Hardware Please help me build a new PC
- Thread starter GameSystem
- Start date
- Views 9,057
- Replies 106
I guess I'll go ahead and do it now.
Bah. Someone took my username! Now I have to think of something totally unrelated so we aren't thought of as the same person.
Bah. Someone took my username! Now I have to think of something totally unrelated so we aren't thought of as the same person.
Last edited by GameSystem,
Don't put too much effort into it. It's really easy to make a throw away account on reddit. I made one a few years ago to actually make a post on buildapc and then never used it again... because reddit, meme, etc, etc.
I made a throwaway account and made a post on r/buildmeapc, but I have 0 comments so far. After 24 hours I guess I'll try again on one of the other pc building subreddits. One of the reasons I don't like that site is because it's too big and it's easy to get overlooked. Here on GBAtemp someone can post something and very rarely will it go unnoticed.
Consider a different mobo if you're going with ryzen 3000.
You can cheap out a bit on the ram too, just make sure you get 2 sticks.
You can cheap out a bit on the ram too, just make sure you get 2 sticks.
The build you ended up with is just fine, no point in mulling over it so much when you are already within budget and WELL above what you need specs-wise, you are just wasting your time overthinking it.
Why 2 sticks? 1 stick is much better, same price as two smaller ones while also not limiting upgrade potential. If a motherboard only has 2 slots for example and you have 2 4GB sticks and you want to upgrade, you HAVE to get two 8GB ones (because uneven sized RAM sticks can cause a ridiculous amount of problems) and throw away the old ones (basically wasted), whereas keeping as many slots open allow for future upgrades if needed. And no, never cheap out on RAM, if you don't get a reliable brand (eg: Corsair), then you can have failing RAM, RAM that de-configures/adjusts itself over time (eg: Voltage changes) and so on. Sure, if you want a PC for 2-3 years, cheap RAM isn't bad, but if you just pay the 5-8$ more for good RAM, then you can keep using the same build for 5-10 years if not more (assuming the SSDs and motherboard capacitors last).
Are you seriously recommending single channel RAM? You do realize you're halving the bandwidth running single channel?
With ryzen 3000 the performance different between slow and fast RAM has finally closed in, the biggest difference now comes from single vs dual channel.
And by "cheap out" I don't mean getting some bottom barrel trash. Just that it's fine to go for slower RAM now.
Google one channel vs dual channel RAM. Grats on learning another new thing about RAM
EDIT: Ninja'd
Last edited by gempugs,
I already know about and in depth, but because dual channel is faster in theory it's not always better in practice. Dual channel is not worth it if it's limiting upgrade potential.Google one channel vs dual channel RAM. Grats on learning another new thing about RAM
EDIT: Ninja'd
So let me get this straight, you say to go for dual channel because it's "faster", but then suggesting slower RAM (which is a MUCH bigger performance drop than single/dual channel)? Sure, dual channel IS fast, but you are forgetting one thing, unless a program/game is made to specifically take advantage of it, it can actually result in WORSE performance, as despite the higher throughput, if data is split between the two sticks, some of the throughput HAS to be dedicated to shifting data back and forth between the sticks instead of going all between just the CPU and RAM. Monster Hunter World specifically actually has crashes related to dual channel on top of that and since it's really light on the RAM despite how heavy a game it is (light on the RAM but incredibly heavy on CPU's cache memory), a single fast RAM stick will work a lot better than two slow ones. I'm using a single DDR3 stick at 1800MHz currently for reference and in World specifically it's faster than two slightly lower sticks because it hardly uses the RAM, it keeps all volatile parts of the memory at a tiny area or the chunk and the rest stays the same (I know this because I make mods/cheat tables for it so do tons of memory manipulation).
It's been proven with ryzen 3000 single channel is a bigger performance drop.
Also you don't have to write a program in some specific way to utilize the literal double bandwidth of dual channel memory. That only applies to multithreading.
Isn't it weird how in the PC building world there can be so many different opinions and disputes even though the performance benefits should be objectively verifiable.
This build is already way over spec (and price) for what the intended purpose is. Yet, concentrating on being able to upgrade it even more is religiously recommended.
This build is already way over spec (and price) for what the intended purpose is. Yet, concentrating on being able to upgrade it even more is religiously recommended.
Upgradability for literally no added cost isn't a bad thing, especially if it can allow using the computer for more than 5 years, so why not go for it? As for it already being over-spec, I agree, don't know why OP is still thinking about it all honestly
Double bandwidth means nothing if there's not enough to actually fill the RAM to begin with, like I said, the game is SO light on the RAM you can play just fine with even 4GBs of DDR3 RAM on single channel, going dual just for the sake of going dual isn't a good suggestion. As for the "don't have to write a program in some specific way", that's not true. In order to properly use the speed of dual channel you have to specifically tell whatever program you are making to split the volatile parts of the RAM space it takes up between the two sticks, otherwise you can end up with cases where all volatile parts are on one stick, so dual channel doesn't even come into effect, meaning it's exactly as fast as single channel. Sure, on average dual can seem like better performance, but unless your RAM usage goes to at least 80% (which World doesn't take up since on medium it needs like 4GBs), then you will only get the dual channel speeds here and there, not consistently. Again, if you want a top-end build or generally a pretty high-end system that you will push heavily with video editing and whatnot, sure, go for dual, but for a budget build that is already over-spec, single channel is fine and still allows for cheap upgradability (cheaper to buy one more stick than have to buy two and throw away the old two).
