Jump to content
Phishing Emails & YouTube Messages - Fake Giveaway Read more... ×
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

MegaVoltz

Member
  • Content Count

    116
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Awards


This user doesn't have any awards

1 Follower

About MegaVoltz

  • Title
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    US

Recent Profile Visitors

424 profile views
  1. MegaVoltz

    First Time Build Help

    Thank you sir!
  2. MegaVoltz

    First Time Build Help

    Multi-threaded performance falls FAR behind Ryzen. That will impact stuff like streaming, video editing and rendering, and having stuff open in the background while gaming. Even in games, the 7700K won't be the best for long. 8700K/Zen 2 will beat the stuffing out of it in future games. Coffee Lake is rumored to be coming next month, Zen 2 is coming sometime next year.
  3. MegaVoltz

    First Time Build Help

    Guess I should have read the CS, my bad
  4. MegaVoltz

    First Time Build Help

    I just wish Intel would come out with a cheap CPU that offered a happy medium between single-threaded and multi-threaded performance for your money and wasn't trash.
  5. MegaVoltz

    First Time Build Help

    I agree with most of your points, not looking to start a war here. The 7700k isn't a bad CPU and you won't have a bad experience with it. If it was $200 and didn't have no upgrade path I'd recommend it. However you're spending a lot of money for it and you make quite a few sacrifices for that extra performance.
  6. MegaVoltz

    First Time Build Help

    PROOF? No one has the slightest bit of proof. He only focuses on AMD because they actually innovate. NVidia and Intel never innovate. They simply milk old architectures by rebranding GPUs over and over again. Just look at what they did with Ryzen! Also, what do you mean non-reputable? He doesn't fake benchmark numbers, and makes good points. He just tends to focus on AMD. Intel is a scummy, crooked company who has cheated and lied their way into first place in the CPU market. They don't deserve first place. They don't even deserve to exist after the crimes they committed. They paid Dell more and more every quarter in the 90s to ONLY sell THEIR CPUs. I don't care whether Intel has better price to performance CPUs in general (they don't BTW), I just hate them as a company and will never buy from them. AMD deserves credit for innovation and originality. Intel never had an original idea in its entire despicable existence as a "company".
  7. MegaVoltz

    First Time Build Help

    Thank you! Happy to see someone here has some sense.
  8. MegaVoltz

    First Time Build Help

    There is no proof whatsoever that Jim is biased. There is also no proof your source for the other video is reliable. I would still recommend a 1600 over a 7700k because it costs $100 less as well as having much stronger multi-threaded performance. The 1600 is faster than the 7700k in pure multi-threaded performance than the 7700k is over the 1600 in single-threaded performance. Sure, if OP wants to buy into a dead platform and spend $100 more for it, it's his stupid decision for listening to your recommendation of a 7700k. Basically the 1600 will have a bigger impact on performance in games that use more cores, and the 7700k will have a bigger impact in games that love single-threaded performance. IMO most of the time games are struggling on the 7700k due to something, it's normally the amount of cores. The IPC and clock speeds of the 1600 aren't that far behind the 7700K however the multi-threaded performance of the 1600 pulls FAR ahead of the 7700K due to the 2 extra cores and 4 extra threads. What if OP wants to stream while gaming? The 1600 is better. However if you try to stream in high-quality while playing modern triple-A games, the 7700k drops frames and bogs down the entire experience. What if he wants to save money? The 1600 is better. The 7700k costs $100 more. What if he wants to edit videos or do 3D modeling/animation? The 1600 is better. The 7700K falls far behind here. What if he wants lower power consumption? The 1600 is better. The 7700k consumes about 50% more power. What if he wants upgradeability and future-proofing? The 1600 is better. The 7700k is currently sitting on top of a dead platform with no CPUs releasing for it anytime in the future. What if he wants to overclock on $80-100 motherboards without spending a fortune? The 1600 is better. The 7700k doesn't even come with a cooler, and you need to spend upwards of $150 to get a good board to overclock on. FAR more expensive if you factor that into the cost. What if he wants an overall cheaper platform? The 1600 is better. Again, the 7700k costs more, the motherboards cost more, and the liquid (or high end air) coolers cost far more than the 1600 and motherboard. 7700K - $330, + good overclock-capable motherboard - $150, + noctua nh-d15 - $90 = 570 1600 - $210, + good overclock-capable motherboard - $90, + stock cooler - $0 = 300 Nearly double the price for 30-40% more single-threaded performance on average. That's insanity! IMHO OP should either buy the R5 1600 now, or wait for Coffee Lake. The 7700K is NOT worth it unless you ABSOLUTELY need the FASTEST (currently) gaming CPU on the market right now. IMO there's far too many sacrifices to be made to buy this CPU. Let me name a few. -No cooler included. -$100-120 more expensive than it should be. -You spend way too much for an overclock-capable motherboard. -Much less multi-threaded performance than its competition. -Dead platform, not compatible with new CPUs. -Stuttery mess if streaming in high-quality while gaming. -Power consumption a bit too high for my liking. However there ARE some pros. -Beastly single-threaded performance. -Can overclock insanely high, sometimes as far as 5 ghz on a high-end liquid cooler. -Still not terrible at video editing and rendering. -Thunderbolt 3 compatible. That's about it. Conclusion: While the 7700K pulls away in gaming and purely single-threaded applications, the lead simply isn't enough to justify the high price tag, dead platform, and many other compromises that come with it. The 1600 is far better value offering a solid lead in multi-threaded performance, darn well good-enough single-threaded performance, and all the other pros I mentioned earlier, at a much lower price than the competition. 1600 > 7700K
  9. MegaVoltz

