Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

jerubedo

Member
  • Content Count

    188
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Awards


This user doesn't have any awards

About jerubedo

  • Title
    Member

System

  • CPU
    i7-9700K @ 4.8GHz all-core undervolted
  • Motherboard
    Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro
  • RAM
    16GB G.Skill Ripjaws V 3200MHz C14
  • GPU
    EVGA GTX 1080 Ti Founder's Edition
  • Case
    Corsair Obsidian 750D
  • Storage
    Samsung 850 Pro 1TB
  • PSU
    EVGA Supernova G2 750w
  • Cooling
    Corsair H150i
  • Operating System
    Windows 10 Pro

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I agree with this 100%. Many applications prefer bandwidth to latency. My question was more oriented at the on-paper specifications. My main question was more so the below Overclocked or not, DDR3 was able to achieve way lower CAS latency at the same speeds (2133 vs 2133). So why can't we have the best of both worlds with DDR4: higher bandwidth WITH lower CAS latency? What is the driving force preventing this? Just the fact that DDR3-2133MHz is defined to CAS 11 whereas DDR4-2133MHz is defined to CAS 14 confuses me.
  2. Oh, and just for reference, it looks like the lowest latency on the market right now is 3200MHz CL13, which puts it at 8.125ns for first word transfer, functionally beating 4600MHz CL19 (but still beaten by 4600MHz CL18).
  3. No it's not, that's what the first word transfer demonstrates (and the fourth and 8th word). That's the measurement of THROUGHPUT, which is the overall metric for RAM. Better throughput = better (faster) RAM. Just to give you an idea on how much timings can affect benchmarks see here. The 3200MHz C14 SHOULD beat the 3000MHz C16 but in several benchmarks it doesn't! It turns out it was the SUB-TIMINGS, not even the primary timings: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/GSkill/F4-3200C14Q-32GTZSW/6.html
  4. Well, it's not less than 2 ns in most cases. The chart I gave compared really high end RAM. Your "average" RAM is DDR4 3000 CL 16, which is 10.67 ns for first word transfer compared to similarly priced high end DDR3 which can do that in 6.36ns. That's a difference of over 4 ns. First word is given priority because it is the most true measure of throughput. As for benchmarks, I don't see any that compare faster DDR3 RAM to slower DDR4 RAM on the same CPU. But even if we could find one, DDR3 is only used on older processors where the CPU might actually be the bottleneck at this level of RAM speed, making the results between the two functionally the same (if I'm right about the CPU being the bottleneck). However, I'm mostly talking about on-paper, not necessarily real world scenarios. On paper the throughput of DDR3 is generally better because of way better latency. And if we are talking real world, then I can assure you there would be a difference between DDR4 2133MHz C7 vs DDR4 2133MHz C14. I really just want to know why we've seemingly fallen backwards on latency.
  5. So it's been almost 5 years since the launch of DDR4 and I'm kind of surprised that we still don't have great CAS latency on most kits. Basically, DDR3 2200MHZ CL7 is still the best overall RAM given that it's able to transfer the first word to the CPU in 7.82ns, the fourth word in 7.73ns, and the eight word in 9.55s. The only place DDR4 is able to claim a victory is with the 4600MHz CL18 kit and the 4800MHz CL 19 kit, but even then it only wins on the eight word transfer, and one can argue that the first word transfer is the most important because the words are sent in critical word first order which allows the CPU to begin work immediately using that first word. The chart below demonstrates what I'm saying. I've also included my own kit at the bottom, 3200MHz CL14. It wasn't a cheap kit, either, and it's handily beaten by both the DDR3 2200MHz CL7 kit and the 2133MHz CL7 kit in first word, fourth word, and eight word, and both of those kits were similarly priced to my kit. It seems the only real advantage to DDR4 is the lower power draw. So does anyone know WHY the CAS latency is so much higher on DDR4? Why don't we have DDR4 2133MHz CL7 kits when we had DDR3 2133MHz C7 kits? I can only guess it's because of the lower power? Generation Type Data rate Transfer time Command rate Cycle time CAS latency First word Fourth word Eighth word DDR4 SDRAM DDR4-4600 4600 MT/s 0.217 ns 2300 MHz 0.435 ns 18 7.82 ns 8.48 ns 9.35 ns DDR4 SDRAM DDR4-4800 4800 MT/s 0.208 ns 2400 MHz 0.417 ns 19 7.92 ns 8.54 ns 9.38 ns DDR3 SDRAM DDR3-2200 2200 MT/s 0.455 ns 1100 MHz 0.909 ns 7 6.36 ns 7.73 ns 9.55 ns DDR4 SDRAM DDR4-4600 4600 MT/s 0.217 ns 2300 MHz 0.435 ns 19 8.26 ns 8.91 ns 9.78 ns DDR3 SDRAM DDR3-2133 2133 MT/s 0.469 ns 1066 MHz 0.938 ns 7 6.56 ns 7.97 ns 9.84 ns DDR4 SDRAM DDR4-3200 3200 MT/s 0.313 ns 1600 MHz 0.625 ns 14 8.75 ns 9.69 ns 10.94 ns
  6. jerubedo

