tonymc

Thank you
Problems with Seasonic Focus Plus! Very interesting, I will look for information about this.

Had a 1080, it was the coolest gpu I had and required the least voltage and power to match overclocks. 
I’m talking about water blocks on them though. Really surprised me. Haven’t had one of their cards since my 550ti’s 

Looks exactly like my PNY 1050 Ti except with another fan and more heatsink area. It's a good card. You don't hear much about them for some reason, probably because they just work and don't give a lot of issues. 

PNY are OK

I finished Darksiders Warmastered Edition, I think it's very good, it's a jewel, it's very well the story and the end, I started now to play Darksiders 2 Deathfinitive Edition, it incorporates new things like greater personalization of the character and the world is more open and more extensive, does not have level indicator of the NPC, then you can easily find a boss in a dungeon for which you are not ready yet and you can say "Then I come for you when you are ready". The fighting is more frenzied and intense than in the previous version. The dungeons are full of puzzles and complications to finish them, not only is killing NPC and move forward, I think it is a very entertaining game, but "for tastes the colors were tried".

I'm playing Daksiders Warmastered right now, I really enjoy it.
In turn-based strategy game I really like Total War Shogun2, I hope that Total War: Three Kingdoms will live up to it.

Windows Power Performance profile is set to Performance, turn it to balanced or lower
 

Ryzen 1000 series is only specced for 2666 and Ryzen 2000 series is specced at 2933 AFAIK.
 
This is why RAM speeds above that are labeled as (oc), they are out of spec for the CPU.  You could probably run 3000-3200 still, but it may require manual tuning of timings.

different applications stresses different part of the cpu, it might be stable in one but not in the other
i suggest u try dialing back your OC and see if that solves your issue

Depends on how long you can wait.
Your System right now is rather low end and might cause Problems with some 
Not really...
We're talking about 4,3GHz Top right now in 12nm, 5GHz Top Boost would only be 16%. Wich is a pretty bad increase for a Die Shrink.
 
And Die Shrinks are usually responsible for higher clock increases, if the manufacturing isn't too bad...
For example back in the day when there was the shrink from 250nm to 180nm.
Highest clocked 250nm Pentium 3 was IIRC 600MHz or 650MHz.
The highest clocked 130nm Pentium 3 was 800MHz (cC0 Stepping) and 1133MHz (cD0 Stepping)...
 
So that's almost double the Frequency!

Or look at the Pentium 4. The 0,18µ Willamette was released with up to 2200MHz 
The 130nm ones (the legendary Northwood) +~50% -> 3,4GHz
Prescott only to around 3,8GHz but only because there went something wrong...
And 4GHz+ was planned but never released for obvious reasons...
 
Same with the Phenom. The Phenom 1 was around 2.5GHz or so, the Phenom 2 went up to 3.6GHz or so...
 
So yes, its highly probable that the frequency increases a bit over 10%!
I'd wait to CES for that...
 
And its probable that there are differences due to higher TDP...

2600 with a b450 mobo is pretty cheap

When using a motherboard with B360 chipset you are giving up RAM memory with higher speeds at 2666MHz, and have greater possibilities of expansion in terms of number of ports PCI express, USB.This plate in particular is poor in volume and amount of heat sinks on the components that generate more heat on a motherboard, and I think this is important, assuming that you could be playing for several hours, and you are demanding this motherboard.
I believe that this motherboard is for office work, where perhaps it does not demand as much.
You should also take into account the audio chip ....
Anyway, answering your question, I do not think there is any loss of performance when using the i7 8700 on this motherboard, or at least noticeably.
It is not mandatory to use Z370, but there are B360 motherboards, better prepared for gaming.

I think he answers some questions.
For example, because it costs the same as the other SATA option.
According to them, this unit is cheaper compared to other NMVe units because there is a compromise between price-performance, it is not very expensive and offers a decent performance, especially in reading, which for a standard user would not feel difference to the Samsung 970 unit which is like saying the king on these issues.
It also says that it ridicules the intel 760p in some tests even using the same controller.
No, there is nothing negative in this unit.
Just use a cheap driver, not because it is bad but because it has less performance than the competition.
They will always recommend units larger in capacity, not only because they have more space but because they perform more.

