LyondellBasell

That would be my recommendation. Since your motherboard has 4-pin fan headers, I think you should look for a hub that supports 3-pin fan connections and has a 4-pin output to connect to the board.

I think to start we need some more information.

We need pictures of what pin layout the fans have. From what I can find online, it says 3+3 pin? But that doesn't match with what the pictures show, the pictures show a 6-pin? connector for the fan connection to that hub.

How does the fan that comes with the case normally get plugged in? Does the case or the fan hub come with adapters?

1 hour ago, RONOTHAN## said:

If your goal is to use a Gen 5 SSD, you really don't want to be going LGA 1700. They do technically support PCIe Gen 5, but in order to get a Gen 5 M.2 slot they need to steal half the PCIe lanes from your GPU. Gen 5 SSDs just aren't that much faster than their Gen 4 counterparts that I would avoid them anyway, it's not likely to give a performance uplift, but if you really want one you should go AM5 instead, as the Gen 5 M.2 slots are standard and don't require stealing lanes from the GPU. 

 

It is significantly better, especially in Jedi Survivors, but you're playing at 4K where the gaming performance is almost always GPU limited and not CPU limited. It's not likely to make a noticeable difference. 

 

If you don't get a T700, lga 1700 is a good option, especially if you just drop down to the 13700K (you save $150 and realistically won't lose any performance in games or Adobe), but if you do going for a 7900X is probably the chip I'd go for so you get better Adobe performance. Technically the 7950X3D also exists and is the best of both worlds if you ignore the software concerns, though it's also a bit more expensive so keep that in mind and again, at 4k you're not likely to notice a difference between anything better than a 5600x.

I didn't know AM5 had those lanes as standard! Thanks for the insight. I'm going to have to think about my priorities here.

1 hour ago, PDifolco said:

At 4K  I don't think the 7800X3D will give you much more gaming performance, you'd be GPU limited everywhere

Get either the 13900K or the 7950X

That's a good point, I don't think I've researched this enough. Thank you!

Budget (including currency): $1,900

Country: USA

Games, programs or workloads that it will be used for: Lightroom + Photoshop//Jedi Survivor + SW Outlaws

Other details: Doing some upgrades to my 2015 i7-6700k/Z190/DDR4 build.

I already replaced my Titan SLI setup with a 3090 2 years ago, and am looking to refresh the rest of the system to keep pace with modern games at 4K and increasingly larger photo files.

The entire build is watercooled and will remain that way, I've already accounted for all waterblock upgrades.

Whatever processor I choose will be getting tuned to extract more performance.

Right now I'm leaning towards the 13900k, with some DDR5 and a Crucial T700 to round out the system.

I've watched LTT and others' comparisons with the 7800X3D. I know it's faster for gaming, draws less power, and prices out a bit cheaper even with a similar board.

I *do* value strong performance in Adobe apps though, and I'm having a hard time making the right decision.

Should I wait for the next Intel gen?

Should I check out with the 13900k today?

Is the 7800X3D *that* superior that I should ignore the Adobe performance and go Team Red?

Help me out here, LTT.

Was going to say Fences, I believe DisplayFusion also has this feature.

Herman Miller Aeron. Buy it in your appropriate size, you can probably even find a refurbished model for a great price.

36 minutes ago, noyo87 said:

Correct me If I'm wrong, but I think the Alienware AW3821DW is using the same panel.

Do you know which one is best ? LG 38GL950G-B vs AW3821DW

Nope, I believe you're correct. They're the same panel, the Alienware is HDR600 as compared to the 38GL's HDR400.

The Alienware is technically the best panel, unless you prefer the look of the LG.

38" UW's a nice format. If you like your Dell but want to add HDR+Gsync, maybe look at the LG 38GL950G-B.

Yeah, it's not HDR1000. It's one of the best panels you can buy though.

Whatever you choose, don't base any decision you make on "input lag" or "response time".

You will not be able to tell with your usage case. We're not talking high-tier, competitive FPS here.

There's no camera movement, there's no crosshair, and nothing you do is split-second.

The things that will matter to YOU are pixel density, screen size, and display mounting options, since it sounds like you have limited space and may want the change how everything's lined up at some point. You should buy solely based on these things.

23 hours ago, fatsoferret said:

So my brother went a bit overboard and bought us matching display setups and I need help finding a monitor stand. I need a freestanding (not clamped to the desk) stand. My desk has pillars that hold the top up and is also height limited so the stand will have to be height adjustable. Im limited to about 23 inches in height and the monitors are...

Dimensions (H x W x D)	21.85" x 33.86" x 7.48" each and are 1500R curved.  The model of the monitor is

Gigabyte G32QC

Thanks in advance

I think I'm a bit confused on what you're looking for. 

