Nankatsu
Member
Thanks for the heads up. I'll try to gather up the prices for each component on Amazon business in order to see the final price.
The monitor you suggest for example I can snag it for 315 € with free shipping
Last edited:
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
"I Need a New PC!" 2024. 240 Hz OLEDs, PCI-Gen5, Path Tracing & Ray Reconstruction.
- Thread starter Leonidas
- Start date
Thanks for the heads up. I'll try to gather up the prices for each component on Amazon business in order to see the final price.
The monitor you suggest for example I can snag it for 315 € with free shipping
Nankatsu
Member
So I've come up with this build, considering mostly the opinions I got around here and after also talking with some friends that are more up to date with the hardware market.
What do you guys think? Would you change anything? I'm stretching myself a bit probably, because I'm way off my 1000 € PC mark.
Through Amazon business the current cost for this build sits around 1559 €.
I could get it lower if I bought the monitor later down the road, which would dropped the total value to something like 1220 €. Still 220 € off-target.
Where could I cut more without making the build worse?
Also, I still don't have any idea about the case though.
Any suggestions?
What do you guys think? Would you change anything? I'm stretching myself a bit probably, because I'm way off my 1000 € PC mark.
Through Amazon business the current cost for this build sits around 1559 €.
I could get it lower if I bought the monitor later down the road, which would dropped the total value to something like 1220 €. Still 220 € off-target.
Where could I cut more without making the build worse?
Also, I still don't have any idea about the case though.
Any suggestions?
Last edited:
analog_future
Resident Crybaby
How soon are you hoping to build? If you wait a month, the new AMD CPUs will be out and you could either opt for one of those or get the 7800X3D for a likely cheaper price.
Last edited:
Nankatsu
Member
It's doable yeah. I'm aiming to build the PC during summer, likely between July-August.
Last edited:
Nankatsu
Member
Update on PC build:
I've switched the CPU and Storage a bit, in order to fix the budget at 1500€ with a monitor already included, which will probably be an AOC Q27G3XMN 27.0" 2560 x 1440 180 Hz, putting the curved one aside.
I was also checking the 7800 XT vs 7900 GRE, but from what I could gather the 7900 GRE has the upperhand so, let's leave it at that.
The build is probably pretty much finished. Won't buy right away, so probably, if I'm lucky, some things decrease prices until then.
I've switched the CPU and Storage a bit, in order to fix the budget at 1500€ with a monitor already included, which will probably be an AOC Q27G3XMN 27.0" 2560 x 1440 180 Hz, putting the curved one aside.
I was also checking the 7800 XT vs 7900 GRE, but from what I could gather the 7900 GRE has the upperhand so, let's leave it at that.
The build is probably pretty much finished. Won't buy right away, so probably, if I'm lucky, some things decrease prices until then.
Last edited:
amigastar
Member
Just bought myself a monitor for 130 bucks. Full HD (yeah i know but still) Just wanted to share with you cause i'm really curious and excited about the monitor. IPS Panel, lets see how it fares against my Eizo 350 bucks monitor.
Just a question if i have a 165HZ monitor and lets say i only reach 120 fps will the experience be inferior or still better than on a 60hz monitor?
Just a question if i have a 165HZ monitor and lets say i only reach 120 fps will the experience be inferior or still better than on a 60hz monitor?
23.8" AOC 24G2SPAE - Specifications
Specifications of AOC 24G2SPAE. Display: 23.8 in, IPS, W-LED, 1920 x 1080 pixels, Viewing angles (H/V): 178 ° / 178 °, Brightness: 300 cd/m², Static contrast: 1000 : 1, Dynamic contrast: 80000000 : 1, Refresh rate: 48 Hz - 165 Hz, sRGB: 126 %, NTSC: 96 %, Dimensions: 539.05 x 322.1 x 47.2 mm...
www.displayspecifications.com
Last edited:
Nankatsu
Member
Guys, help me out here:
How exactly should I setup my fans if I'm running a double tower air cooler?
I've seen some opinions where top fans shouldn't be use, while on the other and I've seen other opinions that say the exact opposite.
