MasterRaceMcqueen

You can use either an Nvidia or AMD GPU. I dont think there's CUDA acceleration built into AutoCAD, but rather DirectX 11 enhanced. 

Unless your using bitlocker or group policies, they are both pretty much the same.

I've had this ATX case forever and am upgrading the build inside soon. 
 
Anyone know what model case it is??
 
Thanks in advance. 

Yes Adobe Premiere Pro doesn't like OpenCL so AMD cards perform considerably worse than CUDA accelerated nVidia GPU.

“Vegas pro”?  Is this an app?

looked at some benchmarks, seems like vegas pro prefers ryzen cpus and amd gpus with hmb memory so I made this build.
PCPartPicker Part List Type Item Price CPU AMD Ryzen 7 3700X 3.6 GHz 8-Core Processor $324.99 @ Amazon Motherboard MSI B450-A PRO MAX ATX AM4 Motherboard $99.99 @ Amazon Memory G.Skill Ripjaws V 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR4-3600 Memory $154.99 @ Newegg Storage TCSunBow X3 480 GB 2.5" Solid State Drive $51.99 @ Amazon Video Card Gigabyte Radeon RX VEGA 56 8 GB Video Card $239.99 @ Newegg Case Fractal Design Focus G ATX Mid Tower Case $55.88 @ Amazon Power Supply Corsair TXM Gold 550 W 80+ Gold Certified Semi-modular ATX Power Supply $90.98 @ Newegg   Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts     Total (before mail-in rebates) $1048.81   Mail-in rebates -$30.00   Total $1018.81   Generated by PCPartPicker 2020-01-29 06:35 EST-0500    

you said you are using vegas pro, not adobe. what country and what budget in your local currency?

2700x is about 5% better than the 3600 in both vegas pro and adobe premiere

Although I use Vegas I don't have performance info on it for various hardware. If I were buying I'd lean slightly towards the 3600 regardless, in part because of its updated FPU which can significantly increase some AVX workloads, and the bigger on CPU cache. 

Likely the R5 3600 and GPU wise an AMD Vega or Polaris card, those have great OpenCL hardware acceleration, Navi sucks at it though sadly.
 
If not grab a GTX 1660 Super and use CUDA.

2700x will have slighly higher multi-core performance, whereas the 3600 will have higher single-core performance. 
 
GPU depends on the budget more so than AMD vs Nvida.

3600 and NVIDIA IMO

If you want QUALITY, you go with CPU.
If you want SPEED and just decent quality, you go with GPU.
 
With CPU encoding, the video codec can really work hard on analyzing each frame, detecting how things move around , detecting differences between series of frames, all in the effort to squeeze as much quality as possible within one second, and within the bitrate you give the codec to work with.
You can choose to let the codec do a lot of motion search, a lot of analysis, search how the current frame is different from the previous n frames in order to compress it better, and lots of other things.
 
A hardware encoder on the other hand is much more restrictive, it's made with a limited number of transistors inside the silicon chip on the video card, and the hardware encoder can only keep a certain number of frames in memory before having to produce some result, and there's a lot of other limitations. 
For example, while with the CPU the video codec could look back on let's say the previous 6 frames to determine differences between current frame and those six, to retain more detail in the same amount of data, the hardware encoder may only be able to keep in memory the last 3-4 frames it worked on, so it would only be able to look for differences in the previous 3 frames.
Or, let's say the video codec tries to determine how much a 8 by 8 pixel square of the image  moved and in which direction, compared to previous frames ... with the cpu, the video codec may look up to 32 pixels in either direction in order to detect the motion, but a hardware encoder, because it's limited by the number of transistors in it, may only look up to 8-16 pixels in either direction.  This could mean that when you have some big motion on the screen (camera panning quickly, or some explosion), the hardware video encoder may not be able to optimally compress that series of frames and you may get lower quality.
 
So basically, the hardware video encoder is much faster because it takes shortcuts, it uses more basic, more rough encoding techniques compared to the software video codec which uses the processor - for the same amount of disk space, the software video codec will produce much better results any time.
 
Sometimes though, you don't really care about the absolute best quality, or you're trying to render a video that doesn't really need that highest quality.
 
 
 

I 
I don't really like ultra wide and I need an IPS display since I'll be doing extensive video editing with this rig as well

https://www.displayspecifications.com/en/comparison/30d8fb0f6

1440p VA panels... 
                        VG271U P                       XZ272U P                       AG273QCX                       27HC2UR P                       VG27WQ                       EX2780Q                       AORUS CV27Q                       MAG272QP                       MAG272QR                  
 

Hi as a title, my 3ds has the luma 3ds
I usually used jksm, to extract/upload data from 3ds games
But when I tryed to extract datas from pokemon soulsilver, soulsilver didn't show up from jksm, so I couldn't do anything 
 
But the game itself worked just fine, so I suppose that the problem is jksm.. So what can I use to extract file from ds game using the 3ds with luma firmware?
EDIT: at first I confused the 2ds with the ds, so I couldn't find any result by googling around..

Can't you go with R5 3600 + RTX 2080?

Its 4k 60hz, but supports 1440p 120hz.
 
So Im playing games 1440p 120hz and everything else 4k 60h

144hz isn’t more demanding, it’s just harder to get 144fps than 60.
 
i would always recommend 144hz over 60. You don’t need 100fps to nice the difference. Once you switch you’ll never go back.

I think you can actually start to feel a difference even at ~75 fps.
 
It would be best to go for a freesync monitor since that smoothes out FPS drops.
My TV is 1440p 120hz freesync capable and even if I dont hit 120 FPS all the time, it is still SO much better than 60hz.

you can double your storage at the same price point? I'd go the 2x2TB WD Blues since the 970 Evo is really unnecessary for mainstream usage and no there won't be any "speed" improvements you can actually feel on normal desktop usage.

Make sure you quote people so we see your responses

Try changing your game settings to high and see what FPS you get

Wrong. The 1660 he has is better than the RX 580. No point in changing that out. I own 3 different RX 480 and 580 GPUs. He's fine with the 1660.  There is no point to what you said about an all Ryzen system. 

Actually first gen ryzen memory frequency only impacts performance until certain gpu power...   hi is using a 1660, he is fine...
what are your full specs and drivers?
i think u have other issue...