I understand you want a monitor mount that's freestanding, am I correct that you want the mount to hold two G32QC panels?

On 11/21/2020 at 3:26 PM, Michael0100 said:

My catch is, I don't want to be spending more than £700 at maximum realistically

I know condensation maybe an issue,

Would you guys consider this a reasonable idea or something plausible?

I think you can make a great cooling setup for less than £700.

I don't believe there's any reason to even bother with sub-zero.

You have a server-size space, and noise isn't a factor.

Get some great radiators, and use some server-grade fans to pump as much air as you can through the system. If the server space is properly ventilated, you'll keep everything close to ambient and you can do it indefinitely with yearly maintenance.

On 10/20/2020 at 1:33 PM, Hatteras said:

I know there is the 8k Dell monitor from 3 (!!!) years ago and the apple (not usable by mortals) 6k display and a couple of 5k displays on the market.

 

I'd think there are plenty of people that would like to switch to something packed with more pixels.

 

| no market for these?

There just really isn't a market for them. Right now, most of the work being done that requires high resolution can be done perfectly fine at 4K. I can only speak to the limited photography and cinematography experiences I've had, but for us, color reproduction accuracy is far more important than any push beyond 4K. I usually sit about 2-3 feet back from the mastering displays and from that distance, the individual pixels are not readily distinguishable.

I *guess* it would be nice to have even larger displays to appreciate the impact of some of our larger-format work before it goes to publish, but

1) We've done just fine without it so far

2) I'd have a really hard time making the case to someone with budget oversight given #1

3) A lot of times, the source material we're working with (with the exception of photographs and digital images) is not shot at 8K, and certainly not seen by the end-user at that resolution. So it's enough to be able to pan around the source material at 4K, do our work, and then export.

On 10/11/2020 at 8:02 AM, Ya_Mi said:

I've already have the softbox, just need to find the correct light bulb.

I think i've figured it out since i shoot with a smartphone, i'll need to blast as much light as i can cuz the camera sensor in a smartphone is so small and correct me if i am wrong, i can't find 5500K light bulb, only 6500K but thats okay right? because i can fix the color temperature in post?

Yes, the more light you can give yourself, the better your end-image will be.

As far as color temperature goes, 6500K is going to be a little bit on the cooler side, or more blue.

You can adjust the color temperature right there in-camera, but if for some reason you had no way to adjust it, I'd recommend going with a slightly warmer light rather than a colder one, cold light tends to be less flattering for skin tones.

2 hours ago, Ya_Mi said:

Man they are kinda pricey, i am on really tight budget atm cuz of what happened to me.

In that case it's probably best to find a bright lamp or several that fits within your budget and either bounce it off the wall, shoot it through a sheet, or make a homemade softbox.

On 10/9/2020 at 3:50 AM, Ya_Mi said:

Since i have very limited budget and no income atm (broken leg), I have to make sure that i got the right item otherwise i'll just gonna waste my money.

When it comes to keylight and fill light? i am gonna use LED but how many lumens do i need? i did my research but none seems to give a clear answer.

The short answer is, it depends.

The long answer is, it really depends.

We need some more information:

• Are you going to be taking photos or video?
• What environment are you going to be working in? Indoors? Outdoors? How much control do you have over the light that already exists in your space?
• How far away are these lights going to be from your subject(s)?
• Are these lights going to need modifiers for the look you're shooting for?

Basically, if you want an exact answer to "how many lumens do I need", you'd have to give us a Cine Designer file and a render of what you hope the final effect would look like.

That's not how lights are bought, what you really want is something adjustable.

That being said, if you just want an off-the-cuff number, get something that says it can do up to a 1000W tungsten equivalent. That'll be enough to light most basic scenarios that you might want starting off. Take a look at the Aputure C120d or C120d Mark II

4 hours ago, BLSmith2112 said:

Howdy. Here's the goal: Have three 27'' monitors, mounted into ether the wall, or the desk so I'm not using the standard monitor legs. 

• I've got a 24'' deep desk.
• I'm nearsighted and the monitor can be no further than 18'' inches from my eyes.
• The center monitor must be 16'' from the wall.
• The 2 flanking monitors must be further than 16'' due to them being on an angle. I don't know the proper recommended angle from the center monitor to know what distance they should be from the wall.
• I like having the monitor 5-6 inches off the desk. 
• Monitors I'd like to buy: LG 27GL850-B 27, but they're sold out everywhere so hopefully by the time I figure this monitor arm stuff out they'll be in stock again.
• They can be wall mounted or desk clamp mounted, but if wall mounted they must have extra length in the event a stud is an extra inch or two away from ideal location.