I'm about to buy a Fractal North case and was thinking of doing the following fan setup:
x3 120 mm fans at front
x2 120 mm fans at top
x1 120 fan at the back
This, paired with a Phantom Spirit 120 EVO, mounted on a Ryzen 5 7600X, paired with a 7900 GRE.
Am I thinking correctly or not?
How exactly should I setup my fans if I'm running a double tower air cooler?
I've seen some opinions where top fans shouldn't be use, while on the other and I've seen other opinions that say the exact opposite.
I'm about to buy a Fractal North case and was thinking of doing the following fan setup:
x3 120 mm fans at front
x2 120 mm fans at top
x1 120 fan at the back
This, paired with a Phantom Spirit 120 EVO, mounted on a Ryzen 5 7600X, paired with a 7900 GRE.
Am I thinking correctly or not?
Last edited:
winjer
Gold Member
Fans at the top extracting.
Fans at the front intaking air.
Fan at the back extracting.
demented waffle
Member
I had better luck with front fans and top fans intake with my Noctua dh15. The exhaust on top actually increased temps by 2 degrees. Although, I didn't see a difference between two fans intake and no fans at all up top. At least on the cpu. There might've been a couple of degrees cooler on VRMS or something. Of course I just left the top fans as intake. This was on a Corsair 5000D converted to airflow.
Last edited:
Nankatsu
Member
Top fans intake? Wouldn't that also push back the hot air from the CPU back to the CPU again?
demented waffle
Member
Convection doesn't work the same in high air turbulence. Good way to increase dust in your case tho. As I'm finding out. That was the result of my experiment. Yours could be different. IDK. Silverstone used to have a write-up about how it was better to have top fans as intake as well when having front intake fans and a tower cooler. Can't find it tho.
Nankatsu
Member
I've come across this video from Linus:
Each case is one specific environment, but judging by this it seems a large dual tower cooler is actually better on it's own rather than having top fans, either has intake or exhaust.
For aesthetics I would like my build to have fans at the top though
Last edited:
demented waffle
Member
I've come across this video from Linus:
Each case is one specific environment, but judging by this it seems a large dual tower cooler is actually better on it's own rather than having top fans, either has intake or exhaust.
For aesthetics I would like my build to have fans at the top though
That was similar to mine as well. No difference in no fans up top and intake. The only difference is more dust with intake. With exhaust, higher temps. That was with cpu temps of course. Like I said, I didn't monitor vrm or other temps since was cool as the other side of the pillow anyways.
Last edited:
hinch7
Member
HSF should be facing towards the back. Stock configuration should be enough. Perhaps add a single 120mm at the back and 3 120mm's front. Adding more at the top will add turbulance and noise without much benefit, if at all. Adding more out-take fans also increases negative pressure, pulling in more dust in the system and dust can get in through the top.
PS120/SE is quieter and performs identically to the EVO. I'd go with the standard one for aesthetics.
And maybe wait for Noctua's next generation fans which are said to be an improvement over curent ones if wanting a more quieter system. Rumored to release Q1, next year.
Last edited:
Astray
Member
I'd just skip the top fan mounts and go for a front to back flow myself.
Focus on managing the fan speeds, turbulence can be a mofo in that case.
SportsFan581
Member
Anyone that needs an upgrade at CPU but doesn't require the latest and greatest, this might be the best moment you'll see in a while. AMD and Intel literally giving away the older chips like the 5600 and 12400f/12600kf, which are still capable if you aren't looking for super high framerates.
OmegaSupreme
advanced basic bitch
I've got a 7800x3d coming in the mail today. Upgrading from a 9700k. Of course a new mobo and ram as well. I went with that rog strix mobo that has been reviewed well.
analog_future
Resident Crybaby
If you're moving to a new motherboard, it's best advised to do a clean install of Windows
M1987
Member
Thanks
MikeM
Member
Hopefully you don’t need to do an RMA with Asus.
OmegaSupreme
advanced basic bitch
Knock on wood I've never had issues with asus where I've had to do that.
MikeM
Member
Im running a 7600x with a 7900xt and with 3x intake in the front and 1x exhaust my temps have been great. Im running a Deepcool ak620 cooler on the CPU.
Soodanim
Member
I'm getting annoying perf issues on my PC that I don't know if I can be bothered to diagnose because I've been thinking about a new build for a while now.
