Account Details
SteamID64 76561198042353207
SteamID3 [U:1:82087479]
SteamID32 STEAM_0:1:41043739
Country Germany
Signed Up December 16, 2012
Last Posted July 15, 2019 at 4:55 AM
Posts 2911 (1.2 per day)
Game Settings
In-game Sensitivity
Windows Sensitivity
Raw Input  
Refresh Rate
Hardware Peripherals
1 2 3 4 ⋅⋅ 194
#3364 PC Build Thread in Hardware

You see, the problem is you want to go from avg 90 to constant 250+ fps. That means you need a CPU that's more than 3 times as fast. None exist.

posted 2 days ago
#3362 PC Build Thread in Hardware

Not quite the right thread? Or are you building it?

Usually CPU, mobo, RAM and a cooler. For ow probably a GPU as well.
How many fps are you getting with your current config and hardware?

posted 3 days ago
#3357 PC Build Thread in Hardware

Yes, that's something I can work with.
There's a lot of guesswork involved, impact of RAM speed, scaling in general and I think those are CPU-Z benchmark results instead of anything ingame but this means that at stock a 3600X (4.4 GHz 1-2 core boost) would perform either the same or better than a 9600K (4.6 single, 4.5 dual core boost). The whole limitation of not getting past 4.3-4.4 all core is not a concern because you only care about the 1-2 core boost clock, which PB2 should automatically bump up.

Either way the "best value" would actually be a 9350KF, unless you're going to run something else that's CPU limited and uses more than 4 threads.

Yeah, future proofing isn't really a thing. Price to performance ratio only gets worse past ~300£.

Why would 1300£ be ideal? Usually less is always appreciated.

posted 4 days ago
#3355 PC Build Thread in Hardware

Best value for what? The goal isn't the overclock, it's the overall performance. Well what is the mysterious game that you're building it for where single core performance is important? Why are you buying a 6 core CPU if you want single core performance?
Usua aio water cooler disclaimer:
M.2 is just the connection/form factor. This is about NVMe vs SATA and speed in general. Is a faster SSD worth it over a slower SSD? There's no universal answer to this question.
Well first you'd have to find a 2060 Super that's actually in stock. A 2070 should be faster though. The cheapest 5700 XT that's in stock is cheaper and faster than either, so that's a thing too.
About the 2070 Super: Well how much performance do you need? If a 2070 is fast enough it's 100£ for no benefit. If you desperately need it to get x fps in game y then the normal 2070 isn't really an option.
We'll deal with the mobo later. It's ok, but there might be cheaper options.

Could you be a bit more specific about the games? I won't google "benchmarks for racing games in VR" and hope it's the right one.

Closer to 1300£ or lower than 1300?

posted 4 days ago
#3353 PC Build Thread in Hardware

No, we wouldn't be underclocking because that lowers the performance.
However the cache doesn't make too much of a difference and on Skylake there's not separate voltage for it so if the cache is the problem you either need to bump up vcore even more, which leads to temp problems or lower the cache frequency.

I'm not sure what guide you've been reading but this should've been covered. Either way that's not really a build question anymore.
Find a better guide with a bit more details than "just up vcore until it stops crashing" and you'll figure it out.

posted 6 days ago
#3351 PC Build Thread in Hardware

Yeah, depending on your RAM and the error messages it could be VCCIO or VCCSA that need a bit more instead of Vcore, once you get it reasonably stable.
What do you mean what's the impact? Lower frequencies are more stable.

posted 6 days ago
#3349 PC Build Thread in Hardware

Temp problem wouldn't bluescreen.
There are other voltages than VCore you know?
You might have to lower the cache frequency as well.

Just read a guide, but 1.280V for 4.8 would be quite low. If you needed 1.250V for 4.5 there is absolutely no way it'll make 4.8 with 1.280V. Anything under 1.4V should be safe, 1.35V if you're really careful, but you're more likely to run into temp problems before you reach unsafe voltages.

posted 6 days ago
#3347 PC Build Thread in Hardware

Compated to the 8350K. I mean realistically in what game that is programmed well enough to use more than 4 threads are you limited by a 8350K at 4.5 GHz? So it's just down to the clockrate.

I mean sure a 3600(X) would be nice for rendering because going from 4 to 12 threads should be around twice as fast but on the other hand even a 9900K (let alone a 9700K) is cheaper than buying a CPU and a mobo and a cooler and that's faster at stock than either option.

