

>Background processes can easily use 10-15%+ CPU on a 6 thread CPU
No they don't
Discord: literally nothing
Browser: literally nothing
That's all you use on the background if any of them
>Plenty of games use 100% of CPU
3 is not plenty. It's literally ac, far cry, (both amd sponsored lol) maybe battlefield on cherry picked situations but you can't prove it because you have no comparisons and just post screenshots implying they prove something

If your browser is chrome and youe only got 8GB of RAM i can confirm closing the browser drastically reduces frameskipping

What part of a computer do we have to improve to make games load instantly?
There doesnt seem to be any benefit moving from SATA SSDs to NVMe or even Optane for long games

That's because the game needs more ram, nothing to do with the cpu.

Everyone knows Intel CPUs have more RAM

2060 is a decent GPU for 1080p and 2560x1080 even without using RTX.
It's not like any of the RTX GPUs are powerful enough to use their advertised features, anyway.

Where is your proof that background processes can't use 15% cpu?
I have 6c/12t and they use more than that.
My game is only using 6.5% but 24% total is used. That's 17.5% background
And that's with a more powerful CPU than the 8400. On an 8400 it'd be over 20% used in the background in the same scenario.
If I had this same shit running in the background and wanted to play BFV MP on a 8400, I'd lose 20% of my FPS. LOL.

The shit you say is so easily provable as wrong. I don't get why you bother posted just to be proven wrong 50 times a day.

>inb4 3 browsers
Yeah one is for testing, one is for research, and the other is for youtube and twitch and shit. One of those is barely using anything (Chrome) with just 3 tabs open and eliminating that would still have me over 15% in the background which would be over 20% on a 6 thread CPU.

>3 is not plenty
It's way more than 3.
Mafia 3 is another. BF1 and BFV multiplayer both max out 6 threads. Wither 3 maxes out an 8400 on all 6 threads with just a fucking 1070, let alone a 1080. Lots of these aren't even new games. New games have trended up in CPU usage.

This was true on my 2500k. It stuttered like shit unless I closed browsers. Viewing Twitch streams are what really hurt it.
But on my 1600X I can have hundreds of tabs open and don't see a difference. Everything still runs smooth except for a few synchronous programmed older games from the early 2000s that hitch no matter what like Eve Online.

NVMeme don't improve load times.
Optane does marginally improve them because latency.
Fast decompression (Ryzen) improves load times.
It will never be instant because the bottleneck isn't simply transferring files from storage to memory, but CPU work like decompression and other operations the game is doing when loading.

Attached: Taskmgr_2019-04-22_22-58-26.png (1364x971, 108K)

Neither.
Either save a bit more and go rx 570 or wait 1 week and see if the gtx 1650 will lower prices for last gen.

r8 my build.

Attached: 2019-04-22-231342_458x620_scrot.png (458x620, 46K)

oh also there's a vega56 in there as well.

this workstation build

>having twitch and youtube open when playing normal games
I don't have adhd sorry.
All the other shit apart from browsers are windows processes that run on the benchmarker's tests too you know.

Rendering box?
I'd kill for that in my server. Except the Vega.

TN monitors don't look bad if you aren't going to look at a monitor from the sides, right?

Can't we all just get along? If you like Intel then good for you, if you like AMD then that's also okay. Why do we fill /pcbg/ with shitposting cpu war bullshit? This general is supposed to help people on builds and give useful information. Where did it all go wrong?

Attached: 1513913875716.jpg (567x437, 142K)

Almost all background processes that use cpu use your gpu too, so you should close them when playing games.

Colors aren't as good as IPS/VA, but in general, yeah TN is fine for head-on viewing, assuming now photo/video editing

Navi when?

>assuming now
assuming no

Why don't you have a PC this sexy?

Attached: crazy thais.webm (1280x720, 1012K)

Shopping for a card to fully use my 1440p G-Sync monitor, as close to 144hz as I can get. The 2080 seems the most reasonable option, but should I wait for Navi in case there's something competitive among those?

sexy is a word that only weird old dudes use to refer to things
this pc is bad and anyone who likes it is bad

Jealousy is a cruel mistress.

Is Navi confirmed to not have anything that surpasses the Radeon VII or is this just a rumor?

Attached: 54643758659.jpg (200x200, 12K)

What the fuck is that supposed to be?

>lots of stupid moving parts
>massive added cost for no functional improvement
Proving that just because you spent a lot on something doesn't mean it's better.

Nah, primary machine.

I run a bit of rendering and other big fat workloads though.

Gaming on this is gonna be hilarious though.

Multi-processor systems tend to have higher latency and more issues overclocking than the single CPU systems. Gonna be some interesting benchmarks.

Well then fine for me, I don't overclock.

Gonna be interesting to see what the upgrade path ends up beeing like. Because I can see 128 cores in my future and it is *awesome*

The Scorpion PC

Attached: 48375385_2226367154063788_1721330159597912064_o.jpg (1944x1296, 349K)

Would it be a good idea to buy a buy HDD for storage of my animes, movies, and pictures. Get a smaller SSD such as a 500gb for games that don't require a lot of space such as emulation games. And get a 1tb SSD for the games that require a lot of space?

I recall there being issues with frame delivery times between the GPU and CPU in multi-CPU systems; especially if the OS is mismanaging memory, which all of them tended to do.

Now disable TSX on Intel. Oh wait, you won't.

They use parts of the GPU the games don't. lol. Imagine thinking GPUs just have one function yet commenting on hardware.

Windows schedular is NUMA aware. Where were you 10 years ago?
Maybe a few ns more PCIe latency, but that'd be it.

based

Sorry I forgot, Intel eventually disables it for you.

>Windows schedular is NUMA aware. Where were you 10 years ago?
Aware; maybe, but it's still having issues today.

These threads are practically worthless because of the incessant intel vs amd shilling. Seriously wish you guys would fuck off to your own thread or something. Start a /cumswap/ general and take it over there, you fags.

Dude Intel faggots started this whole thing. Every single thread was "lol AMD, AMD sucxors!" And now that Ryzen is out, we get revenge.

>we

this. should be bannable offence to take part in a fucking flamewar between the brands

kys you're part of the problem

The RX 560 price it's the half of an RX 570, so hat's what I'm asking for.|

That CPU draws fuckloads of power so you'll need good VRMs for the CPU.
Also why do you have to do everything on a PC? Is there no specialized hardware for this?