What I've found while researching: 

• Most desk stands I've seen, such as the Ergotech 130 have an absolutely huge base stand that elevates the keyboard like a quarter of an inch which raises the height of the keyboard, making for an uncomfortable user experience, specifically because I have to have the monitor so close to me and the 15''+ deep stand gets in the way (raises my 37'' inch mouse pad too). Full discloser I own the Ergotech 130 and it's about to be returned due to this experience. If there were VESA extensions to allow me to push the stand back 8 inches while keeping the monitors 8 inches forward I'd try that but it might break the spec allowance of the stand.
• Most wall arms I've seen do not extend far enough for the flanking monitors or aren't well reviewed. 
• Most desk clamped arms I've seen aren't strong enough to prevent wobble, or hold the lowest point of the monitor over 5-6 inches off the desk.

Any tips or suggestions on what to try? Thanks guys & gals. 

My setup is very much like the one you describe, my mounting point is on the back of my desk and I like my monitors suspended very far forward so the they float over my keyboard and mouse.

I've got three recommendations for you depending on your mounting style preference. They're all from Chief, you can look them up either through the Legrand A/V website or through ErgoDirect.

The K1C330 is a single desk mount that spiders into three dynamically adjustable arms. The center arm doesn't look like it's adjustable for depth, so this may or may not be the right one for you, depending on how far from the mounting point you want your monitor to be. The base for this one is much smaller than your Ergotech 130 because it's a grommet mount, so it's not relying on it's size to steady itself. It's maybe 5" by 4".

The K4G310 is also a single desk mount, but on this one the monitors are attached to a bracket and then suspended by a single arm, so they are not independently adjustable. This one will allow you to position the entire array much further from the base than the K1C. They also offer it in a K4W310 if you want the wall mount version instead.

As a third alternative, if you want to stick with independently adjustable arms and not an array, you can buy three arms. Desk mount, pole mount, or wall mount, up to you. Suspend the central one and set your distance, and then just adjust the other two to match/give the best fit.

On 9/30/2020 at 11:41 AM, Knyghtshade said:

How the hell are you supposed to buy a new monitor.

>Newegg.com

>Monitors

>Sort by price High>>Low

>Select #1 result

>Checkout Now

In all seriousness, start with what you know.

You have a budget, and you have a screen right now.

What does your screen do right now that you wish the new one would keep doing?

What does your screen not do right now that you wish the new one would?

Do you like your aspect ratio? How would changing it affect the applications you use?

Do you like your current monitor's color reproduction capabilities? What would you gain/lose from a change in accuracy?

Do you like your current monitor's size and resolution? How would your physical space and viewing distance change with a new panel?

Since you've already set a budget, come up with an answer to each of these questions and use your answer to filter  what's available. 

1 hour ago, Real_nimr0d_2 said:

Is nobody annoyed at the fact there are like zero good high reso high refresh rate glossy panels on the market? When they have superior image quality.

Everybody knows that pc graphics are superior to consoles, it's like a universal truth at this point. But are they really in the real world given that most pc gamers are playing on matte panel while most console players are playing on a TV with way better image quality and a glossy panel to top that off. I really wish LMG(Linus media group) do a video on where they have comparable glossy panel vs matte and cover what system is it running on and ask people which one looks better, they can even do that with 4k matte vs 1080p glossy as pc gamers don't realize resolution that isn't everything when it comes to image quality. LMG can literally shake up the entire monitor industry by doing this kind of video.

 

I'm just really bummed that there are no options, i'm not saying glossy panels are superior in every way and I know some people would prefer matte but why cannot we just have better options? Currently i'm an owner of xb271hu with no upgrade path to a glossy panel in sight. And I hope that changes in the future. 

I'm sure there are *some* people out there who are annoyed by it, but I am willing to bet that that market's pretty small, to the point of it not even being worth it to add another SKU for most manufacturers, let alone to develop another process they're happy with.

That's not to say that they're not working on improving image quality though. Screens have gotten WAY better in terms of both clarity and glare rejection.

7 minutes ago, Balletje72 said:

the gigantic boost in fps allows easy playing on 4k ultrawide on max settings. So, I'm looking for a 4k ultrawide monitor... but I literally can only find 1 ultrawide 4k monitor, from LG, which isnt even curved. I mean... why aren't there any? And then I'm not even filtering on Hz / colors / other features yet.

I think it depends on what you're looking for when you say 4K.

There's panels like the LG 38GL950G, which is 3840*1600. You're correct in that it isn't "true" 4K or DCI 4K.

No ultrawide will be in the expected 3840*2160 resolution, simply because of the aspect ratio.

So you'll either have to look for something like the 38GL950G, which is 4K in the horizontal dimension, or something like the LG 34WK95U-W, which is 5120*2160, which is "4K" in the vertical dimension. (and 5K in the horizontal).

