Account Details
SteamID64 76561198042353207
SteamID3 [U:1:82087479]
SteamID32 STEAM_0:1:41043739
Country Germany
Signed Up December 16, 2012
Last Posted March 31, 2020 at 6:29 PM
Posts 3069 (1.2 per day)
Game Settings
In-game Sensitivity
Windows Sensitivity
Raw Input  
Refresh Rate
Hardware Peripherals
1 2 3 4 ⋅⋅ 205
#3585 PC Build Thread in Hardware

The goto are 3600 CL16 kits that work out of the box, as shown by the QVL (list of memory the mobo manufacturer tested). The gold standard among those are specific chips (Samsung B-Dies) which play a bit nicer with the Ryzen memory controller and oc a little better.
The "lesser" version with 16-19-19-39 timings are around 120£, the better 16-16-16-36 around 130£ if you're lucky.
The rare and elusive 15-15-15-35 (I only know of the F4-3600C15D-16GTZ) should be around 150£.
CL14 is where the price gouging starts.
Now I'm not saying that a lot of these 3600 CL16 kits won't be listed at 200£ (or even 250£, yes I'm looking at you, Corsair), just that the cheapest of them will be much cheaper.

Yes, if it can handle 3600 CL14 and 4266 CL19 it should also be able to handle 3733 CL15. Yes, that should be better than 3600 CL14 for Ryzen.

posted 3 days ago
#3583 PC Build Thread in Hardware

You can edit posts, no need to post twice in 2 minutes.
If all you wanted was 3733 MHz CL14 it would've been a lot easier to start with a 3600 MHz CL15 kit that's already at 8.33 ns with only 1.35 V (-> some room for higher voltage left) instead of trying to force a kit that needs 1.45 V for 4400 Mhz CL19 = 8.64 ns into that.

Not that it really matters all that much. IF dominates the latency anyway so even 3733 Mhz CL15 would win against 3600 Mhz CL14 in both latency and bandwidth. I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to achieve.

posted 3 days ago
#3579 PC Build Thread in Hardware

It's 4400 or 4266 MHz Cl19, that's 8.64 or 8.91 ns latency.
3600 MHz CL14 is 7.78 ns, 3733 MHz is 7.50 ns.
Why are you surprised that that's not stable?

Also you maybe should've checked the QVL and/or manufacturer's website.

***Viper Steel 4400MHz memory kits require specific CPU and Motherboard.****

QVL CPUs: Intel I7-8700K | Intel I9-9900K

Nope. 4400/4266 CL19 or 2133 CL15. 4400 CL15 would be insane.

Base Frequency: PC4-17000 (2133MHz)
Base Timings: 15-15-15-36
Tested Frequency Profile 1: PC4-35200 (4400MHz)
Tested Frequency Profile 2: PC4-34100 (4266MHz)
Tested Timings: 19-19-19-39
Tested Voltage for Profile 1: 1.45V
Tested Voltage for Profile 2: 1.35V

1.45 V for 4400 Mhz CL19.

posted 3 days ago
#3 R5 3600 + 5700XT - how to run game smoothly? in Hardware
Wazrachthere must be some way to get it to run smoothly?

Case closed.

posted 5 days ago
#3576 PC Build Thread in Hardware

Generalizing like that almost never works. Also if anything it's the opposite. I don't really see a 2200G/3200G winning against even an i3-9100, especially in games. Or even a 2400G/3400G and those are significantly more expensive. The 1200 is so outdated it's not even fair anymore and the 2300X is OEM only. If you don't need the GPU of the G a 9100F costs about the same as a 1200 and it's not even close. So if you want a fast quad core there's not a whole lot on the AMD side. On the other hand if you just want more threads and the per core/thread speed doesn't really matter it's hard to argue with the 1600 12nm refresh. 85$ for 6 cores/12 threads. Same at the high end. Yeah sure, a 9900K is faster per core/thread, but either you're buying 8 cores/16 threads for no reason or a 12 core/24 thread 3900X is going to run circles around it. Anything in between, especially for games, it's not so clear-cut. There are enough games where more than 4 cores do help (not TF2) but more than 8 threads not so much. It's nice that the 3600(X)/3700X/3800X come with SMT, but it barely makes a difference so 9600(K/F/KF)/9700(K/F/KF) are actually worth considering.
Going blindly by brand and the choosing whatever's most popular is a really bad idea. Popularity is rarely an indicator of quality nor is there any guarantee that what works best for someone else works best for you. If you're doing the same thing sure, but TF2 has always been a special case.