    PC Build

    Depends on the game. Some games can shave 1-2 seconds off the load time. That might not sound like a lot, but if the game loads a lot, that's minutes of your life saved per playthrough.
  7. jerubedo

    PC Build

    Here's what I'd recommend: PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant Type Item Price CPU Intel - Core i5-9600K 3.7 GHz 6-Core Processor $329.00 @ Powertop CPU Cooler Cooler Master - Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler $39.75 @ Vuugo Motherboard Gigabyte - Z390 UD ATX LGA1151 Motherboard $169.50 @ Vuugo Memory G.Skill - Ripjaws V 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3000 Memory $114.99 @ Newegg Canada Storage Western Digital - Black NVMe 1 TB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive $279.99 @ Newegg Canada Video Card EVGA - GeForce RTX 2060 6 GB XC BLACK GAMING Video Card $464.99 @ Mike's Computer Shop Case Fractal Design - Focus G ATX Mid Tower Case $64.99 @ Amazon Canada Power Supply Corsair - TXM Gold 550 W 80+ Gold Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply $79.99 @ Canada Computers Operating System Microsoft - Windows 10 Home OEM 64-bit $129.00 @ Newegg Canada Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts Total (before mail-in rebates) $1692.20 Mail-in rebates -$20.00 Total $1672.20 Generated by PCPartPicker 2019-03-21 18:39 EDT-0400 The 9700K is overkill for both the 1660Ti and the 2060, especially if targeting 60 FPS. The 9600K is the better pairing for either of those GPUs which saves you enough money to step up to the RTX 2060. For any Z390 board, I recommend Gigabyte over everyone else right now. They offer more robust VRMs, even on their lowest priced board, the Z390 UD. I've put together a few builds using the 9600K paired with the Z390 UD and all of them were able to get to stable 5.0GHz without any throttling and without the VRMs overheating. I went with the 1TB NVME drive because the budget allowed for it and it's a better experience than having 2 500GB drives. I stepped you up to the RTX 2060. I went with a better tower that offers better overall airflow. Finally, I went with a tier 1 PSU, which is a nice step up from what you had. Hope this helps!
  8. Here's what I would go with. It's pretty similar to what you built , with a few minor changes: PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant Type Item Price CPU Intel - Core i7-9700K 3.6 GHz 8-Core Processor $409.99 @ Amazon CPU Cooler Noctua - NH-D15S 82.52 CFM CPU Cooler $79.90 @ Amazon Motherboard Gigabyte - Z390 AORUS PRO ATX LGA1151 Motherboard $179.99 @ Amazon Memory G.Skill - Ripjaws V Series 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3200 Memory $105.98 @ Newegg Storage Western Digital - Black NVMe 250 GB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive $74.89 @ OutletPC Storage Seagate - Constellation ES 3 TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive $57.99 @ Amazon Video Card Gigabyte - GeForce RTX 2070 8 GB WINDFORCE Video Card $459.99 @ Newegg Case Corsair - Carbide Series 275R (Black w/Tempered Glass) ATX Mid Tower Case $69.99 @ Newegg Power Supply Corsair - TXM Gold 650 W 80+ Gold Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply $64.98 @ Newegg Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts Total (before mail-in rebates) $1533.70 Mail-in rebates -$30.00 Total $1503.70 Generated by PCPartPicker 2019-03-21 15:55 EDT-0400 I bumped the motherboard up to the Z390 Aorus Pro. This board has better VRMs and will easily handle overclocking on the 9700K. It's pretty much the best board you can get quality-wise within a reasonable price range. The RAM I changed to slightly faster for the same price. It's 3200MHz C16 vs 3000MHz C15, so the throughput works out to be the same on paper, but the 3200 C16 will perform slightly better in real world scenarios. This RAM is very reliable and I've used it in many builds. I kept you on the Western Digital Black NVMe. That's a FAST drive with a great endurance rating, second only to Samsung right now for a cheaper price. The case I went with a slightly cheaper one but with that same tempered glass side that you originally picked out. Finally I changed you from a tier 3 PSU to a tier 1 for cheaper. The 9900K is overkill for both gaming and for programming/testing at the expense of running a lot hotter, even with the best coolers on the market. I'm a programmer myself and I work with Java, C# .NET, C++, Python, and Objective C, and for me even the 9700K is overkill (but for gaming it's great, which is why I bought it). Make sure that if you listen to any one else's advice, stick with an SSD that has a high endurance rating. I assume you'll be running local MySQL or Microsoft SQL Server, which produces a ton of read/write cycles on your drive with use.
