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

drumn_bass

Member
  • Content Count

    41
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Awards


This user doesn't have any awards

About drumn_bass

  • Title
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. They will likely just keep selling 3000 series parts to the lower end market.
  2. A lot of people are suggesting that once the 5000 series starts shipping, prices for the 3000 will fall, and it's a reasonable prediction, but I wouldn't be so sure. Looks at what's going on with RTX 2080 and 2080Ti pricing right now. Used cards sell for as much if not more than the RTX 3080 MSRP. The new Ryzen's are not cheap, and looks like there will no 5700x, so personally, I don't think we will see any fire sales on the 3700x parts anytime soon. If you see a good deal now, I'd say go for it!
  3. So looks like there will not be a 5700x, right? I guess it makes sense since most reviews shower that the difference between 3700x and 3800x was only about 2-3% in performance, so if they decided to simplify and just keep one successor, the one with a higher number just looks better on the store shelf. 5800x.
  4. @Nena Trinity I don't think my board has the Fast Boot setting, I couldn't find it (and apparently it's a thing with AM4 MSI boards, based on many users confused and upset about it), but while searching for info on this, I also found something from someone on Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/MSI_Gaming/comments/dcxku1/no_fastboot_with_msi_x570_a_pro/ "Well, According to MSI, boot times of 20 seconds are totally normal, go figure '' The boot time is related to the devices you installed, such as the CPU, GPU and SSD. Also the boot time for AM4 is a little long. We will continue to update BIOS for better performance. You can try later BIOS on MSI website. Thanks and sorry for the inconvenience caused you! ''" So, an interesting statement from MSI support which appears to once again point to the "it's just how it is with MSI" conclusion:( And I just double-checked, I do have the latest BIOS available for my board (MSI B550 Gaming Plus)
  5. @Nena Trinity I hear you, I was expecting it to be super fast, but so far it's looking like it's just how my motherboards works, and I'm not going to look for another and rebuild my system over few seconds of boot time which I only have to deal with once a day.
  6. Looking at MSI's support page, there was a new BIOS update every month so far for this board, with two updates in August. I guess I'll need to get used to that, and re applying all my BIOS settings after each one.
  7. @Syn Nice find. If it's normal for this motherboard, I'm fine with it, it's not that big of a deal. What are those AGESA versions? Is it something that just gets updated with BIOS updates? Do you have a link to those MSI results you found?
  8. The CSM was gray/disabled, UEFI was white, so enabled. I believe the setting is to switch between the two, it looks like attached image (from the manual), which the manual says I want to see.
  9. @Hymenopus_Coronatus Yeah man, the first boot took about a minute I'm guessing, I was freaking out thinking it wasn't gonna post, but it did. Just took a very long time. Makes me wonder if it just gets better over time?
  10. @HelpfulTechWizard Oh good question, sorry about that. Yes, the latest BIOS update from MSI Support page, and mist likely irrelevant, but also the latest chipset drivers.
  11. Hi guys, so I just built a new system after about 6.5 years with i7 4770K. In the past, I didn't think much about boot times, but the Intel system on Z87 based Asus mobo would post in just a couple of second, and probably boot to log in screen in under another 10... Now on this new Ryzen 7 build, it takes over 20 seconds for it to post! Then a couple of seconds on the Bios splash screen, and only about 5 seconds to actually book into Windows, but that makes it an overall around 30 second from the press of a power button to Windows log in screen. Kind of disappointing to be honest. Other than that, everything works great so far. My specs are: -Ryzen 7 3700X -MSI B550 Gaming Plus -EVGA GTX 1070 (something to upgrade at a later date, good enough for now) -GPU rizer card (maybe relevant, idk, I hear there are some issues with PCIe 4 and rizer cards) -Samsung 970 Evo+ M.2 boot drive (but there are 3 other 2.5" SSDs, 3 internal and 2 external HHDs connected to the system, I'm a digital horder) -EVGA 1000W 80+ Gold PSU -Ballistix 32GB 3200MHz RAM -Windows 10 Pro (probably not relevant as it boots very quickly, it's the post time that's slow) BIOS mode is set to UEFI, and the manual states that UEFI can boot directly into OS and save the BIOS self test (whatever the "safe" means?). I searched the forums here and found a couple of threads, some good suggestions, but no real solutions. Also, there are of course many people that don't have these issues at