RacA

A lot of this is a matter of personal opinion but: RTX 3000 series cards have brought a very large jump in performance in comparison to previous launches. RTX 4000 will come at some point but I doubt they will be that much upgrade over current gen as 3000 is vs 2000. On your place I would just get 3070/3080 if you can find one in stock. Buyers remorse is very unlikely in this case. Also if you're planning to play on 4K display, disregard amd rx 6000 series as those cards while excellent for lower res, are losing a bit to nvidia at 4k

Reporting back, "it just works!" Connected 12v on strip to 12v on mobo header and ground to "green". I have set the RGB output to pure green in RGB fusion and now I am able to control UV strip (dim or turn it off) via software!

Okay, seems a more sensible choice to me out of the two. I guess I will be able to control the leds by setting the color to pure green in the software. I'll report back if this works of if i break something

Hello, As per title, I am wondering to correctly wire my 2 pin uv led strip to 4 pin (rgb) motherboard header. This would allow me to turn it off when not needed or dim it if it is too strong on software level. I've seen people sugvesting to connect: 1) 12v to 12v and green (or any single color) to - 2) 12v to 12v and red green and blue all to - How do you think wchich way is better/would work at all

That's it! Now I'm feeling a bit silly for missing this. This also answers my question regarding how tiny fans are going to push air though such a rad. I bet 10k rpm server fans would do an easy job of it

Recently, while browsing for watercooling parts I have found quite bizzare, thick, 50mm size rads. I've been trying to find a reasonable usecase for those parts but I am out of ideas. Also how a tiny 50mm size fan would push any air through such a thick rad? Has anyone ever seen a case with a spot for such a radiator? Photos and name for reference: "Alphacool NexXxoS XT45 Full Copper 50mm Single radiator" Also they go up to 3 slots, 3x50mm fan?

As per GN vid posted earlier in this thread, seems there is even more mysteries about how Zen 3 scales with various ram configurations. And it's the number of modules and/or ram chips on a single rank memory. Never seen that coming. Steve suggested they might do a follow up investigation with Wendell at Level1Techs, I'm really looking towards this.

The higher the settings the more GPU bottleneck can be introduced to the benchmark, based on a specific game. When GPU starts to be limiting factor we're seeing flawed results, in this case, we're not letting Zen 3 achieve it's max performance, and it's average FPS value ends up being lower.

Disclaimer: I am posting this in the tech news category as this is related to the recent Zen 3 Launch, Linus and Luke has nudged the topic in the most recent WAN show 06/11/20 but in my opinion, there is more to it. Zen 3 has launched and you're after a new cpu you probably have seen at least several benchmarks by different tech youtubers and news outlets by now. Some of them show new ryzens beating intel by quite a margin, and some of them put them on par with i9-10900k and ever slower intel SKUs. This has been addressed by LTT in the latest WAN show episode. Linus attributes the discrepancies in reviews to the RAM configurations used for testing, but there is one more factor at play here. Uh... is our Ryzen 5000 Review WRONG?? - WAN Show November 6 , 2020 Some reviewers are still using rtx 2080 ti or using 3080 but testing on 1080p ultra settings. One would think that it should not matter much for 1080p testing, right? Not quite. If we'll look at 1% and 0.1% low performance, on this chart below (Gamers Nexus 5600x review) we can spot that all new Ryzens are performing better than i9-10900k on average, yet Intel still has better lows: This appears to be the case across many games, the reason Ryzen comes out on top is that above test is done on 1080p medium, not ultra. Anandtech included results for various settings and resolutions which is a helpful example: F1 2019 768p ultra low, new Ryzens stomp intel into the ground, same game on 1080p ultra and... how come it's so blue at the top of the chart? Conclusion: It occurs to me that new Ryzens have much higher performance ceiling than we thought, the reason why reviews end up being so different is the unexpected GPU bottleneck. When new Zen 3 CPUs and Intel 10th gen are limited by a GPU on the top end, Intel comes out on top due to better low frame performance. When there is no (or lesser) limit imposed by GPU, even ryzen 5 5600x beats i9-10900k in the average FPS. This is especially visible in CS:GO benchmarks which is one of the least GPU intensive titles. It looks like low frame performance improves for Zen 3 CPUs by a mile, with a faster RAM kit. That's why in LTT review, 1% low fps results look to be on par with Intel, as they have used 3600Mhz CL14 kit, contrary to multiple reviewers that are using 3200Mhz kits. Sources -Wan show -Gamers Nexus 5600x review -Anandtech review -My own reflections after watching/reading bazillion reviews

Given the reply it seems that Displays subforum is not very popular. Leaving the final outcome here for anyone having same dillema in the future: I've decided to upgrade to 34 inch 3440x1440p 100hz I've tested the difference between 144hz and 100hz in the Apex. It is quite visible to me, but Apex is like the only fps I play at this time so I have decided that 100hz won't be this much of a downgrade. Also upgrading from 1080p 24inch to 1440p 27 inch would not feel this much of an upgrade either. Final thoughts. Ultrawide feels really great for gaming, my 5700xt is a right fit for this resolution (although in some titles I gotta drop from ultra to high - not much visual difference). Ultimately I believe your final decision should be based on this: if you spend over 50% of time in FPS games, get 1440p 144hz - if not, you will not regret going ultrawide.