  9. For the same exact price, assuming this is primarily for gaming only, this build will provide way more gaming bang for your buck. The i5 will perform better in the majority of games, the RX 580 is a nice step up from the RX 570 and it's an 8GB variant instead of 4GB, the 1TB SSD ensures that you'll be gaming off of the SSD instead of the HDD for faster load times, and the tower is pretty decent to build in and looks cool (orange is what I picked but you can also get it in green, purple, yellow, and white): PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant Type Item Price CPU Intel - Core i5-8400 2.8 GHz 6-Core Processor $199.99 @ Amazon Motherboard Gigabyte - B360M DS3H Micro ATX LGA1151 Motherboard $69.89 @ OutletPC Memory G.Skill - Ripjaws V 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3000 Memory $89.99 @ Amazon Storage Intel - 660p Series 1 TB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive $119.00 @ B&H Video Card MSI - Radeon RX 580 8 GB Video Card $179.89 @ OutletPC Case DIYPC - DIY-F2-O MicroATX Mini Tower Case $24.99 @ Newegg Power Supply Corsair - CXM (2015) 450 W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply $37.98 @ Newegg Monitor Acer - SB220Q bi 21.5" 1920x1080 75 Hz Monitor $89.99 @ Amazon Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts Total (before mail-in rebates) $861.72 Mail-in rebates -$50.00 Total $811.72 Generated by PCPartPicker 2019-03-19 01:22 EDT-0400 Sure, it's nicer to have 2TB of storage, but at this price point, I'd trade that extra TB for the better overall performance, and no HDDs, but if you're dead set on storage capacity, go with your original setup using the 256GB SSD and the 2TB HDD for $10 cheaper. Oh, and the monitor I picked is a nicer IPS panel as opposed to the TN panel. Plus it's a 75Hz refresh rate and it supports free-sync. That's a win-win.
  10. DAMN, my secret plan to infiltrate these forums, stealthily find you, and destroy your marriage has been unfolded!
  11. https://www.microcenter.com/search/search_results.aspx?Ntt=ryzen+5+1600 Note that to see the price, you must select a store at the top first, this is not available online, only in-store. In order to bring the price down to $45 from $50, use this coupon: https://www.retailmenot.com/view/microcenter.com The one at the top that says $5 off any in-store purchase of $30 or more. I just picked one of these up myself at that price. I wish I could have gotten another for a friend of mine but it was limited to 1 per household. I told him about it, though!
  12. Make sure you buy the same brand you already have with the same timings and speed, or just buy a new 16GB kit to ensure that they match. Having mismatched memory can also cause huge problems from a stability standpoint. If you're on Windows 10, in the search bar type in "Edit Power Plan" then hit enter. Then click on the link that says "Change advanced power settings," then click on the dropdown at the top of the resulting window and select High Performance (if it's not already selected).
  13. Yes, single channel memory, depending on the game, can cripple frame rates by up to 60% on both AMD and Intel CPUs (that's at least the maximum I've seen but it could be worse, even). GTA V is one of those games. Additionally, I suspect that perhaps your RAM is not running at 3000MHz. First generation Ryzen is VERY sensitive to RAM speed. Did you set the XMP profile in your BIOS? And if that motherboard doesn't support XMP, did you set your speed and timings manually based on the RAM kit's specifications? If not, that RAM is only running at 2133MHz. Here's a great video showing single channel vs dual channel in general. Note that it might seem like most of these are higher FPS scenarios, but there are some segments where if you watch closely, the single channel system dips below 60 FPS where the dual channel system is closer to 90 FPS, especially with Shadow of the Tomb Raider towards the end: And note that this video is with Intel. Ryzen is even more RAM sensitive and it makes even more of a difference there. Also, please check your CPU temperature to make sure there isn't thermal throttling happening in addition to the above. It could be an overheating CPU which could mean that the cooler isn't seated 100% properly or maybe there's too little thermal paste. Double check Windows settings as well to ensure that your power mode isn't throttling the CPU. Sometimes Balanced or Power Saver power mode can be set to limit the CPU's max load to 80% or so. If you're using either of those power modes, try High Performance mode as well. Finally if all else fails, use DDU (Display Driver Uninstaller) to remove all traces of your GPU drivers and then reinstall them fresh.
  14. jerubedo

    Should I upgrade, or keep what I have?

    1) Yep, I personally didn't think you were. There are a lot of die hard AMD people on this sub-forum though. 2) Then yes, the 9900K is the best of both worlds and is the best you can get if the budget allows. 3) I'd personally wait and see if Ryzen 3000 is a game changer since it's only a few months out. It COULD have better single thread performance for the first time in ages, but we won't really know until review day. Even if it doesn't, though, Intel is GOING to release a response, and that one might be your best bet as well. It's all very soon. And even if we weren't taking into consideration upcoming hardware, I'd still say wait so that you could do your 9900K build. That's what I'd do at least.
×