all, but there are a bunch of posts on Reddit from Ryzen users that report the same ~30 second boot time with most of it being a slow post. Some people say it's just how it is with AMD platform, while others claim their systems boot in 3-4 second total (?). There seem to be a lot of reports of this behavior on MSI boards (X570, B450, B550), but not just MSI, Gigabyte too, and maybe others as well. My motherboard has post LEDs that show that it takes about 10 seconds for it to go past the CPU, then instantly posses RAM and another 12 seconds or so to get through the GPU and finally it goes into OS boot. The LEDs are CPU-DRAM-VGA-BOOT. So this sequence takes 22-23 seconds, then another 5-6 seconds for the OS. Is this in fact common with AMD based systems vs Intel? Something to worry about? Going with AMD saved me about $100 over i7 10700K, but with this slow post thing, and all the reports of the possibility of issues with a rizer card, it makes me wonder if the savings were really worth it:/ And if I should expect more issues. I waited for a while to build an AMD system, and assumed by now all the issues and quarks were sorted out for the most part. P.S. If slower boot times are not an indicator of an issue, and maybe it's just my board or whatever, it's not really a deal breaker, as I usually only boot once a day in the morning, so I wouldn't be too worried about extra 20 seconds it takes. This guy's system behaves similarly, even worse than mine actually, but to give an idea, yeah it just feel like it's sitting there doing nothing, but the on board LEDs are cycling through.
  12. @antnyhills I'm looking at this board as well. From some video that I saw it looks like there are 4 SATA ports on it, is it correct? IDK if I'm one of only few to fill up my case with drives, and have 6 SATA ports in use. It won't be a deal breaker, I don't think, it's just hard to find a spec on this for some reason. Are all the SATA ports the same or is the orange one different from the rest? And for the debug led... does it show anything when the computer runs normally (with no error codes obviously)? CPU temps?
  13. Thanks again guys! After test driving the Countryman S All4 it's clear that the base model is not an option. I get all the opinions about the reliability and high repair cost, but she really likes Minis now, so I might be in trouble:) We're still looking at other options thought, for now. The second option I originally posted has been sold, so the link is probably now dead. I get the general idea, it's best to try to find something with less mileage with Minis for sure. There is another option, a 2014 Countryman S All4 with 44K miles. Around the same price. It's kind of in the middle, more power and all-wheel drive, a bit older but with over 20K less miles (vs the 2016 from the original post). I think something like that would probably be our best option.
  14. All great advices, thanks guys! We went and drove the first, low mileage one. She likes it, but IMO it is under powered... still, doesn't seem to be an issue for her. It is in a great shape, especially the interior, which feels brand new. On the outside, there are just a couple of slightly faded plastic trim parts, and a Mini logo on the back is flaking off, but no dents or scratches. I will do a bit more research on the reliability aspect, I know we can't expect a Toyota or Honda quality with a Mini, but we will need to decide if we're ready to deal with any potential issues (meaning me, I will have to deal with that). I wonder how self serviceable they are. Can I do an oil change, replace filters, breaks by myself? I believe BMW makes servicing their cars really hard, so is it a similar situation with Mini?
  15. Hi guys, I'm trying to help my mother pick a new car. She likes a Mini Cooper Countryman. We're looking at used cars and have two on our radar (haven't seen them in person yet). The issue is, while pricing to her is about the same, about $1500 difference but both within her budget, one is a couple of years older with fewer options but very low miles, a little over 21K, while the other option is 2 years newer (but still the same generation), has a more powerful engine, all wheel drive, a little bit better equipment (but both are well equipped), a face lift (but this probably means nothing to her), and almost 67K miles. Car 1 (autotrader link) Car 2 (autotrader link) Hoping to get some opinions. What would you likely prefer: A newer car with better features but relatively high mileage for its age, or an older and simpler model but with low miles, for less money. Keep in mind, it's not for me, a 34 y.o. dude, it's for my mother, so try to put yourself in my shoes. An older woman doesn't need "cool" or "powerful", so engine differences, color and body kit aside, let's say that's where the price difference comes from, simply mechanically speaking, would you go for older car with fewer miles or newer car with more?
×