Maxxtraxx

Interesting Anandtech article exploring Ecore efficency on the 12900k comparing 8 E-cores against a 7 year old 6700k (4c, 8t): HERE The results seem to show many CLOSE performance comparisons between the 6700k and the Ecores. I'm not sure if I'm impressed that a 7 year old 4 core/8 thread CPU can keep up with 8 newer Ecores or that the Ecores seem to be a close match for Skylake (which was better than I expected).

It certainly depends upon the workload, but i would say that this Hardware Unboxed video shows some of the potential performance disparity between the P and E cores in a VERY significant way.

Ok, you've clarified. Have you any data to backup your assertion? I've been trying to combine my reasoning with relevant data to determine the proper course.

The Data as I interpret it does not seem to correlate. As we can see, 16 cores with hyperthreading does a nearly identical amount of total work as does 8 cores with HT and 16 E cores. I'm specifically considering the Cinebench R23 data which shows the 7950X and 13900k scoring very close to one another. This would seem to indicate that with an Identical number of logical cores the performance is very similar and thusly 2 Ecores are doing very similar work to 1 core with HT. My point is that with that number being similar, would you rather have Pcores doing important work beyond the 16 thread mark or have E-cores doing it(because we KNOW that there is a definite performance difference between intel's Pcores and their Ecores). For example in Cinebench R23, 13900k Pcores that is 8 cores with HT score 24k-25k(only Pcores) with a normal score for 13900k of 38k-40k that leaves all 16 e cores only scoring the remaining 15k, So of the total 40k R23 score the 8 Pcores with HT scores ~25k of the total and 16 Ecores scores ~15k of the total. So yes, I would rather have 16 Pcores with HT than 8 Pcores with HT and 16 E cores. Thats my logic and i'm sticking to it(for now).

I'm not sure what SMT or HT being slower than an E-core means. But the main interest is, would you rather have 16 P-cores or 8 P cores with backup from E-cores if you need more than the 8 Pcores can offer? IMO, 16 P-cores would be the better choice. Intel added E-cores to match AMD's highly threaded performance on paper and possibly to help their power consumption in mobility. No one really wants the E-cores doing anything important. Obviously I have chosen the path i think is best via AMD and you've chosen the path you think is best via Intel so we're both biased. ANANDTech: "In multi-threaded workloads, we saw an average uplift in performance of +22% when SMT was enabled. Most of our tests scored a +5% to a +35% gain in performance. A couple of workloads scored worse, mostly due to resource contention having so many threads in play – the limit here is memory bandwidth per thread. One workload scored +60%, a computational workload with little-to-no memory requirements; this workload scored even better in AVX2 mode, showing that there is still some bottleneck that gets alleviated with fewer instructions. On gaming, overall there was no difference between SMT On and SMT Off, however some games may show differences in CPU limited scenarios. Deus Ex was down almost 10% when CPU limited, however Borderlands 3 was up almost 10%. As we moved to a more GPU limited scenario, those discrepancies were neutralized, with a few games still gaining single-digit percentage points improvement with SMT enabled. For power and performance, we tested two examples where performance at two threads per core was either saw no improvement (Agisoft), or significant improvement (3DPMavx). In both cases, SMT Off mode (1 thread/core) ran at higher temperatures and higher frequencies. For the benchmark per performance was about equal, the power consumed was a couple of percentage points lower when running one thread per core. For the benchmark were running two threads per core has a big performance increase, the power in that mode was also lower, and there was a significant +91% performance per watt improvement by enabling SMT."

Both are great. Some points to consider: generally the X670 are expensive the B650 are cheaper but both require DDR5 (you could potentially reuse your ddr4 from your old system with z690/h670/b660) Both CPU's are very highly tuned at stock settings the 13900k has Very high peak power draw (not likely an issue while gaming) and also runs hot as a result the 7950x runs hot but has considerably lower peak power draw both require high performance cpu cooling (recommended 240AIO or greater) Both CPU's are turned up to 11... both run MUCH cooler and draw MUCH less power when turned down from 11 to 10 or 9(on a scale of 1-10) at the potential expense of peak clock frequencies(undervolting and negative PBO offsetting) 7950x seem to peak at about 6000-6400 MHz ddr5 speeds when on 2 dim memory configurations, when running 4 dimms and more capacity the speed drops to below 5000MHz 13900k has a much faster peak memory speeds but faster memory is also more expensive (not sure if more dimms or higher capacity effects the intel as severely) PERSONLLY: coming from a history of cpu's as follows: 2500k --> 4790k --> 6700k --> 9900k --> 7950X I'm not sold on the actual usefulness of intel's E-cores, I remember (cuz i'm old) when 4 cores was all you ever needed for gaming.... then 8 cores became future proof... will games adopt even more cores in the future? when a game can run on 10 or 12 or 16 threads will the E-cores be a liability? I'm not interested in Windows 11 yet either... and Intel's thread scheduler to specifically assign tasks to the proper cores(P core vs E core) is not available on Windows 10, so unless you want to assign all cores priority and preference to programs yourself... you're out of luck or stuck with windows 11. I (obviously) decided that AMD was the preferential choice for me... if more expensive choice, I find myself impressed by the longevity of the AM4 socket and the impressive performance scaling they achieved and this gives me hope that AM5 could be similar(zero hope of this from intel). FOR YOU: both are closely matched and very high performance, get what you want, what fits in your budget, what fits your use case and what makes you smile... Sorry for the long opinion and long non answer.

