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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by GTBTK

  1. GTBTK


    If Nvidia stay true to form, the 1170 should be roughly the same as a 1080TI
  2. GTBTK


    The 2700 with an overclock is a better bet if you are planning on streaming and using CPU encoding. 2700x is the pick of this gen if you can afford to stretch that far
  3. I will be interested in hearing what the results are
  4. the Celcuis s36 is one of only two 360mm AIO coolers made by asetech that I am aware of. The thermaltake 360 unit being the other one. That model is constantly topping the charts in aio comparisons so the fractal unit should be pretty good as well. While fans on PWM are a good thing, ramping up with temps. you may find it better to separate out the pump from the fans and use different headers to control the fans and the pump.You don't really get much benefit running the pump at 100%, just more noise. Temps will be not much different to running the pump at medium speed compared to full speed. Low speeds will effect temps though. If the pump is PWM controlled, you should look at setting a pump curve that remains relatively flat in the 70-75% range. Certainly run temperature tests to confirm, the sweet spot may be 80% I would be interested in hearing what temps you can keep your 1700 at with that cooler.
  5. We all live in hope that Intel starts pricing their products at reasonable levels, I am not holding my breath though
  6. Yes I am aware of that. Have you ever heard Intel mention that in its marketing information for the HEDT platform before? I think that soldered heat spreaders will now become a marketing bullet point for overclockers They have to come up with something to make a 4 core chip on the HEDT platform appear desirable. If it suddenly becomes "too dangerous" to overclock 7700K CPUs it makes it a load easier to direct people to the 7740K instread
  7. What is the bet that the up coming Kaby Lake X i7-7740K CPU has a soldered heat spreader and has a default base clock of 5Ghz or more? It sounds like there are setting up the new CPU they are about to release to give it a reason to exist. I can imagine the marketing will go along the lines of "engineered for world record overclocking"
  8. Are you in the country that the ebay page came from? If so, I suggest that you look locally rather than on ebay, you might find some deals there.
  9. you will not be able to overclock the 2600K in that motherboard, you would be better off just buying an i7-2600 if you can find one cheaper and if you are keeping the H61. The 250W power supply is also too small for an i7 2600K CPU which has a 95w TDP I am running an i7-2600@4.4Ghz in a z68 Motherboard with a gtx 1070 and while it will not make as many frames a second as a 7700K but it still runs pretty good and will do a 15200 in Firestrike..
  10. The bios updates on the acer site, are bug fix bioses. The H61 is designed to support Sandy bridge CPUs (i3-2100) that came out in 2011. Ivy Bridge (i7-3770K) was not released until 2012. I don't know how proprietary the inside of your case is. If it uses a standard ATX designed motherboard, you could get a used z68 or z77 motherboard and a new cooler and an upgraded power supply (500W would be enough, the standard one is only 250W) and you can just swap out the motherboard. That would work with a 3770K but unless you can find a 3770K/z68or z77 cpu/motherboard cheap, you would be better off finding a used more whole computer or a new skylake or Kabylake motherboard/cpu.
  11. If it has Z68 or P67 motherboard from Asus, Gigabyte, Asrock there are bios updates that will allow Ivy bridge CPUs to run. Acer usually make their own motherboards so they are unlikely to release bios updates because they want you to buy a new PC. Your PC is also running an H61 chipset that is the non overclocking consumer level where the assumption is that you will never upgrade anything so the H61 chiipset boards never got any updates to support Ivy Bridge CPUs.
  12. You have a proprietry H61 chipset Mother board that can not support Ivy Bridge 3770K CPUs. Sorry
  13. yes it is. but even you got it confused. It seems it needs to be because everyone is following the herd and not thinking about this stuff themselves. Especially while the media seem to be selective about what they report on. I don't know if they are trying to use the poor at gaming pronouncement as a form of click bait or just because they are clueless and just follow a formula they wrote learned. That graph you posted with the Combined scores highlighting the poor ryzen performance, is the ONLY review I have seen that even mentions the combined score. Everyone else is totally ignoring it which I find really strange as they are all concluding Ryzen gaming is poor and then ignoring the only tool that compares isolated GPU performance, isolated CPU performance and combined CPU and GPU performance against itself and other Intel units. It also seems a bit silly to be claiming that gaming performance is poor when with the same GPU they did the review on, it is performing better than 98% of all computers on firestrike bench marks that while not a game is closer than many benchmarks and the minimum frame rates are better than Intels, which is actually much more important in user experience terms than max frame rates if you are exceeding monitor speed.