Anyway I'd say either drop down to 4 cores, which'll do fine for TF2, or go for higher clockrates and faster RAM.
3600X is kind of meh, 3600 should get you almost the same performance, especially if you overclock it, but the upside of TF2 being shit is that even those 0.2 GHz could get you another +5% fps. RAM is more important. Getting 3600 MHz RAM is going to do more than getting a 3600X instead of a 3600. At the very least don't go below 3200.
Not sure if a 9400F would be faster (it's definitely cheaper though) but a 9600(KF) definitely would be.
For quadcores the previously mentioned 9100F is dirt cheap, 9300/9320 for higher clockrate.
For all the Intel options would be ideal to wait for Comet Lake and enjoy the price drop or get the next-gen equivalent but I guess it can't be helped. They are at least worth considering though.

Won't get much out of it on a 3600 but it's free so might as well. Not that difficult.

Yes, but if overclocking doubles the power consumption something is probably on fire. Pcpartpicker isn't that great outside of the USA and finding good PSUs at a decent price is always difficult even with price comparison sites. You might just have to check whatever shop(s) you end up buying from manually.

posted 6 days ago
#3574 PC Build Thread in Hardware

Have you ever seen a badly reviewed CPU? Also pay attention to where it does well. Unless you're streaming the 6 cores aren't going to do a whole lot in TF2. It would be neither here nor there again. Not clocked high enough to do great in TF2 but also not cheap to make the performance acceptable.
I mean why is it a good price? Have you compared it with other similarly priced CPUs? Or did you really plan your build around the first CPU you heard about after you saw it's <200€?

Yeah, drop the cooler. Also low-ish clockrate and low-ish RAM clock really won't be helping for TF2 performance.
On that note always go for dual channel. 1x16GB makes no sense.

Do you really need a 970 Evo then? 660p maybe or something even cheaper?

Ok. No time to wait for any new CPUs as expected.

Well for TF2 you can get away with an even cheaper GPU. No idea about Bannerlord. AAA games depends on what you're going for. I mean a 5500 XT is probably not going to get you 144 fps or 60 fps on max settings in a 2020 AAA game but it's not like anything less than that is unplayable.

posted 6 days ago
#3572 PC Build Thread in Hardware

Why do you want that CPU specifically?
Overclocking yes/no?
When are you planning on building it?

As always a 36€ 212 Evo is neither here nor there. It's a good budget cooler for <30€, but if you're not limited by the budget it makes no sense because there's far better coolers even in the range of 30-40€, if you don't need anything better because you're not overclocking it makes no sense because the stock cooler will do just fine and in general for 36€ it's just meh.

posted 1 week ago
#3570 PC Build Thread in Hardware

Multiple different PSUs with the same name, sometimes even the same part number. Sent out review samples of the good version, switch production to cheaper model 2 years later, keep the name, keep the price, coast on the good reviews.
It's more of a problem with CX rather than CXM though, but pcp mislabeling things always makes it more interesting than it should be. For me the main issue is that 69$ is a lot for a 80+ Bronze semi-modular budget PSU especially while there's not one but two actually really good 80+ Gold fully-modular PSUs on sale.

Monitor depends on what you're looking for exactly. You're not going to get a monitor that does everything perfectly (e.g. colours vs response time), any extra features you don't use cost extra assuming it at least got all of the features you do want to use.
If you do want a 27" 1440p 144Hz TN panel with G-Sync there's nothing wrong with that one apart from being a bit expensive than the competition.

posted 2 weeks ago
#3567 PC Build Thread in Hardware

Nope, there's plenty 1650 with a 6 pin.