Not a bad first go! well done IMO: 360 AIO is a bit overkill, I would lean towards at 240 AIO. a 360 is certainly fine and up to your choice. the Arctic 240 is an excellent AIO. A 1000 watt psu is also unnecessary, 850watts will cover anything you throw at it, even a 4090 and 13900k I switched you to a Z690 motherboard to take advantage of the overclocking ability of the 12700k Check this over and relay your thoughts: https://ca.pcpartpicker.com/list/Z2dqJM Edit: Also removed Windows 10 home from your list. IMO Windows 10 pro is the better route. Personally I use a software key site called https://www.kinguin.net/ to purchase a software key for windows 10 pro, Just did this last week when I upgraded, CPU, Motherboard, Memory and SSD and it cost me around $30 US. If you're more comfortable buying a retail key... that's fine too.

Listening to Gamers Nexus Review right now at work. Already looked at Anandtech and Tomsharware and others. One thing that is more of a curiosity than anything else that I'm struggling to find any good info on is this information: Clock Speed vs Active core count (assuming high end cooling) On different work loads. Everywhere i look i see 5.7GHz max frequency 5.85 GHz PBO 4.5Ghz base But what are the clocks with differing active core count, at different loads in different applications? is it 5.7GHz on only 2 cores? what frequency will it run with 4 cores utilized? 8 cores utilized? 12 cores utilized? 16 cores? what if it's less intensively utilized? This is the best i've found thus far.

I like most of the build. I would lean towards a Z690 motherboard if possible. I am also a fan of compact builds. So ITX or even compact ATX midtower is my preference, possibly something you would consider? I love the Fractal Design Meshify 2 Compact, it has no wasted space, great air flow and I've got two 240 AIO radiators in mine along with a large EVGA 3080 FTW3 GPU, it's all close clearances but fits great and keeps my temps down. For Monitor: AOC CQ27G2 is a 1440p, 144hz, gsync/freesync, VA panel, curved monitor that is a fantastic price, I love the contrast, though if you use the PC in a Very Bright area it may be lacking in peak brightness. but if you don't need a very bright monitor for working in direct sunlight, I can highly recommend this one.

Definitely sounds like you're in the mood to buy, not sure we can talk you off the ledge. First: Define your problems: What are you dissatisfied with in your current setup? Pick something specific and quantifiable thenSay it/Type it out (does it sound silly?) Second: Define your Goal and what is needed to achieve that. Will a new GPU do that, Which card specifically will do that, AND how much money will it cost(decide now and stick to it). Third: after doing the above items, do you have the financial resources to splurge this amount easily while maintaining a healthy (3-6 month) reserve financial savings(at least here in the US the crap is definitely heading for the fan). You realize you paid to much back in December and desperation leads to higher prices, so be careful. If all these things line up and you're ok with it, stick to the plan and execute.

You're talking 6 core vs 8 core, 8 cores can certainly provide some uplift in performance for demanding games. Newer games like Elden Ring require 6 cores as the minimum requirements. An 8 core CPU will certainly keep the 3060Ti much better fed and bottleneck less. At 1080p 75hz you're not likely to encounter much bottlenecking however. My feelings tend to lean towards, get the best product you're willing to purchase at that moment and lean towards items that have the greatest effect upon what your goals for the PC are. Gaming order of importance: 1: Graphics Card 2: CPU 3: Memory speed/channels and amount 4: everything else

Questions that may help us answer this: What Monitor Do you have? What is the refresh rate of your monitor set to? In the game pictured in your screenshot what are the Vsync related settings currently set to

Saving money on the CPU cooler could net you a nice and very useful Storage upgrade in the form of a 1Tb NVME M.2 drive(drives fill up fast) HERE

Or the Cooler Master Hyper 212 Cooler is cheaper yet, slightly lower performance BUT, comes with the LGA1700 mounting hardware and will EASILY cool that CPU: HERE

CPU cooler: same performance, cheaper brand, good product: Scythe Fuma 2 Link HERE you likely also need the LGA 1700 mounting kit HERE

ALSO: if you're considering upgrading the CPU in the future to a K class cpu (overclockable) you may want to consider a Z series motherboard to start with as you'll need it to overclock. If Overclocking is not an interest and you want to stay with this CPU for the long run you may want to save a few bucks on the CPU Cooler, it is pretty overkill for that CPU.