  14. think about what you are saying first. We are talking about how often a thread will jump the gap, not how often a thread will run on a specific core. A single thread has the option of switching to 7 other locations on the same ccx it is already on plus the only other option is that the thread takes option number 8 which is to jump across to ANY of the 8 thread locations on the other Module. If it is currently on CCX 1 Core 1 thread 1 and it is being directed to a core on the other CCX it is still only one jump to go to CCX 2 Core2 Thread 1 or Core 5 thread 2 or what ever location it ends up on on the other CCX. that is a 1 in 8 chance of having to jump cores. It is not telling you the probability of switching to a specific core on CCX2. Given that the threads runs for multi milliseconds doing its processing work before spending 14 -70 nano seconds switching. That 10% should have been closer to 0.01% or less but I though it made it easier to illustrate a point without making the core switching assumption look too ridiculous
  15. The people who have one seem to be very happy with them. I cannot speak from personal experience though
  16. Shame that the context switching theory is wrong, like everything else with Ryzen, everyone is looking at one thing once and assuming all the rest. The maths don't actually add up for that theory. These are fag packet calculations just to illustrate a point. I know that the numbers like the % of time a tread is switching to another core are an over estimaton, the reality is a smaller %. Every time a thread switches, it has a 1 in 8 chance of jumping to the other CCX, that is 12.5% of all thread switches. Threads are not switching 100% of the time, they have to do work on the core they are residing on for a significantly longer period of time before they switch again. Lets assume that a thread spends 10% of its time switching, (I am sure it is significantly less than 10%) for the sake of the discussion to make the maths a little easier. So only 1.25% of the compute time is effected by cross CCX switched threads and that does not take into account that those threads are running in parallel with other threads that are not being slowed down, a significant number of those other threads are not dependent on the results from the slowed threads (a tessellation thread is not always gependent of a physics calculation) and some of the slowed threads will still finish before non slowed threads simply because they had less work to do. That reduces the 1.25% a bit more. Lets say to 1%. I can keep going pointing out that the original 12.5% assumes a total loss and we are only introducing delays and dont have to start the threads calculations over again so that 1% actually gets smaller again. But I will stop here. Either way, delays on 1% of the processing threads is not enough to cause a performance decrease of 20-40% in actual work output, particularly when the the 2 component workloads (the graphics part and the physics part) have already been shown that the nature of the instructions that they are each processing in isolation does not have significant impact on the system as a whole even if the CPU can run at 100% load. There is definitely some performance degradation added by delays in switching between CCX modules, but that is only contributing the performance drop because the data Fabric enables switching and it also enables the connection to the PCIe Controller for the graphics output and the memory controller for every thread executing instructions regardless of switching or not, plus the thread inter CCX switch management. plus the nural net traffic, plus plus plus.... The cause is contention for resources on the Data Fabric due to an overloading of the Data Fabric caused by the high compute memory read/write requirements combined with high memory read/write and PCIe controller access the graphical processing requires. As supported memory speeds increase with the bios improvements, the bandwidth and associated latency improves and the extent of the original problem is reduced as can be seen if you look at the improvement in combined scores over the last couple of weeks, improving by almost 20%. Given the reports of occasional black screens, I would be willing to bet that the CPU side of PCIe controller in the SOC is the primary cause of the bottleneck
  17. the low single core performance from the low frequency CPUs (quad socket system with 18 core Xeons right?) will hurt performance compared to a current desktop CPU.
  18. Clock droop like that is pretty common even on Intel boards. The B350 boards do not have the extenal clock chip like the higher end x370 boards as far as I am aware. so you cannot adjust BCLK. In addition to the Asus CH6, the Asrock Taichi and Gaming Professional and the Gigabyte Gaming k7 also have the b-clock chips
  19. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=asrock+x370 If they use the mounting bar that attaches to the black clips you should be fine. Things are improving every day
  20. Has Thermalright got AM4 mounting brackets for the Macho as yet? CH6 has a reputation of spontaneously bricking itself at the moment. Asus are certainly doing the best marketing job by far and pumping out new bios updates every couple of days. I am sure that it will end up being stable but I dont think it is there yet. I like the CH6 board as well.. Gigabyte boards started out really well but have now started dying at random times are also doing strange things. Biostar bios is very limiting and as I said, Asrock is just going along with people using them and there do not seem to be many complaints or problems that I am aware of, I have heard the comment "It just works" on a few occasions. I am not an ASrock fanboy and never owned an asrock board, they are certainly not as pretty as the Asus board, just telling you about my observations. I am thinking about the Asus CH6 myself, I just want it to grow up a bit more before I spend any money on it.