At this point I'm just going for price vs performance ratio and I basically stopped caring about budget. So if if something is cheap and does the job, but you would get a better value with an upgrade, that's what I want and what I think I'm doing in this current build.
Oh for the reddit thread, I finally got someone to reply. They said it was way too early to make that kind of post and to come back before I buy.
EDIT: It appears that the B450 Tomahawk is the most recommended mobo for 3600 series, but the BIOS is apparently no good, and so people are saying to wait on the MAX versions. Elsewhere I'm reading that if you opt for 3000 series, to just get the 570 boards, but then that costs too much. Now I'm thinking of downgrading back to 2600 just to avoid potential problems.
Oh for the reddit thread, I finally got someone to reply. They said it was way too early to make that kind of post and to come back before I buy.
EDIT: It appears that the B450 Tomahawk is the most recommended mobo for 3600 series, but the BIOS is apparently no good, and so people are saying to wait on the MAX versions. Elsewhere I'm reading that if you opt for 3000 series, to just get the 570 boards, but then that costs too much. Now I'm thinking of downgrading back to 2600 just to avoid potential problems.
Last edited by GameSystem,
Honestly, anything built around the 2600 is going to be a great gaming PC. Anything more will not give you bang for the buck as it would with a better GPU. It might not be a popular opinion, but if it was me I would put in an extra 80-100 and get a 1660ti.
Last edited by subcon959,
I just checked here and the 1660ti is currently $290. I just found about a site called PassMark where they tell you price performance of cards. 1660ti only got a score of 42.62 whereas the 590 series ($200) has a score of 46.73. Relatively close. I was convinced earlier that having AMD type CPU + GPU combo makes it easier for drivers and something something, so that along with the lower value still pushes me to the 590 simply because of the bonus add-ons increasing the value further.
For the CPUs, the Ryzen 2600 ($140) got a score of 96.43. The 2600x ($160) has a score of 90.45, and the 3600 ($200) has a score of 101.23. So I guess they were right in saying that on paper the 3600 is a better value, but when you factor in MOBO issues and potentially needing a 570 for a lot of money, I'm sure the point value goes down.
For the CPUs, the Ryzen 2600 ($140) got a score of 96.43. The 2600x ($160) has a score of 90.45, and the 3600 ($200) has a score of 101.23. So I guess they were right in saying that on paper the 3600 is a better value, but when you factor in MOBO issues and potentially needing a 570 for a lot of money, I'm sure the point value goes down.
Last edited by GameSystem,
Not sure about PassMark but theres a good comparison table of GPU's here:
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html
Oh I'm not doubting that the 1660 ti is a better card. Even on PassMark the 1660 ti has a performance score of 11507 with an overall rank of #34. The 590 has a score of 9346 and overall rating of #62.
To me that's worth the extra price. Especially, if the requirements are higher than expected next year and you're having to sacrifice quality to keep 60fps on the 580/590.
Btw heres an interesting comparison video..
Btw heres an interesting comparison video..
Last edited by subcon959,
The 2600 is more than enough even for max settings on most new games coming out, 3600 is overkill and because it's newer the drivers for it aren't as well optimized, so it's only better on paper. With 2600, even if you reach the point where it's not good enough for max settings, it's REALLY easy to overclock, so you are still future-proofed! Just don't OC before you actually need it as it lowers the component's longevity (eg: 7-9 years instead of 12-14 for about 15% overclock).
Looking at a comparison, the 1660Ti may allow you to run some games on high settings much more consistently, since it rounds up the bad points of the 590, so if you can find them for similar price, go for it! Here you go for reference: https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/AMD-RX-590-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1660-Ti/4033vs4037
As for the processors, here: https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/AMD-Ryzen-5-2600-vs-AMD-Ryzen-5-3600/3955vs4040
For benchmark comparisons, always use that site instead of PassMark, since unlike PM, the benchmarks are done by users and are averaged, so it's not always optimal conditions, resulting in a more accurate measurement, as you can't expect all components to run the exact same just because they are the same model, getting bad silicon can severely drop performance and UB takes that into account!
I checked the value % on UB and they list the 2600 in the 96th percentile for best value and 99th percentile in user score. The only AMD chip that beats it on both fronts is the 3600, which we already knew.
The 1660 ti has the rx 590 beat in every category except user score by two points and price, but they also have the rx 590 listed as 240 when I found it as $189 with the XBOX game pass and Devil May Cry bundle.
I also can't go NVIDIA because my monitor was basically made for AMD and freesync, so I'm basically locked to AMD.
The 1660 ti has the rx 590 beat in every category except user score by two points and price, but they also have the rx 590 listed as 240 when I found it as $189 with the XBOX game pass and Devil May Cry bundle.
I also can't go NVIDIA because my monitor was basically made for AMD and freesync, so I'm basically locked to AMD.
Similar threads
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
@
Psionic Roshambo:
If your not getting your pills from Psi's discount drugs who knows what your swallowing!+1 -
@
Psionic Roshambo:
Shawnita used to get her pills from some other street pharmacist and after switching to The Psi Discount plan she now only has to swallow two things a day!+1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