If you stay on the same chipset, your best option would be the i7 7700k as its the fastest chip that you can run on a z170 board, assuming you have a z170 with the 6600k. This will give you the best pure gaming experience over upgrading to a ryzen chip. Now if you do more than just pure gaming, a Ryzen chip is more compelling for live streaming, video editing, production work etc at the cost of about 5-10% on average loss in FPS compared to intels side of things. 

It's your choice, not denying that or knocking it. Just saying it's unnecessary to go with something that high in wattage. 850-1000w would be plenty (even with 2x 2080Ti's) will probably save you a few dollars and run a bit quieter. 

OK, in that case ...
I personally believe that the SSD is fundamental, although it does not necessarily have to be NVMe, in most of the conditions a standard user does not notice the difference. I have a Samsung EVO 850 SATA for Operating System and a Corsair MP500 NVMe to mount the laboratories .I must say that I have tried to install the operating system in the NMVe and I have not noticed the difference, however in more difficult working conditions, which is why I acquired it if there is a difference and a lot.
Install operating system in a SSD ensures a very smooth operation of the system in general. And if it were my case you would choose the SSD.
I've seen games that have consumed in my system 12Gb RAM as Call of Dutty WWII at 1080p, but I still consider that 16gb to play is not mandatory yet.

What is Corsair Corsair 275r tg?

So I will focus on just the bold words:

Obviously the decision is mine. 
 
Agreed that the components do degrade over time
 
What percentage of failure?
 
We've gone off topic but I believe there is a lot of great information, to fill the delta of WHY little headroom on a PSU is commonly suggested.
 
1.) Degrading components can cause a failure, why wait for that failure (and to see what that failure may cause)
2.) Purchasing a high wattage PSU you should be replacing (see #1) is a waste - because #1
3.) Future-proofing isn't a thing (we all actually know that as Prosumers - you can only mitigate the future but the future will be coming either way!)
4.) If you can afford the high wattage next generation items, you can also afford to replace the PSU at that time should your wattage be insufficient
 
Those are all very sound reasons - any I missed or didn't extrapolate on enough?
 
 

The problem is NOT having some overhead.
 
Having some room to upgrade in the future is fine because the usual trend is to get better parts which in some cases requires more wattage. And overclocking stuff rather than running it at stock is definitely going to increase power requirements.
 
The problem is when people get to the point where they get a 750W+ PSU for an APU build because "it's more future proof"
 
So "future-proofing" is often used in such a stupid way because people lack reasoning for it to be future proof they just say so probably because they heard it somewhere.
 
There is usually little to no price difference between from 450 to 650W units at least in the high-end but once they go 750W or above they're either spending significantly more money or giving up quality which is even worse. For what? 750W+ is a niche thing, you need to SLI/Xfire or run beast CPUs to take advantage of it.
 
It's easier to overestimate than underestimate.
 
Again, it's hard to go too low, there are not many good PSUs under 450W and even if there were some, many don't have enough connectors for what you need so you usually overestimate from the get-go. Why go higher when you already have plenty of room?
 
If they want more future proofing then they should a better quality PSU or buy better CPU/GPU as those age way faster.
 
Just think about it, if you need 750W or more you wouldn't want to risk such a rig with an entry-level PSU, even with a mid-range one. Efficiency would probably be important as well. As for the other one, if you can't afford that kind of hardware right now, what makes you think you soon will?
 
Even if you did, in fact, go with a massive upgrade to an HEDT build, don't you think you could also afford a PSU replacement in that case? For now focus on HAVING A GOOD PC now, not on having lots of W that do nothing for you.
 
