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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


This user doesn't have any awards

1 Follower

About pstarlord

  • Title

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Music Production, Gaming
  • Occupation


  • CPU
    Ryzen 1700X
  • Motherboard
    MSI X370 Gaming Pro Carbon
  • RAM
    16 Gigs G.Skills Trident Z RGB 3600
  • GPU
    Sapphire Nitro+ Vega 56
  • Case
    NZXT H500i
  • Storage
    WD Blue M.2 1tb SSD
  • PSU
    EVGA Super Nova 750 G3
  • Display(s)
    MSI Optix MAG27C
  • Cooling
    NZXT Kraken X62
  • Keyboard
  • Mouse
    Razer DeathAdder
  • Sound
    Shure SRH440 Headphones
  • Operating System
    Windows 10

Recent Profile Visitors

262 profile views
  1. pstarlord

    Wattman resets after crash

    When your PC crashes, as a fail safe, Wattman will reset to default. Just save your profile, so you can simply reload in the event of a crash.
  2. pstarlord

    Trading cores for Mhz?

    Well, I guess you might as well just buy them and try it out. It's really a no lose situation. If you like it, then great. If you don't, then sell them and break even.
  3. pstarlord

    2013 razer 14 motherboard upgrade

    The big question would be, where would you get the new Razer mobo to use? Its not like Razer will just sell you one. After that, the short answer is no you cannot. There are a number of reasons why, some include simple stuff like the i/o ports are probably not in the exact same spots, so you'd probably have to modify the chassis of the laptop. Same with the connections to the monitor. Laptop motherboards aren't the same "simple" or standardized beast as a desktop mobo, the confined space and proprietary design of the different laptops makes a bunch of other problems to face.
  4. pstarlord

    Trading cores for Mhz?

    I'm sure someone here will be able to answer you questing with more technical accuracy than I will, but hopefully my general information will help. And the answer is...it depends. haha. To my knowledge, there are not many games that utilize more than 6 cores, and even fewer that utilize hyperthreading. But, it is becoming more common. A broad stroke answer is that fewer cores, and more raw core speed will be better for gaming. This is why many people will save some cash and buy an unlocked i5 CPU without hyperthreading, but a faster core speed for gaming. Here's my biggest question for you, what is your motivation behind this change? Right now, you've got a solid workstation PC, cutting the core/thread count down that much will most likely have a very negative effect on the work station aspects of your machine. If you're wanting to continue to use that machine as a workstation, I'd say just buy a light gaming PC instead or changing out the components of your current PC. If you're doing light gaming, and aren't going to get caught up in the FPS race, or benchmarking and all that stuff, then for just a bit more than the cost of buying two CPU's for your current build, you could have a decent gaming PC. (that is, if you're planning on buying your CPU's new) If you're planning on buying the CPU's used, then it wouldn't be much of an investment, and if you end up not liking the result you could turn around and sell them for about the same price you bought them for.
  5. pstarlord

    ryzen 2600 vs 1700x

    When I was building my last machine, it was right when the rumors of Third Gen Ryzen were starting to surface. I bought at 1700x as a "place holder" until the next gen comes out. Found a fantastic deal on it. I've been running a 1700x since mid November, and it has worked great for everything I've thrown at it. I use a Vega 56 GPU with it, and I haven't had a bottle neck or any other sort of issue with the system. Plays every game I've thrown at it 1440p ultra settings, and rarely drops below 90 fps. I mainly play RPG, Horror style games. Rise of and Shadow of the Tomb Raider each play between 90 - 100 FPS. On Shadow of Tomb Raider, it can dip into the high 70s when going through really crowded areas full of NPCs. Evil Within II, Resident Evil 2 Remake both run in the same FPS range. Nier Automata, even in very dense fights it has no issue. So, even though I bought it as a "place holder" it's been doing great. So much that a buddy of mine mirrored my build for his latest one, and he's not even going to upgrade his CPU. For reference sake, I keep my 1700x overclocked at 3.9Ghz on all cores at stock voltage. It'll go up to 4.1Ghz with the voltage cranked, but the minimal in game difference isn't worth it to me.
  6. pstarlord