My dilemma about a new build is that GPUs are taking the piss, so I'm basically stuck with my 1660ti being a bottleneck in what would likely be something like a 7800x3D 32GB build. Quite mismatched, although a GPU is far easier to swap out than a CPU which is why I want to get something that will last.
I could get a 3060 12GB for £265 or a 4060 8GB for £270. 4060 seems to be a 60% increase compared to current, but only 8GB feels like a slap in the face. Older is only 30% but 12GB is less of an insult. For reference I'm currently at 1080p but will eventually upgrade my TV to something 120hz, which will inevitably be 4K.
If I go the new build route, a quick throw together on PCPP brings me at £920 without a GPU but with a case that I don't really need. My current build ran me about £800 all in, but that was just shy of a decade ago at this point.
There's no specific question to answer here, but if anyone has any thoughts about the many factors I'm all ears.
System interrupt taking ~90% CPU, which a restart or 2 usually fixes. What's weird is that it happens roughly once a day but then after that I can play ER for hours without issue. That makes me think it's a Windows issue, but the prospect of a fresh install is a bit annoying because of the backups involved. However it's less of a financial investment than replacing parts, which doesn't quite feel right on a system I'm thinking about replacing. Although I suppose if I replace, say, the PSU that would be fine to reuse in a year or so.
My dilemma about a new build is that GPUs are taking the piss, so I'm basically stuck with my 1660ti being a bottleneck in what would likely be something like a 7800x3D 32GB build. Quite mismatched, although a GPU is far easier to swap out than a CPU which is why I want to get something that will last.
I could get a 3060 12GB for £265 or a 4060 8GB for £270. 4060 seems to be a 60% increase compared to current, but only 8GB feels like a slap in the face. Older is only 30% but 12GB is less of an insult. For reference I'm currently at 1080p but will eventually upgrade my TV to something 120hz, which will inevitably be 4K.
If I go the new build route, a quick throw together on PCPP brings me at £920 without a GPU but with a case that I don't really need. My current build ran me about £800 all in, but that was just shy of a decade ago at this point.
There's no specific question to answer here, but if anyone has any thoughts about the many factors I'm all ears.
delirium trigger
Member
7800x3d is a sweet cpu at a great price but it's more than what most people need. You'd be way better off with a 5600x and a 4070.
You don't need a high end cpu for 4k. You do need a fast gpu with enough vram. The 4060 is a great card for 1080p and it can run 1440p okay. The 3060 12gb has the vram but still ain't fast enough unless of course you're fine with really lowering settings.
4k is a bitch to run in general. Very few pc gamers actually run 4k.
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
A 4060 is one of the worst GPUs to recommend. Far better to get a close out 6800XT or 7700XT.
But I mostly agree with your 5600X suggestion and 4070.
If close to a Microcenter, a 3070 refurbished can be had for $300.
The only reason to get a 4060 is for a super tiny build.
We recently upgraded my brothers computer. He had a B450 with the original Ryzen 1600X and a 1070.
We swapped the 1600X with a 5600X and the 1070 for a 4070 Super.
I doubt we will ever get the kind of mileage out of a platform again.
Last edited:
Corporal.Hicks
Member
I have a 7800X3D + MSI X760E gaming paired with a GTX1080 until I upgrade to the RTX4070ti Super at the end of the month. GPUs are very expensive these days, but CPUs are relatively cheap, so I saw no reason to go with a slower (6 core) and less future-proof CPU. The 7800X3D is quite a bit faster than the 7600X (160 fps vs 101fps), and the price difference between these CPUs was not great enough to even consider getting a less powerful CPU.
The 7800X3D is amazing, it only draws 55W on average and even cheap endorfy fortis 5 was enough to cool it. I get 55-72°C during gaming, and up to 82-84°C in cinebench R23, with isnt a bad thing considering this CPU is designed to run at 89°C under full load at all times and push cooler to the limits before it starts lowering frequency.