The time has come to move on from my 24 inch 1080p 144hz display. Main purpose: gaming. Most played games: survival games (Conan Exiles, Last Oasis etc.), Open world games (GTA V, RDR 2), FPS (only Apex Legends), MMO (only WOW when shadowlands finally drops) GPU: RX 5700 XT Budget: equivalent of max 500 USD Sitting distance: 60-65cm (~23.5-25.5 inch) Games selection is quite a variety, which makes it even harded to decide between three main options: -27 inch 1440p 144hz - AOC Q27G2U or similar -32 inch 1440p 144hz - AOC CQ32G1 or similar -34 inch 3440x1440p 100hz - AOC CU34G2 - only this model (right on the max budget - no other contenders) (All of above display models listed are AOC and VA just because they are great value in my region in comparison to anything else). Considerations: -27 inch could be better at this distance since - more ppi- more fidelity -32 inch I am afraid it will be too close and I will have to constantly move my head around - also same ppi as curent monitor -34 inch UW - Unsure about stretched image on sides of the display in many games, only 100 hz but that should be max of the ability of my gpu anyway Please share any tips and experiences you had with those types of display.

Yeah, I think part od the problem was that exhaust in front of cpu cooler was taking air out before it reached the tower. I decided to leave the fan in the front as intake since those front fans are very close to front panel and possibly not pushing enough air. I might test it with that fan off someday.

Cpu cooler mount is good, I chose to test with Battlefield 1 because of those temp spikes that made me worry in the first place. My temps are sitting at 70 now on the OCCT stress test. Also note that cpu is oc'ed to 3.9 all core (even though voltage is relatively low).

It does make sense, but if you'll look around forums/articles on case fan placements, configuration 1 is always being considered as the best/most optimized.

Hi all, Recently, I have been experimenting with different fan configurations for my PC since my CPU temperatures rose significatly while playing CPU demanding games. Frankly I got the best results while doing everything "wrong" by the common knowledge about pc cooling, so I wanted to share them with everyone who ever had such a dilemma. Please note that those results are most likely totally dependant on my case model, but chances are that if you're running a similar setup to mine, this could work for you too. First, my setup: CPU: R7 1700 @ 3.9GHz, 1.26V (yes, it's stable, guess that's the lottery win) RAM: Corsair Vengeance RGB 16GB 3200Mhz (2x8gb dimms) GPU: Gigabyte RX 5700XT Gaming OC MOBO: Gigabyte Aorus B450 Elite Case: Silentium PC Gladius GD8 (also Tecware Bifrost in some parts of the word) CPU cooler: Silentium Fera 3 RGB - simple tower cooler - per specs should be able to dissipate 180W heat Case Fans 6x Silentium PC Sigma PRO fans - nothing pro about them, supposed to be static pressure, 38,5 CFM, 1200rpm Temperature measurements taken after ~30 min of Battlefield 1, 64 player conquest - Known to be CPU demanding, it actually generates higher temps than OCCT test, but this might be due to additional GPU load in the game. Configuration 1: 3x front intake 2x top exhaust 1x rear exhaust, CPU - Spikes to 83C; GPU - 71C Originally I went for the most logical fan layout Problem with this case is it has a very little clearance for the front fans, back exhast has no obstacles, top fans have bit more room to breathe than front. In result I ended up with negative air pressure. My CPU temps were bad and final conclusion was that top exhaust fans are stealing air from CPU cooler Configuration 2: 3x front intake 2x top intake 1x rear exhaust, CPU - Spikes to 76C; GPU - 71C Common knowledge is that you should always go with natural air convection (hot air rises naturally). Seems though that even cheapo fans absolutely negate this effect. This has been confirmed by Pudget Systems in this article. It looks like this config was working way better at the start of the test but temps were gradually increasing to 76C on the CPU and 71C on the GPU. Easy guess is that single fan was not able to cope with that much air being taken in and airflow in the case was a mess. Configuration 3: 3x front intake 1x forward top intake 1x rear top exhaust 1x rear exhaust, CPU - Spikes to 74 C; GPU - 69C Would you look at that, I decided to do the stupidest thing ever (as per every forum post and article I have found) and mounted intake and exhaust on the same (top) case panel. All sources say that this will cause turbulence in case and that those two fans will suck air from each other. To minimize this effect I have moved them as far apart as possible. I was hoping that the top fan will feed additional air into the CPU tower and top exhasut in the back will help to suck out hot air directly behind it. Result? Even lower CPU temp, suprisingly GPU temp went down too. (Those results were also reflected in OCCT stress test but are way more pronounced in a real gaming scenario). TLDR: The least recommended fan configuration dropped my CPU temp by 9C and GPU temp by 2C.