    New Ryzen generation 3

    To my knowledge, the upcoming generation of Ryzen should work on all AM4 mobo. Work, and perform optimally are two different things, but it should work.
  7. pstarlord

    1440p Monitor Suggestions

    @ThisIsCheez thanks for the suggestion! For an extra $9, is there a reason not to get the 32"?
  8. pstarlord

    1440p Monitor Suggestions

    I currently have a 144Hz 1080p 27" monitor, and it's fine. My Vega 56 and 1700x have no problem pushing pretty much any game I play to 100ish FPS. I had planned on buying a Radeon VII card, but decided not to after reviews and the fact that they are sold out. haha. (I know it wouldn't make ideal sense to buy that card for 1080p monitor, so of course I had planned on upgrading my monitor anyway, the release time and budgeted funds just dictated the RVII would be purchased first.) With me missing out on the RVII, that leaves a bit of cash set aside for a monitor. Here's the basics of my system: *1700x - OC'd to 3.9Ghz *Sapphire Nitro+ Vega 56 (As implied, I will probably be upgrading my GPU to something the level of the RVII or 2080) *16 Gigs RAM *I play a variety of games, mostly RPG and Stealth style first or third person games. (Resident Evil 2, Tomb Raider, Witcher III, that kind of thing) *Current monitor is an MSI MAG27C - 27" Curved, 1ms response time, 144hz, 1080p, LED panel. Here's what I'm hoping to find to fit a $400 (ish) budget. *27" - 31" Panel - Curved or Straight *1440p No need for ultra wide *100+ Refresh rate: Obviously, higher the better *Adaptive Sync: My current monitor is Freesync, I'd rather not pay the premium for G Sync. If I do end up going for a 2080, I'd want the monitor to be FreeSync compatible with the 2080 As always, thank you very much in advance!
  9. pstarlord

    Share your thoughts on the Radeon VII launch

    To my understanding, and someone please correct me if I'm wrong, It's because of the HBM2 VRAM they use. In order to get 16 Gigs of HBM2, it's 4 chiplets on the dye. With Vega 56 and 64, the GPU portion of the dye took up more room, only leaving space for two HBM2 chiplets on the dye, with the 7nm GPU on the RVII it double the space for the HBM2. In order to get that many of DDR5, you'd have to put RAM chips all over the PCB. HBM2 is more expensive, but its much more efficient so you can fit more of it into smaller spaces. Look at a PCB tear down of the two different styles, Nvidia cards have RAM chips littering their PCB, Vega does not. Now, this is cool, but it also centralizes the heat and is one of the main reasons that AMD cards run a bit hotter.
  10. pstarlord

    Share your thoughts on the Radeon VII launch

    I'm too new to the whole GPU world to have a preference to either the Red or Green team. I've only owned AMD cards (580 and Vega 56) simply because of the value of the overall package when freesync was strictly an AMD thing. That being said, as I find that the more I learn about each company, I do feel like AMD is the lesser of two evils in terms of their business practices and philosophies. So I do find myself rooting for them to do well. I had planned on buying a Radeon VII, as I said a handful of times here, but I wanted to wait until the reviews were out...as it turns out the cards were gone before I could even watch the reviews. haha. So, I'll stick with my Vega 56 for now. As for the overall release, I think they got WAY too caught up in the "VII" of it all. Vega II, 7nm, releasing it on the 7th day of the 2nd month...etc. While I do appreciate interesting things like that, I'd preferred they pushed the launch date back a bit until the drivers could have been done right. Of the reviews I watched, they all said their test drivers were not good, Jay did happen to get them to send over a beta version of some new drivers that gave him a much better experience. AMD should know that first impressions last a lifetime. I mean, how many people still think that the RTX2080TI will break on them for no reason, even though that problem has essentially been fixed? We already knew that RVII was essentially a stop gap card until NAVI, this shouldn't surprise anyone, but now it'll go down as being one of the bigger "flops" in the GPU world because a vast majority of people who will never have will only see the initial reviews and think it was a rip off. It's not new for a tech company to release something that's not 100% ready, it happens all the time. But, when you are AMD, and you are already the underdog, you cannot afford press like this. Anyway, if they do come available again, I might pick one up if they properly fix the drivers. There was a bunch of rumblings about AMD only doing one batch or something, I dunno. It would be a bummer if they didn't at least give it some time to mature a bit.
  11. I think you see that in more than just the GPU market, but across the tech landscape in general.
  12. pstarlord