 

Friend, my English is not very good, but according to what I understand of all that I must say the following.
a-You should not worry that your source today, is not what you need for the future, because in the end you should not have a PSU for more than 5 or 6 years no matter how good it is. The problem is that there are components that are degraded over time (for example the capacitors), therefore the operation or better said parameters that begin to change. Also the PSU is a critical component because it is a common factor for the whole system. My recommendation, do not wait for it to fail completely, change it working.
b-The increase in consumption I do not think is so aggressive, considering that the manufacturing processes will be smaller .. We are going for 10 or 7 nm.
c-In any case, the most aggressive systems for energy consumption are not those of the majority, but of the minority, those that generate TOP TOP configurations.
regards

I disagree with most of this.
The 2BB Fans are rather loud to annoying. So if you want it quiet, you need a high quality advanced sleeve bearing like an FDB or the friction less magnetic bearings.
 
And in the end, it is more important what the PSU was designed for and if "quiet operation" was in the spec sheed of the Contractee and the PSU is modified to be quiet(er) and has a modified fan controller...
 
And the 0 RPM mode can sometimes cause more harm than good. A CWT made SFX unit is proof of that (ie Enermax Revolution SFX and other similar things).

Your references for choosing a good PSU should come from professional tests and reviews. Currently the best PSU reviews can be found at TechPowerUP, Tom's Hardware and KitGuru. Watching for some real-life issues is important too, like in the case of Seasonic Focus Plus.

Exactly and thus every talk about "future proof" is fortune telling at best and bullshit at worst.
So why bother at all??
Because a Seasonic X-560 probably won't work well with modern systems either...
 
That is useless when the specification is reaching its limits and there are problems with ATX popping up left and right and better boards have additional connectors (PCIe usually) to circumvent that. 
 
So what is more probable:
a) that a 550W will not be enough for a decent mid range PC in the future
b) ATX will be scrapped and we will see something new/fresh with less pins and voltages (wich will make PSU a bit cheaper as well!)
 
I bet on b) because I see the limits and Problems of ATX, the burned ATX connectors that happen frequently...
 
What you also forget is that higher power consumption dramatically increases the cost of a system...
So if you do not think about the Chip and Memory of a graphics card, the difference between a 150W and a 250W Graphics card is enormous! Just look at the Heatsinks, that have to be more complicated, use either more heatpipes or a Vapor Chamber. More and higher quality voltage regulators. More capacitors. All that increases the cost.
Just look at a Radeon HD7850 or 7870 and compare that with a 7970(GHz).
 
Why are you ignoring the trends??
Why are you ignoring the facts about ATX?
The trends are that the big system integrators already scrapped ATX for some of their business machines and use single voltage Power Supplys. Some use a 5V Standby rail, some use a ~12V Standby Rail. And it is probable that this will switch to more and more systems. And move towards the higher end as well.
Maybe they will add a 5V for drives in higher end systems but there is no need for a 5V Rail to the Motherboard. It is only needed for Harddiscs.

There is no need for the 3,3V Rail anywhere. 
There is no need for the -12V (wich is why it will be removed next).
 
There is only a need for +12V and a Standby rail. The signs are already on the horizon.

And there are many people posting stuff about burned ATX Connectors because the +12V Connectors are overloaded and burned.
 
The facts are that ATX is a piece of shit for modern systems. It was made 22 years ago for what they thought made sense then! But it doesn't today.
 
And there were people talking about the Intel Design Guide version 1.4 wich require different supervisior ICs, maybe other changes as well...
 
And that will be here in 2 years. So your "moar watts = Future Proof" is already bullshit because it will not be. No PSU you can buy today will (probably)...
 
We ain't talking about imaginary, virtual things without any knowledge about that stuff.
We are talking about technical stuff. That are two different things.
 
And what you see is a fragmentation of the Market. Not all systems use ATX compatible PSU. Some Systems use +12V Only PSU. Some even totally break compatibility with 12V Standby Rail. 
 
So why are you ignoring those systems??
 
Highest end, totally overpriced card that is not interesting for the masses.
The cheapest 2080 is listed for 750€...
So should we argue with max. OC Power Consumption of a 2990WX??
Or should we argue with more mainstream components that are 300€ or less??
Your problem is that you focus only on power consumtion while ignoring other stuff that is happening right now. Like the burned ATX Connectors.
Like the Business Machines from Dell + HP that use a 12V Only PSU. Like the mentioned Intel Design Guide 1.4...
 