If I had to choose between the RTX3060 12GB and the RTX4060 8GB, I would go for the former. Yes, the 3060 is a little bit slower, but IMO 15% better performance does not make a significant difference, so if the game runs too slow on the 3060, the 4060 will not offer much better experience anyway unless you turn on FG (frame generation) and I'm not even sure if you can enable FG on the 4060 8GB, as games are already VRAM-limited without it on the 8GB cards, and FG drastically increases VRAM requirements. However, the extra 4GB on the 3060 can make a huge difference between a playable game and an unplayable stutter fest experience. Some games, such as Forspoken, fail to load textures even at the lowest settings on 8GB GPUs.
My GTX1080 2GHz is obviously a massive bottleneck for a 7800X3D, but I'm still surprised at how well many modern games run on this 8-year-old GPU. I cannot run UE5 games at 1440p, but thanks to FSR it can run the vast majority of raster games at 1440p with a playable frame rate 45-60fps and that's perfectly fine for me on my VRR monitor and especially on gamepad. Right now I'm playing Hogwarts Legacy (1440p FSR quality and high settings) and I'm getting 65-80fps. If you use reshade sharpening filters, even FSR quality looks sharp (in Hogwarts Legacy FSR looks much sharper than native).
The biggest problem with the GTX1080 is poor driver support, as modern games are much more optimised for the newer architectures. I get low GPU usage and low fps in some games becasue nvidia no longer optimize drivers for my card. Two weeks ago I bought a 2080ti (I was planning to use it till 5000 series will launch) and these problematic games had no such problems. Unfortunately the 2080ti I bought was faulty (it's core was stuck at 1350MHz), so I had to return it. The 3060 12GB should have even better drivers than 2080ti therefore I would be happy with it's performance in modern games. In fact, I even considered getting the 3060 12GB when I realised that the 2080ti I bought was faulty, but I have decided to buy a new GPU at the end of the month. I was planning to get the 5070, but I think the 4070ti Super will still be a pretty attractive card when the 5000 series comes out, because I'm sure Nvidia will only give people 12GB VRAM in the 5070 series GPUs.
Last edited:
Hohenheim
Member
The difference is quite big though, at least when using a monitor in the 30" size and upwards. Or a TV of course.
I'm using a 34" monitor and playing in 4K. Huge difference from my former 34" 1440p monitor.
Soodanim
Member
Thanks for the replies, I appreciate them! You've given me some things to think about.
As for the GPU, this is why I wanted to hold off in the first place. The NVidia 40 gen is not even hiding the fact that it despises the lower end (as evidenced by 3060 vs 4060 VRAM), and do I really want to spend that much on a GPU? Maybe I should be considering the underdog's GPUs, especially as I'm going to run Linux alongside Windows. Are AMD drivers still better on Linux than NVidia? Or do I bite the bullet and become part of the problem by supporting a GPU that costs double what it should?
You've touched on a few things I was thinking about. The CPU not being overpriced and me lasting 10 years on a 4690k makes me think I should go with the 7800x3D just because it will last that little bit longer. Right now my CPU is the bottleneck, so reducing that future bottleneck for a relatively low cost doesn't seem bad.I have a 7800X3D + MSI X760E gaming paired with a GTX1080 until I upgrade to the RTX4070ti Super at the end of the month. GPUs are very expensive these days, but CPUs are relatively cheap, so I saw no reason to go with a slower (6 core) and less future-proof CPU. The 7800X3D is quite a bit faster than the 7600X (160 fps vs 101fps), and the price difference between these CPUs was not great enough to even consider getting a less powerful CPU.
The 7800X3D is amazing, it only draws 55W on average and even cheap endorfy fortis 5 was enough to cool it. I get 55-72°C during gaming, and up to 82-84°C in cinebench R23, with isnt a bad thing considering this CPU is designed to run at 89°C under full load at all times and pusth cooler to the limits before it starts lowering frequency.
If I had to choose between the RTX3060 12GB and the RTX4060 8GB, I would go for the former. Yes, the 3060 is a little bit slower, but IMO 15% better performance does not make a significant difference, so if the game runs too slow on the 3060, the 4060 will not offer much better experience anyway unless you turn on FG (frame generation) and I'm not even sure if you can enable FG on the 4060 8GB, as games are already VRAM-limited without it on the 8GB cards, and FG drastically increases VRAM requirements. However, the extra 4GB on the 3060 can make a huge difference between a playable game and an unplayable stutter fest experience. Some games, such as Forspoken, fail to load textures even at the lowest settings on 8GB GPUs.