Did I miss something about a CPU upgrade? Don't think he wrote anything about that. Not like he needs it anyway.

And what would be slow without an SSD? These upgrades are mostly about fps and an SSD won't affect that.
Also how does reusing the SSD in another system help when his problem is that he doesn't want to reinstall windows?

posted 2 weeks ago
#3565 PC Build Thread in Hardware

Could still do better on the mobo and PSU. Is there a budget?
The cheapest cooler is the stock cooler. Unless you're going to overclock hard or want a particularly silent build it'll do. If you do want either of those the 212 Evo and cheaping out on the cooler in general are questionable.

Nothing obviously wrong.
NH-D15 might be overkill.
Not sure which part of the bait-and-switch-cycle of "good CX, bad CX" that particular CXM is.

CPU or GPU encoding for the streaming?
Haven't looked at the monitor yet. Hard to tell if it's what you want beyond being a 2k 144Hz monitor when that's the only requirement I've got to work with.

None of that is worth the price/hype if you're already happy with the performance you're getting. There is no improvement to be had. You're upgrading for the sake of upgrading, just to get rid of 3000$.
Everything is only getting faster/cheaper so why would you upgrade before you need to?

Long text. Looks interesting/complicated. Might require thinking. Sleep now. Thinking tomorrow.

Yeah, upgrading to dual channel should be fairly cheap even if it doesn't do that much and most of those games should be fine even with 8GB, so I'd do it if it's still within budget.
SSD seems unecessary, nice for loading times but not worth the effort, especially considering this isn't going to be a long term situation. If you do have one lying around or can afford it you can just use it as a second drive for the games. Should still speed up loading and it's not like that PC will be rebooted that often so shortening the wait for something that happens once a day isn't a priority. No need to reinstall windows.

GPU seems reasonable.
An aftermarket/factory overclocked 580 can easily draw over 200W so I'd say that's a hard no. It might technically be less than 300W total but with spikes, +5V rail and the cheap 300W OEM PSUs being what they are I wouldn't expect it to cope well with that.
1650S with just 100W TBP should actually be doable and most of them should be a bit short as well, so higher chance of finding one that actually fits inside the case. Check the PSU first though. If it's one of those terrible ancient leftovers with just 150W on the +12V rail and >100W on the +5V rail it's not going to work. Also check if it even got a PCIe 6-pin power connector.

posted 2 weeks ago
#13 good specs but low fps? in Q/A Help

The trick isn't finding one that's in the CIS, the trick is finding one that ships to the CIS.

Unless 10 USD is too much for him. But honestly in that case he's always fucked when buying pc hardware.

posted 4 weeks ago
#11 good specs but low fps? in Q/A Help

Have you tried praying? Since you're expecting a magical solution you might as well.

Seriously though configs and all that can only do so much.
Even going downhill a car needs at least 3 wheels if you want it to pick up any speed.

Unless you can get some kind of overclock going (and even then) your best bet is finding a used CPU that fits your socket (should be laughably cheap, the difficulty is actually finding one) and is slightly less crippling. One of the higher clocked quad core models would be ideal.
Or just straight up dumpster diving. Even most 8 year old office pcs would probably come with a better CPU. Something just half a decade old would probably be a terrific upgrade.

posted 4 weeks ago
#3556 PC Build Thread in Hardware

See, that already makes a difference for the budget.
There's obviously no reusing the PSU but we get some leeway to make the budget work if we're in a tight spot.