 
And I don't find it probable that the ATX connector will increase another 2-4 pins to add the really needed 12V Pins. I see that its more probable that it will be getten rid of and we will see something like we see on DELL and HP Boards with an 8-10pin connector with only 12V and the "Communication" stuff (power Good, PSU On)...
 

All the time I'll see people recommend PSUs based on efficiency. This, although fundamentally a good idea so that you don't end up with a stick and some chewing gum powering your system, shows that most do not understand what 80 PLUS efficiency implies. Let's get a couple myths out of the way:

- "A higher 80 PLUS rating correlates to better quality." Incorrect. Certain components in a PSU do need to be of a certain quality to achieve higher efficiency (typically MOSFETs and diodes), however, quality of soldering, certain capacitors, etc, can be forgone in achieving an exemplary 80 PLUS rating. Electrical performance can be ditched as well. I like to use the EVGA G1 as an example of this. It's made of above average componentry, performs lackingly, and achieves gold efficiency. Then there's the EVGA B2, which is constructed about as well, performs better electrically, and advertises 80 PLUS Bronze efficiency (it actually achieves 80 PLUS Silver efficiency but that standard has been given up by and large). The EVGA B2 is a better PSU than the G1, yet it wastes slightly more electricity. This will correlate to a marginally more expensive power bill (pennies on the dollar for most home users) but ensures you a better power supply for your money. If, however, you plan to run a very power-hungry system for several hours on end then a more efficient power supply can save a more noticeable amount of money, especially if used heavily during hours of the day where electricity is more expensive.
 
On another note: some brands will undersell their unit's rated wattage if it can achieve higher efficiency at lower loads, I.E. a brand may sell a 550W 80 PLUS Platinum rated unit that can actually output 600W+ but would have to be advertised at a lower efficiency rating if they were to sell it at that rated wattage.

- "Higher 80 PLUS efficiency keeps the PSU cooler." Not to any serious degree, but this is technically true. A less efficient PSU will waste more electricity and wasted electricity is turned into heat. This is not likely to have an appreciable impact on the temperature of your room or system however as your system doesn't really draw that much power, thus it's better to optimize your system's airflow before throwing an AX1500i in your system to minimize heat created by the power supply. Since PSUs exhaust heat anyways the temperature of your system's hardware will not be impacted to any noticeable degree. Different PSUs also handle cooling differently and 80 PLUS efficiency doesn't correlate to the size of the fan used or the heat-dissipation abilities of the unit.
 
- "Power supplies are most efficient at around 50% load." This is, by and large, untrue, and seems to be set in stone by many simply because the peak efficiency measured by Ecova's testing of just three load levels is at 50% always. Many manufacturers or reviewers test PSU efficiency at different loads and post charts online, if this matters to you, but many PSUs are more efficient at 60% load than 50% and many are more efficient towards 30%. Don't buy a PSU based on how efficient it will be with whatever hardware you have in it. Different topologies and different PSU platforms handle efficiency differently. This should be a non-issue and you should be looking at buying the best PSU you can get with your money.
 
- "If you have a 1000W PSU with an 80% efficiency then you are only going to be able to get 800W from your power supply." This is incorrect. If you have an 80% efficient 1000W PSU then, when putting it under enough load to max its output you are going to be drawing more power from the walls - not losing output from your power supply. In this instance, putting a 1000W PSU under max load with an 80% efficiency would mean you're drawing 1250 watts from the wall. Math goes as such:
                                                                                                X / Y= Z                  
                                                                                        1000W / .80 = 1250
                                                                                  1250W drawn from the wall

X represents the wattage you're using (say 350W with a Ryzen 7 3700X and RTX 2080 Super under 100% system load), Y represents the efficiency in decimals (an 85% efficient PSU would be .85), and Z represents your total system draw from the wall. For this calculation we're assuming that the PSU in question has exactly enough wattage to power the system at 100% load and is 87% efficient at 100% draw, making it an 80+ Gold efficient power supply.