    $750 setup, any thoughts?

    CXM is even more expensive than that. Also, what if I was upgrading to an r7 1700 and a 1080 ti, both overclocked with 16 gigs of ram and a bunch of peripherals, monitors, hard drives, fan controllers and stuff? I calculated it on CoolerMaster's psu wattage calculator and it came to slightly over 540 watts. It has all the features I want. Fully sleeved black cables, 80+ bronze rating, 600 watts, a solid review on johnnyguru, "Performance (40% of the final score) - while the 600 BQ was not the best performer I have ever seen, it didn't do a half bad job at all, I reckon. Efficiency was well above Bronze targets at all times, so no deduction there. Ripple control was a similar story... not the best ever, but still good enough to get by without a deduction. However, voltage stability was only average, managing 2.7% in the hot box. That's a full two point deduction, because we are a fair distance from mythic level in this regard. With no other performance issues needing scoring on, we come up with an 8 here. Functionality (20% of the final score) - I have two deductions only to make here. First, that Berg connector loses half a point. Second, the unit is only semi-modular, so half a point comes off there, too. And there we stop. EVGA threw in so many extra goodies that no points come off for accessories, and we had way more than enough cables and connectors for a unit this size. They did good, here. 9. Value (20% of the final score) - $72.98 is the going rate for these at Newegg right now. It has some competition around that dollar level, mostly with Rosewill. However, that's the bad news... the Capstone G is two dollars more money and 80 Plus Gold. Yeah, you'd be buying a somewhat bland performing Enhance built unit, but I personally prefer them as an OEM to HEC, and in this case you're going up in efficiency in the bargain. Two dollars difference? That is when you can justify Gold over Bronze (or Silver, as the case may be for some of these). And there's the other thing... Corsair's CX750 along with EVGA's own B1 unit are both cheaper than this one by seven bucks. Not an especially good value, this unit. 6.5. Build Quality (20% of the final score) - I'm taking half a point for capacitors and half a point for the weirdness on the bridge rectifier traces. Since the power cord is not too small for the current draw I saw through it, that is all. 9." "Performance 8 Functionality 9 Value 6.5 Build Quality 9 Total Score 8.1" Not to mention it's actually less expensive than it was when it was reviewed. I'd say it would get at least a total of 8.7. Good enough for me.
  10. MegaVoltz

    $750 setup, any thoughts?

    50 less watts and non-modular while being only one tier higher and more expensive? I'd rather go with the 600BQ.
  11. MegaVoltz

    $750 setup, any thoughts?

    The EVGA BQ series is one tier above the 500/600B though. I simply can't AFFORD the higher-end ones.
  12. MegaVoltz

    First Time Build Help

    The 1600 costs less than 1/3rd less while being ~20% less powerful in single-threaded performance than the 7700k. It would be a VERY good deal nonetheless even without the countless other advantages of a 6-core 12-thread processor.
  13. MegaVoltz

    $750 setup, any thoughts?

    Yes LOL no, obviously having more wattage is better if you plan to not upgrade your power supply for a while. It also lets the fan run at a lower speed due to not using all of the PSU's wattage.
×