EDIT: My point is you've got a CPU and mobo that are barely over one and a half years old, if even that, now is not the time to upgrade. New shiny things are released every year. Doesn't mean you have to upgrade every year.
Same for the GPU.

posted 1 week ago
#3345 PC Build Thread in Hardware

3600 would be the cheapest, 3600X for editing, 9600K for games. Still a massively weird sidegrade. Essentially 500€ for 3% better performance in games.

posted 1 week ago
#3342 PC Build Thread in Hardware

At least B350 obviously, he doesn't really need to OC so pretty much anything will do. Maybe someone is selling both CPU and mobo to get PCIe 4.0.
Same thing with the cooler, even if he wants to oc any thick (not slim) single tower or dual tower should be ok-ish, just depends on what's cheap. I've seen 50$ coolers for 90€ because god knows why.

4.5 isn't much of an overclock for a CPU that can boost to 4.6. You can always replace the cooler and/or delid the CPU if you do run into thermal problems. Deciding what overclock you'll be able to run before you even got the chip and know whether it's good or bad seems a bit strange.

Well I don't know when exactly B550 is being released.
Either way I'll wait for street prices to settle before making a partlist.

posted 1 week ago
#3338 PC Build Thread in Hardware

Define "near future".

Current CPU?
Destiny 2 (and Cyberpunk etc.) should be GPU-bound, especially after a CPU upgrade so I don't think you'll get 150 fps.

Rendering is basically infinitely parallelizable so it will use all the cores.

It's about the mobo and especially the VRMs, not the chipset.
Overclock does matter but 10% are 10%. He's not going to push a 2600 to 5 GHz so any 8 core CPU will win. The 2600 is neither here nor there. For single threaded/games he'd want the 3600 and if less ST is fine because the games are GPU-bound anyway he might as well go for more cheaper cores like clearance sales or used 1700(X)/1800X/2700(X) or even a 1900X/1920X if he wants to get really weird.

You don't really need the extra cores. Throwing out the cooler and mobo doesn't make sense either. A 3600(X) isn't really going to be faster than an overclocked 9600K(F) and a 3600(X) + mobo + cooler sure as hell aren't going to be cheaper than just the 9600K either.

An aftermarket 5700 XT would be a minor upgrade but again where are you going with this? NVidia finally caved in and supports Adaptive Sync now no matter how much they are trying to rebrand and hide it so what's stopping you from using it?

posted 1 week ago
#3335 PC Build Thread in Hardware

If you're using a discrete GPU you need to plug everything into that GPU. The connections on the mobo only lead to the integrated GPU. The 3600 doesn't have one so it will not work.
GPUs also come with 4-6 outputs, so it's really not that hard to find one with 2 HDMI ports.

No mobo change would be required either way, so the 3600 would be better.
The GPU market should change a bit in the next few months so maybe that'll free up enough of the budget to get a 3600.

Yeah, the slim cooler doesn't make much sense, it's not any better than the non-slim Pure Rock, which is cheaper. The options are a bit limited though so it might make sense to keep the stock cooler and buy the cooler separately.

posted 1 week ago
#87 belle delphine selling bathwater in Off Topic

posted 1 week ago
#80 belle delphine selling bathwater in Off Topic

Concentrated so you get more bang for your buck, obviously.

posted 1 week ago
#3330 PC Build Thread in Hardware

Technically possible, very much not recommended. Your options are Skylake/Kaby Lake with either a trash mobo or an overpriced mediocre mobo that support DDR3. If you can find them that is. We're talking about 2015/16 hardware. If you want a decent mobo you'd have to dig up 2014 and older hardware.

Also the mismatched sticks prevent it from running in dual channel mode, which isn't ideal.

In Witcher 3 a 960 would get around 60 fps on low. Not consant, just average. That means 1% drops to 50 and 0.1% drops to 40, but that's just how it is. That's a game from 2015 so I think it's safe to say that you're not going to get 60 fps in a game released at least 5 years later.

Should be very doable with 600$. We'll have to wait for the release and benchmarks but even a 3600 (6 cores/12 threads) for 200$ might get you good enough streaming performance. Another 200$ for mobo + RAM and you'd have enough left for other upgrades. Worst case you can max out the budget and throw an overclocked 3700X/3800X at it. 8 cores should do the trick.

posted 1 week ago
1 2 3 4 ⋅⋅ 194