So in our case with the 3700X and 2080 Super:
                                                                                               350 / .87
                                                                      = 402 watts drawn from your power outlet
 
Note, however, that efficiency is not consistent throughout the load of the power supply.

Power supplies are more and less efficient at different loads. They are also more efficient when connected to a more powerful grid, the 230V nominal, which you may use if you don't live in North America. Check that your PSU allows for operation under both voltages. Most modern ones switch operation automatically. Other, often older units, will have a hard switch at the back of the unit to switch to choose from either 115V or 230V (note, DO NOT SWITCH TO THE ONE THAT DOESN'T MATCH THE ELECTRICAL OUTPUT OF YOUR WALL OUTLET! This doesn't usually end well!). This graph demonstrates the efficiency curve of a 2011-era Corsair TX750 when plugged into a 115V AC versus being plugged into a 230V AC. Note the TX750 is an 80+ Bronze rated PSU.
                
                                      
 

If you live in the United States, for example, you are using a 110-120V (115 nominal) AC through a standard NEMA 5-15 socket. Your power supply may be more or less efficient than your manufacturer claims because they may advertise efficiency through a 230V AC, though standard 80 PLUS efficiency testing is done on a 115V AC. Note that these tests for efficiency are also done under very specific test environments and do not necessarily reflect real-world scenarios so you may achieve higher or lower efficiency than rated by the manufacturer.

And just to finish up let's go list the various 80 PLUS ratings and their efficiency at different power draws on a 115V and 230V AC as well as 230V AC redundant.
                                                                               
 
                                                                          
Note that Silver isn't really used anymore and the efficiency of a PSU that would achieve Silver certification would typically just be rounded up or down to Bronze or Gold. "230V internal redundant" refers to efficiency in a redundant scenario like in a data center. This guy from Dell explains it.
 
One last thing I want to make a little more hard-hitting here. 80 PLUS efficiency ratings were invented to save corporations and industrial services money in the long-term, not home users! A company with 1000 computers all consuming 100W for 10 hours a day will see a much greater benefit from having all 80 PLUS Titanium units in their systems than you likely would with your system. Don't spend tons of money trying to get a super efficient PSU when a PSU that's just as good, costs less, and achieves a tier lower 80 PLUS rating is drastically cheaper. 
 
Resources:
Ecova (formerly Ecos), the 80 PLUS certification founder (and located very near me in Portland!)
Wikipedia - There's more info here if you want to go down the Wikipedia rabbit hole
Plug Load Solutions - A list of all PSU companies and how many different PSUs they have that achieve Ecova's various 80 PLUS standards.

Okay, so watching the 5820K vs 6700K showdown video on Vessel, I came across a common misconception about the PCIe lanes on Skylake and Haswell-E unfortunately being perpetuated by @Slick.
 
The Core i7-6700K, and all the other Skylake CPUs, offers 16 PCIe 3.0 lanes. The chipset offers additional PCIe lanes separately from that. For the Z170 chipset, that's 20 PCIe 3.0 lanes, a huge boost over Z97 which had just 8 PCIe 2.0 lanes. Luke was just saying 20 lanes, which is not really correct; there is a kernel of truth to it though, because while the chipset offers all those lanes, it's still only connected to the CPU by a DMI 3.0 link that's equivalent to 4 lanes of PCIe 3.0 (in addition to the 16 lanes directly from the CPU). Still, you can hook up lots of PCIe 3.0 SSDs to the chipset just fine without affecting lanes for the GPU(s). Just don't expect RAID0 to give you like 10GB/s combined bandwidth.
 
As for the Core i7-5820K, it offers the well-known 28 PCIe 3.0 lanes directly from the CPU. But again, the chipset offers additional PCIe lanes. In this case, X99 is far inferior to Z170, because it only offers 8 PCIe 2.0 lanes (just like Z97).
 
Here are the block diagrams showing what I explained above:
 
 
Do note that the lower-end chipsets, eg. H110, cut down on the PCIe connectivity on offer.