My GTX1080 2GHz is obviously a massive bottleneck for a 7800X3D, but I'm still surprised at how well many modern games run on this 8-year-old GPU. I cannot run UE5 games at 1440p, but thanks to FSR it can run the vast majority of raster games at 1440p with a playable frame rate 45-60fps and that's perfectly fine for me on my VRR monitor and especially on gamepad. Right now I'm playing Hogwarts Legacy (1440p FSR quality and high settings) and I'm getting 65-80fps. If you use reshade sharpening filters, even FSR quality looks sharp (in Hogwarts Legacy FSR looks much sharper than native).
The biggest problem with the GTX1080 is poor driver support, as modern games are much more optimised for the newer architectures. I get low GPU usage and low fps in some games becasue nvidia no longer optimize drivers for my card. Two weeks ago I bought a 2080ti (I was planning to use it till 5000 series will launch) and these problematic games had no such problems. Unfortunately the 2080ti I bought was faulty (it's core was stuck at 1350MHz), so I had to return it. The 3060 12GB should have even better drivers than 2080ti therefore I would be happy with it's performance in modern games. In fact, I even considered getting the 3060 12GB when I realised that the 2080ti I bought was faulty, but I have decided to buy a new GPU at the end of the month. I was planning to get the 5070, but I think the 4070ti Super will still be a pretty attractive card when the 5000 series comes out, because I'm sure Nvidia will only give people 12GB VRAM in the 5070 series GPUs.
As for the GPU, this is why I wanted to hold off in the first place. The NVidia 40 gen is not even hiding the fact that it despises the lower end (as evidenced by 3060 vs 4060 VRAM), and do I really want to spend that much on a GPU? Maybe I should be considering the underdog's GPUs, especially as I'm going to run Linux alongside Windows. Are AMD drivers still better on Linux than NVidia? Or do I bite the bullet and become part of the problem by supporting a GPU that costs double what it should?
Corporal.Hicks
Member
The 7800X3D is much faster than the 7600X, but if your budget is so tight you can go with the 7600X as even this CPU will run modern games at 60fps with ease. You can spend the money you have saved on a used 4070 12GB, and in a few years when games will push the 7600X too hard, you can buy a 7800X3D or even a 9800X3D on the cheap. If you go the 2'bd route, however, I'd recommend getting a good motherboard, as cheap B650 boards have trouble running high-end AM5 CPUs.
Corporal.Hicks
Member
It seems that even a standard RTX4070 can run quite a few games at 4K, if you are willing to tweak some settings and use DLSS.
And no one is stopping you from playing at lower resolutions on a 4K display. Obviously, the image will not be as sharp due to standard upscaling, but you can still display 1440p at 1:1 (with black borders), making it look perfectly sharp and it's size will be still usable on a 32-inch monitor. The great thing about 4K is that 1080p can be perfectly scaled (integer scaling) to 2160p, and with a little phosphor mask filter to hide the pixelation (result of upscaling), 1080p looks as good as it gets (as 1080p would look on a 32-inch 1920x1080 monitor).
You arnt loosing much going with 4K monitor, you can however gain a lot if you want to play older or less demanding games at 4K.
Last edited:
Soodanim
Member
It's not budget that holds me back, it's a bit of a mix of principles, price/performance, power consumption, and what I want from visuals. I don't particularly care about RT, it's more a smooth framerate I'm after.
So really it's not about taking money away, it's about not wanting to add if I don't see the value in it. 4070 would normally be about where I was aiming, but with the jacked up prices and them not being future proofed at all it's much harder to justify the cost.
That's good to know. If/when I upgrade my TV, I'll likely happily run lower res for higher framerate (especially with newer TVs having VRR).
Last edited:
Quixz
Member
These days with upscaling tech like DLSS you dont need to sucrifice resolution and in some cases upscaling can look better than native.
Last edited:
Corporal.Hicks
Member
I thought you might be interested in this comparison, which has just been published today. With FG / DLSS3 enabled in Ghost Of Tsushima, the RTX4060 8GB was VRAM limited. As a result, performance not only did not improve, it actually decreased. The RTX3060 12GB was much faster compared to the newer RTX4060 (90fps vs 30fps) simply because it has more VRAM.