  21. On my i7-2600, i can overclock +4 multipliers above stock and run the BCLK at 105.8 for a Turbo clock speed of 4.4Ghz. You have an asus motherboard, why not try the automatic overclocking utility in the bios and see what it does for you? You may find that you get a bit of extra performance from your CPU. Those utilities usually add too much voltage but you can review and reduce that after it is finished. The auto utility only took my CPU up to a 103Mhz bclk but I have manually tuned it up another 200Mhz and it is still stable. Running a 1080Ti in that rig will be restricted compared to say a 7700K but it will still be significantly better than what you are using now. You always have the option to upgrade the motherboard/CPU and Ram in 6-12 months time and transfer the Graphics card across
  22. The Asrock X370 Taichi and X370 Gaming professional are almost the same board at the top of the Asrock tree with a dedicated BCLK chip, 60A mosfets and 12 phase VRM. The main differences are the colour and the Gaming Professional board also has the 5Gb/s network adapter included. I read a spec sheet somewhere that said the ac Wifi may be a bit disappointing and be limited to the single channel 430Mb/s bandwith instead of the dual or triple channel cards that will do 867Mbs or 1.2Gbs From what I am hearing, AMD's project management was terrible and they forgot to tell the motherboard manufacturers and the Cooling solution manufacturers anything much in the way of specific details to facilitate Bios development and Mounting hardware engineering until a couple of weeks before launch. Like all x370 motherboards they are still immature and being updated regularly but they seem to be providing the most carefree experience from all the manufacturers at this point in time. I have not heard of any asrock boards bricking themselves. If you are buying this week and want AIO water cooling, the Cool-it sourced corsair units are the only ones around that use the top mount bracket that clips on the black plastic hooks near the socket so they are your only choice until the asetek mounts start shipping (H100i and H110i with the square block/pump)
  23. The Firestrike combined test is the most relevant score in Firestrike if you are having a discussion about Ryzen gaming performance and it is the score that has been universally ignored by every reviewer that I have seen. That graph is the only mention of combined scores that I have seen in an article about Ryzen. It would appear that the majority of tech reviewers don't understand the firestrike benchmark at all. It is important because it is the only part of the benchmark that does something similar to what is going on when you play a game. The Graphics and physics tests are also important as they show the performance of either the Graphics or CPU running almost in isolation. If reviewers had bothered to pay any sort of attention to the Combined score, They may have noticed that the Ryzen graphics and physics scores were both fairly comparable to what you score with an Intel 6900K and beat the 7700K scores, however the combined score seriously under performed both of the Intel platforms, giving a hint where they should be looking for an explanation of the slow gaming problems - ie. It is not the CPU or GPU itself, it is not the PCIe bus because that runs to a standard, it could only be the connectivity to the memory or the PCIe controllers in the Data Fabric on the chip. This is from the 3DMark Technical Guide that you can download from here http://s3.amazonaws.com/download-aws.futuremark.com/3DMark_Technical_Guide.pdf "3DMark Fire Strike Combined test stresses both the GPU and CPU simultaneously. The GPU load combines elements from Graphics test 1 and 2 using tessellation, volumetric illumination, fluid simulation, particle simulation, FFT based bloom and depth of field. The CPU load comes from the rigid body physics of the breaking statues in the background. There are 32 simulation worlds running in separate threads each containing one statue decomposing into 113 parts. Additionally there are 16 invisible rigid bodies in each world except the one closest to camera to push the decomposed elements apart. The simulations run on one thread per available CPU core. The 3DMark Fire Strike Combined test uses the Bullet Open Source Physics Library." The guide gives details on the graphics and physics tests as well as how the benchmark is scored, as well as how the other benchmarks are run as well but you can download the file and read up yourself.
  24. Doh! I was just home from the pub when I typed that. sorry
  25. I am still using an Asus p8z68-v i7-2600 @4.44Ghz 16GB Fury X PC12800 Ram at 1972Mhz MSI Gaming X GTX1070 Corsair HX850i Samsung 840 Evo Thermaltake Armor V60 Case P67 boards do not support iGPU but overclock slightly better than Z68. Z68 do support iGPU and have the Intel IRST ssd disk caching feature