To help the rest of us make better suggestions, can you elaborate a little more on *exactly* what you're looking for?

1 hour ago, The Torrent said:

Yea i did think about stuff like that but. At least for the next 2 years at a minimum, this ultrawide is staying exactly where it is and a little bit of filler and paint in 2-5 years time is no issue.

 

So recently im considering not even getting a wall mounted arm... Im considering literally buying a 10 quid one of these

 

because i basically never move my ultrawide at all and the main reason i want to wall mount it is because i want to push it back and want the desk space (the stand is MASSIVE).

 

And then maybe getting another one of these if i get my second monitor soon? I've not decided the second monitor part yet.

That's fair. Getting rid of the stand is going to be a huge plus, no matter which way you decide to go with it.

You won't be able to do any vertical height adjustment on that one but if you don't mind, it's pretty much impossible to beat that price. 

You can always decide what solution you'd like to use for your second monitor later. Once you get the UW mounted, you can see what kind of space it leaves you and I'm sure it'll give you a much better idea of what looks best for your setup. Best of luck!

19 hours ago, The Torrent said:

i have a 35inch ultrawide i wanna wallmount.

 

I also wanna get a 22inch or something small display to put vertically on the left of my ultrawide.

 

Is there any stand which will allow me to have both in that configuration?? I have a crude sketch of what i want attached. I see loads on amazon that say up to 27inch but idk if you can work on averages like 35inch then 22 inch so it balances out... etc. lol.

 

I have a AC352UCG6 i have no clue what it weights without the stand and cant find anything online, and idk what side monitor I will get yet. Hope you can help. Thanks

 

 

Are you *absolutely* sure you want to wall mount it, as opposed to maybe getting a grommet or pole mount?

I understand the appeal of a wallmount. It frees up desk space on the actual surface and floating panels look much cleaner.

On the flip side, you're limited in positioning. You'll have to put the mount over a stud, and extend your arms from there. If the stud is off center, you'll have to live with it. If you ever want to change monitors down the road, you'll have to make sure the panel size and weight can fit with the mount and arms you have.

I'd recommend a grommet mount or a pole mount instead. With the right arms, you can still position your panels far from the secure point and utilize the entire surface of the desk. If you decide to switch monitors, it's much easier. You won't have to repair any walls.

I'm in somewhat of the same position as you, I have a large ultrawide, and a secondary screen that I use for peripheral activities. I have them both on a pole mount, stacked one on top of the other. Due to the size of the ultrawide, this means I don't have to turn my head to look at anything going on on the second monitor. I can quickly glance up and it's much more comfortable.

Just some food for thought. I have recommendations for wall mounts if you still decide that's what you'd like.

15 hours ago, PeachGr said:

Hello guys, i will wait a little bit to check the octomber's releases but then, i will choose a new monitor
The question is, is 4k on 27 inches noticeable, or 2k feels the same?
I am about to choose between LG 27GL850-B and LG 27GL950 (after i check reviews)
I d also wanted to go to 30" for 4k, but it's not a trend yet, so the cost and the variety is out of place

Totally a subjective opinion thing that depends on your personal visual acuity, the type of content you interact with, and how close you sit to your displays.

That being said, the *general* recommended advice is that 24" is a good size for 1080p, 27" is a good size for 1440p, and 32" is a good size for 4K. 

4K at 27" is definitely going to be sharper. You can do the PPI calculation and compare it to other sizes and see if you're in the neighborhood of what you're shooting for.

I personally find that 32" is a great size for my 4K display such that I can use it without any additional scaling and am not able to discern individual pixels unless I look closely. This is purely anecdotal and you may find your preferences differ greatly from mine. 

On 9/10/2020 at 5:39 PM, TheZmajCap said:

Getting a 3080. 

Sounds good! I think you'll love it

I have an LG 38GL950G and love it.

It's 3840x1600 so while you do give up some vertical real estate compared to a true 16:9 4k monitor of the same size, I find the ability to maintain relatively high framerate to be worth it.

I'd recommend at least a 2080Ti for optimal experience.

I find the monitor's color reproduction, refresh rate, and black levels to be excellent. I don't use the monitor at the overclocked 175Hz refresh rate, I prefer to leave it at 144Hz to avoid the worst of the overdrive issues.

The HDR400 is nothing outstanding, but it works, and HDR content looks *good* on it. If you don't have an OLED display or an HDR1000 display to compare it to, you'll probably think "wow, this looks really great."

Buy it, but not for the HDR or the ultra deep blacks.

Buy it because it's big, it's fast, and it's arguably one of the best gaming experiences you can get at 3840 horizontal resolution right now.