Last edited:
winjer
Gold Member
The worst part is that the 4060 is on it's way to become the most used GPU on Steam.
RTX 4060 on Track to Become the Most Popular Graphics Card on Steam
According to Steam's June hardware survey, the GeForce RTX 3060, previously one of the most popular graphics cards, is experiencing a decline in popularity, being overtaken by the RTX 4060, particularly in its mobile version used in laptops.
www.guru3d.com
Come On Tars
Member
Hey guys I wasn’t looking into upgrading my (evga black)1080ti for a 4070 I found used on fb for $350 bucks.
Good deal? Should I do this?
Good deal? Should I do this?
demented waffle
Member
I upgraded from a 1080ti to a 4070 and the difference was huge(80+ %). Just check on the condition and hope the warranty is transferable.
Last edited:
Come On Tars
Member
Gotcha. Problem is I’m surely bottlenecked by my cpu (4790k) which buying this gpu means new cpu and mobo
demented waffle
Member
O ya. I went from a 4770k with 2400 mhz memory to a 7700x with 6000mhz and the difference was insane. Like over 2x single-threaded and no telling what on multi. Cyber punk was over 3x the performance. Almost 4. My old cpu was actually bottlenecking my 1080ti.
Last edited:
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
Yes. They’re overpriced
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
That sounds too good to be true. Be careful. If it’s legit it’s a great deal
Come On Tars
Member
It was legit, he even recovered the I/O's with the plastic nubs. Felts like a new unboxing hahah. It was a bitch fitting it into my Ncase m1. I might get a little bigger case like the fractal North
Rossco EZ
Member
Well got myself an NZXT aio, pretty happy with it. Was more for aesthetics but actually running cooler than before which is a bonus.
Can anyone recommend a single cable for GPU so I don't have to use the included one? tried a corsair cable but it was so hard to bend and didn't look good at all.
Can anyone recommend a single cable for GPU so I don't have to use the included one? tried a corsair cable but it was so hard to bend and didn't look good at all.
Last edited:
Quixz
Member
Well got myself an NZXT aio, pretty happy with it. Was more for aesthetics but actually running cooler than before which is a bonus.
Can anyone recommend a single cable for GPU so I don't have to use the included one? tried a corsair cable but it was so hard to bend and didn't look good at all.
Very clean and no RGB BS!
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
Nobody can recommend a single cable without knowing the brand of the power supply. That is absolutely critical as you cannot mix cables amongst manufacturers.Well got myself an NZXT aio, pretty happy with it. Was more for aesthetics but actually running cooler than before which is a bonus.
Can anyone recommend a single cable for GPU so I don't have to use the included one? tried a corsair cable but it was so hard to bend and didn't look good at all.
Bets bet is to go to their website and look for compatible ones.
Nankatsu
Member
Guys I'm in need of some assistance:
Finally did a new build and my PC keeps doing this each time I restart it.
Doesn't happen if I turn it off and then turn on, only if I restart it.
When restarting PC also takes more time going from login screen into actual Windows.
I have no clue what's causing this behavior. I've read online that it can be some Windows 11 update or even that the brief screen that shows up can be tied with Windows Welcome Screen.
As to why it's showing and it's fix, well I have no clue.
Any ideas?
EDIT: video makes it look like it's on loop but it's not.
The splash screen only appears one time and advances to Windows, working perfectly fine after that.
Finally did a new build and my PC keeps doing this each time I restart it.
Doesn't happen if I turn it off and then turn on, only if I restart it.
When restarting PC also takes more time going from login screen into actual Windows.
I have no clue what's causing this behavior. I've read online that it can be some Windows 11 update or even that the brief screen that shows up can be tied with Windows Welcome Screen.
As to why it's showing and it's fix, well I have no clue.
Any ideas?
EDIT: video makes it look like it's on loop but it's not.
The splash screen only appears one time and advances to Windows, working perfectly fine after that.
Last edited:
winjer
Gold Member
Run CMD with admin privileges. Then run "sfs /scannow"
When that is finished, run Powershell as admin. And run "dism /Online /Cleanup-Image /RestoreHealth"
This one is going to take longer.