KarathKasun
-
Posts
5,555 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Status Updates
Blogs
Events
Gallery
Downloads
Store Home
Posts posted by KarathKasun
-
-
Worst case you could start with what I have mine set at and try to work them down a bit from there.
TRFC: 560
TRFC2: 416
TRFC4: 256
-
Just now, RGoodall said:
Just working from home atm so unable to reboot currently but have all this on my to do list now thank you. Also I do have installed in the right slots.
With regards to the TRFC, in my bios I have TRFC 1/2/4, I've tried a variation of changes here, but I've been assuming the safest bet is changing TRFC 1 and leaving 2/4 on auto? Thanks.
You will get ALL TRFC values from Ryzen Master. They should not change with speed AFAIK, as the values from my modules default 2133 timings work at 3400.
-
Just now, TofuHaroto said:
A little low
1.1 would likely be better
Not for 3000 series. I can hold 3400 at 1.0v. Max "safe" SOC voltage is 1.15v and that is generally enough for ~3700.
-
Also make sure the RAM is installed in the set of slots furthest from the CPU.
Bad text illustration follows...
CPU socket ---- DIMM A1---- DIMM A2 ---- DIMM B1 ---- DIMM B2
Modules should be installed in A2 and B2.
To get it working you also likely need to do the following...
Get working TRFC values from Ryzen Master and compare to the DRAM calculator
If TRFC values look off use the higher of the two
Set all other timings from the DRAM timing calculator
Set SOC voltage to ~1.05v
The DRAM calculator gives me values for TRFC that are something like 100 lower than what they should be, 470 when it needs to be 560. The system will not boot if TRFC is too tight with my modules. I can hardly go below TRFC 540 @ 3400 without random issues. Im using bottom tier super cheap Hynx MFR modules.
-
Oh, you can swap over your current GPU to see if its any better than the integrated graphics or not. Just use whatever configuration works better.
-
YT vid with 3770k vs 1700 both at stock...
(just noticed its only with a 1060)
More comparisons with a 1070...
https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/my-own-3770k-vs-r7-1700-games-comparisons.18772521/
-
4 minutes ago, Scitesh said:
3600 is about INR 18K..so i would have to skimp on motherboard and Ram pretty hard
Then wait. 1700 or 2600 will not be a significant upgrade from what you currently have for games.
If you OC the 3770K to ~4.6ghz it will actually be faster in gaming than the 1700.
-
1 minute ago, xariskouves said:
i was thinking about buying an old-new pc that has:
i5 3470(something like that)
8gb DDR3 ram
iGPU
there is no reason to go 3000 series over 2000 series for the most part, they perform very similarly. So if an i5-2400 is sigificantly cheaper, grab that. ~$133 gets you that HP I linked above if you are in the states.
-
1 minute ago, xariskouves said:
its not worth it because i was going to buy second pc for my bro and i thought if this pc would leave u know
Its just not really worth upgrading. Give it to him as is and let him do whatever with it. Its like throwing money at a lemon car at this point, you do it because its fun and interesting, not because it makes sense.
-
Just now, xariskouves said:
i know but its dangerous to add a CPU because i had never before and i m8 break it
what cpu do u think is going to fit ? (LGA 775)
Based on what you have, this is the fastest you can add... Core 2 Duo E6850.
HOWEVER, it uses just as much power as your current chip overclocked. So you also need a PSU.
-
6 minutes ago, xariskouves said:
i could overclock it to 3.01+ Ghz but the PSU wont let me
Here lies the problem with upgrading stuff this old. You get into a situation where you end up adding ~$200 of parts to a system that is basically worth nothing.
For $200 you can get a whole "new" i5-2300/2400/2500 tower AND a GPU. Dont let MHZ fool you, the 2nd gen i5 can do twice the calculations per MHZ and it has twice the cores.
Something like this plus an ebay 750 Ti.
https://www.newegg.com/hp-compaq-6200-pro-business-desktops-workstations/p/1VK-001E-3KBA0 -
1700 will be the same performance per thread as the 3770, slightly lower without an overclock. About the same gaming experience.
2600 will be slighty better for games.
3600 is significantly better than both.
-
Just now, xariskouves said:
i am ok playing now with 8 chunks and i am getting around 110-200 but i had kept it to 60 for no 70 fps framedrops
Yeah, a GPU isnt going to help your FPS a whole lot in MC unless you want to go to a much higher resolution with the same FPS.
-
2 minutes ago, xariskouves said:
i had overclocked my cpu from 2.4 Ghz to 2.77 Ghz
i dont now if that will make a difference
updated my previous post.
Overclocking will hardly make a difference unless you are pushing 3.2ghz+.
-
GT 1030 will be limited by the CPU you have in games like Minecraft and CS:GO. I have not run MC on my C2D/A64 stuff in a long time because they have been put into long term storage, and MC has bloated a bit in CPU needs for a target FPS.
Will it do 60 FPS?
Maybe, with a low view distance.
I would get the absolute cheapest used 1030 (DDR5) or 750 you can find. Its not really worth the money to add much to that system, as newer higher clocked CPUs will likely not work in it. After ~2.6ghz or so C2D had a manufacturing process shrink, and a lot of the older boards for these chips do not support the newer versions.
-
Just now, TofuHaroto said:
What's your budget exactly ?
Can you maybe sell the system for like 30 bucks
Add to it 100 bucks and get an optiplex with a 2500 or a 3770 maybe and them add a 750ti to it
That would be a lot better
This is a good option if you are looking to spend $150 or so.
Just put your current GPU in the new system and drop another $150 into a 1650 or something later and you will have something like 4x the performance on all fronts.
-
I wouldnt spend more than $100 on a GPU for that computer if you are not going to upgrade the core system for a while.
Something like a GT 1030 GDDR 5, do not get a GT 1030 DDR4 card though.
-
Just now, xariskouves said:
hmmm ._.
so an older gpu will be better?
No, you dont get more performance from an older GPU. The maximum performance of the CPU is just REALLY low.
-
I had a dual "Core 2 Quad" Xeon workstation with 3ghz CPUs in it, and it was limiting the performance of an RX 460. In a few games it was limited by as much as 50%.
For reference the RX 460 is a little slower than the 1050 Ti.
-
The computer will bottleneck the GPU, not the other way around.
Core 2 Duo is now well over 10 years old. Even with some of the fastest Core 2 Duo chips they will limit performance of even a GT 1030.
-
15 hours ago, nonem91 said:
ok thanks for answer sir,
if i up vga to gtx 1650/1650 super, there is huge bottleneck sir??
or just buy gtx 1050/1050ti??
1650S is about as high as I would go. There are some instances where going higher will get better FPS, but because of the weak CPU you may see more wild FPS swings. Playing at a pretty solid 45-60 FPS tends to be a better experience than having a FPS range of 45-120.
-
Try a different HDMI cable as well.
-
You need to have memory with the exact same timings or you will encounter lots of drama getting it to work properly.
-
Thats a standard mATX case on the desktop. You can upgrade the internals, but replacing it with a much better case is possible for $40.
Honestly its better to just replace the whole thing, PC part prices are kinda stupid right now though.
Ram locked at 2400, out of idea's :(
in CPUs, Motherboards, and Memory
Posted
Wont work, XMP already sets those voltages by default. Generally to 1.05v and 1.35v.
XMP just applies a general memory overclocking group of settings then sets frequency and timings based on data in the SPD flash ROM on the memory modules. The XMP profile is likely setting a timing value that is only correct for Intel based systems. There are a few timings that are platform dependent. XMP is an intel spec, not an AMD one.