Observations: CPU cooler is way overkill for that CPU. If you're considering upgrading in the future it may be a wise futureproof investment... but definitely overkill for this cpu. You've got a case that can fit a standard ATX motherboard but you're using a micro atx motherboard, It will work fine but a standard sized ATX motherboard has more expansion slots for both PCIE and for M.2 drives though they may be a few bucks more expensive. Case is Great, have it myself. power supply is adequate. FYI Most of you Highest end GPU's recommend a 750Watt PSU, if you think you'll upgrade this to higher end GPU's you may want to consider just getting a 750Watt PSU to start with. M.2 drive is great GPU is fine Memory is fine. Would reccomend some case fans (2 fans in front to start with, 1 fan in the rear secondarily, finally up to 2 more in the top of the case, it comes with 2 fans, would recommend at least 1 more, possibly 2, some good bang for the buck fans here

You're fine using the cables that you have. 6+2 or 8 pin are perfectly fine to use in whatever configuration you have available. It will work and is perfectly fine to use.

Your current setup Plus a Nvidia 1080/2060/3050/3060 will run many of the games you have listed. However, Elden Ring has a minimum 6 core cpu requirement listed, this will be an issue for that game. I appreciate Robert's efforts here(quoted below) to fit a new CPU/Mobo/memory and GPU into your price range as it would push you into a more recent platform that would appear to be elden ring capable. However your current CPU/Motherboard platform is certainly not unusable, It will play a large majority of current games though it will struggle more with AAA titles that use more CPU cores. I'm not sure about the used PC component market in the UK, but at least in my area of the US used component prices have plummeted. (my area craigslist has a z97/4790k/1080ti ITX system for $500 that i've been mulling over) It may be worthwhile if you're comfortable with seeking out used components at a possible discount. I would also recommend the idea of just getting a cheap but usable Graphics card that fits your desires for acceptable performance in the games you want to play (say an rtx3050 or 3060) and if the CPU becomes a problem then taking that unused money and upgrading cpu/motherboard/memory. However you choose to go, stay within your price, look for the best value, and buy what you want while considering the advice given. Don't let us make Your decisions for Your PC.

Friend recently had issues, here's some of the diagnostic steps we took: 1. install a motherboard speaker to listen for POST code beeps 2. reseat GPU in PCIE slot, reseat Power connectors into GPU power connector 3. install GPU into different PCIE slot 4. try different cables 5. install different known good GPU into your setup 6. install new GPU(with no display output) into another known good PC to check functionality TLDR: NEW ARESGame PSU faulty, RX580 wouldnt work with his new pc but a gtx1070 would for my friend, it was a new build, his USED rx580 would not work with his TUF z590 i7 11700k, the rx580 would work in my pc my 1080ti did not work in his PC hooked up known good power supply to his PC and installed my 1080ti and it now worked replaced new aresgame 750w PSU with new RMX850 RX580 still did not work in his PC, 1080ti does now work in his PC Friend bought gtx1070 and sold rx580, (rx580 works in buyers pc)

See 1080 strix fan replacement here. It appears that you may be able to remove the fans from the card from the front and it appears the shroud comes off easily as well... The fans you found do appear to be correct. it is certainly possible that the fans are failing, it may be worthwhile to run some more tests on them such as: manually ramping the fans to full speed via afterburner and watching and listening for any issues turning the PC off and checking for any wobble in the fans by touching them lightly with your fingers re thermal pasting GPU chip worthwhile if fans are running but temperatures are an issue Edit: do not spray anything on the card, the fan bearings are sealed and not able to be lubricated. Spraying anything on the card will have bad consequences.

It would work.

Have you cleaned the dust buildup inside the card recently? Have you considered replacing the Thermal Paste? Does your case have good airflow to the card? The 1050Ti is a very low power card and most factory heat sink solutions are far beyond what is needed so without knowing exactly which 1050Ti it is these would be my first reactions. If none of those help (is this a 1/2 height low profile 1050ti?) It may be possible to undervolt the card to lower it's power draw and thus heat output

What the card is doing is completely normal and does not damage the card. If you want to apply a constant on fan profile I would recommend downloading MSI Afterburner and applying a manual Fan curve. Most fans are nearly inaudible at low to medium rotational speeds, so starting in the 30% fan speed range at all temps would be fine and then ramping up with temperature would be a normal case scenario and you can adjust fan speed to whatever speed you're comfortable with. EDIT: to adjust the fan speed in Afterburner, open the program, hit settings then hit the fan tab at the top of the window, then select custom fan speed curve and move the curve around to your liking.

Both are quality cards Choose the one you like best, one is considered more "premium" but offers no performance advantage other than a factory overclock that can be completely negated by a simple manual overclock and will offer only single digit performance improvements over a stock card anyway.