Well would you mind explaining how this "future proofing" works and why it's more cost effective? Because what you're actually doing is planning to buy a 3600 (please don't get a 2600 just because it "worked without any issues", that should be the bare minimum for any CPU and it's outdated now) because it's (significantly) cheaper although (not that much) slower in the games you'll play than a 9600K(F). The most cost-effective CPU would probably be a 50$ Pentium or Athlon. You're just looking for the best CPU at a price you're willing to pay. Don't get me wrong, you're on a budget so not wanting to pay 300 CAD for a 9600KF is perfectly reasonable, but that's got nothing to do with cost effectiveness. What applies to the 3600 in comparision with the 9600KF also applies to the 9350KF or 3400G in comparision to the 3600. You're trying to justify it as "future proofing" because "more threads = better" and surely one day there'll be a game where the 3600 beats the 9600KF therefore it must be the better CPU but really that's just lying to yourself.
In the end the 2600 worked well enough for your cousin so you'll buy a 3600 for yourself, ignoring all alternatives.
I mean right now the cheapest 9600KF costs 243.75$.
Now let's hear why a 3600 for 14.25$ less is that much better or more cost effective.
On top of that I want to see how your future proofing works out when the 10600K(F) with 12 threads is released in April or May.
And in the opposite direction why do you need 12 threads? I can see the point of 12 or even 16 threads if you go with CPU encoding and if you reuse the GPU you could definitely afford such a CPU, but if you don't? Beyond "more threads = better" and nebulous claims of future proofing what do you get out of a 3600 that a higher clocked quad core (with or without SMT) can't do better for less?

Well but that is the question isn't it? With GPU encoding you could drop down to a cheaper CPU, with CPU encoding and no cost for reusing the GPU it would make sense not to stop at 6 cores but maybe get a 3700X for that extra oomph.

That seems reasonable. Roughly how much more fps you want in AAA titles compared with your current RX 470 (assuming you're not CPU limited) would also work for a decent estimate of what you'll need GPU wise.
From what I know a 470 should already get you 60 fps in Witcher 3 and GTA V on medium settings.

Mini-ITX mobos are more expensive and rather limited.
Mobos are also flat so SSDs, HDDs and potentially the PSU are right above them in some cases (really most small cases do that) so the space isn't wasted. The volume taken up by the CPU cooler is entirely unaffected by the mobo beneath it. If you're not specifically going for a very tiny case swapping a µATX mobo for a mini-ITX one can be like shrinking Kansas. It's all well and good that the mini-ITX mobo is only 170mm instead of 244mm but the case isn't going to get any shorter if you also want to fit a 290mm GPU in there.

Case in point I do get praise for what I do. Personally I think the amount is perfectly adequate.

posted 1 month ago
#3553 PC Build Thread in Hardware

Take a look at the size of µATX cases. Especially the smaller ones. Don't go mini-ITX unless you really have to to get the build as small is you want it.

I can see not reusing the mobo (and therefore the CPU) but unless you want to sell the old PC as is I'd at least consider reusing the GPU, HDD/SSD and PSU.

"Ryzen" is even less specific and useful than "i7". If you don't at least have a few specific models in mind and are aware of what the other options are this is the same as the old "I'll buy Intel because I like Intel, that's what my old pc uses". If you ever rule out half of your options because you've "heard good things" about the other half you need to take a step back and reconsider.

GPU or CPU encoding?
What are "high frames"?
What does playing other maintstream titles without fps issues mean? There's a difference between getting a GPU one step above what you strictly need and getting one that's three times as expensive because you 60 fps on max settings in every game.

Watercooling also uses fans. For travel size and weight should be your primary concern. There are cases that are quite pretty and very durable because they are a massive box of steel weighing 30 pounds but I wouldn't want to travel with one of those. With the exception of some cheap plastic front panels no case should just fall apart during travel. Any force that could actually break weaker cases would leave even the best ones quite scratched and banged up so you should avoid that either way.

posted 1 month ago
#3551 PC Build Thread in Hardware

I wouldn't buy by brand. Neither Noctua nor Seasonic are always the best choice nor is the RMx series bad. That's the one Corsair part in the whole build I don't dislike for being Corsair but rather because 850W are wholly unnecessary.

And yeah, I figured some of the choices (GPU, fans, cooler) are limitations of the website/builder but that doesn't explain half of the choices.

I'm also actively trying to ignore the existence of "AntiVirus for PC Gamers". Please don't make me remember.

posted 1 month ago
1 2 3 4 ⋅⋅ 205