    Best Vega 56 variants

    Sapphire Nitro+ or the Asus Strix are the two best.
  13. pstarlord

    Vega 64 fan going insane despite consistent temperatures

    Yeah, you could try using a 3rd party piece of software for that, like Afterburner. If that doesn't help, you might have a faulty card somehow.
  14. pstarlord

    Amd radeon VII

    I know I'm getting in pretty late to the party on this, but here's my general thought on the RVII. 1-Vega cards are built like tanks. Just watching GN videos on the Vega 56 and 64 they constantly talk about how overbuilt the VRMs and other components are, making it great for overclocking. Personally, I like that. There is a reason that for quite a long time, Steve at GN and many other people pointed to the Vega 56 as one of the best options because of how far it could be overclocked. If the RVII has anywhere near the overclock-ability of the other Vega cards, then it should be able to be taken closer to the 2080TI. I doubt it'll be able to beat the 2080TI, but even if it's like...90% of what the 2080TI is at half the price, I think it's a great option. 2-I read that AMD will be exclusively selling the RVII. Third party manufacturers will not making their variants, so the FE is THE model. I think this could end up being great for consumers if the stock cooling solution works well. Just think about all the 3rd party cards, and their insane prices. There are third party 2080TI cards selling for like $1800, and 2080 cards selling for $1500 on newegg right now. The most expensive Vega 64 sells for under $800. (I'm not at all comparing the performance of a V64 to a 2080 series card, its just the top pricing of current models from both companies.) If the MSRP of the RVII is accurate, and that's what it stays at, then you'll be getting the best option available for like 1/3 of the price of the top end Nvidia card. Everyone always talks about launch price MSRP of the FE cards from Nvidia, but a majority of the systems with 2000 series Nvidia cards I see are not founders editions, so people are paying much more for them than MSRP. 3-I was playing Resident Evil II Remake the other day, and in the settings it tells you how much RAM will potentially be used depending on the settings you chose, and its' pretty easy to get it pushed to the high 6G close to 7G of RAM. 16G is obviously a TON of RAM, but many people, Linus included, have been saying that games will very quickly be passing the 8G threshold of required RAM, and if RE2 is any indication of how close games are getting then I'd be inclined to believe him. While, a typical gamer will probably never need 16Gigs, it's nice to have more than not enough IMO. 4-I don't think it's a false statement to say that many people building their systems on AMD platforms are typically going for a price to performance kind of build. So, getting a card that can potentially sit in the top 2 or 3 overall of available cards, at a price 1/2 the price of the top consumer card...that sounds really appealing. At a certain point, it'll probably come down to brand loyalty on if someone prefers the RVII or a 2080 because it seems like they are going to perform pretty similar at a similar price. 5-The whole "it doesn't have Ray Tracing" thing is annoying. Ray Tracing isn't used by a vaaaast majority of people with RTX cards, and isn't implemented in very many games to even use it on. The counter to that is always, that AMD is using HBM2 RAM, hiking up the cost. The way I see it, with both products you're overpaying for tech, at least in the AMD card you overpaying for tech that you'll actually use. I'd rather overpay for 16 Gigs of HBM2 RAM, than overpay for a tech that I won't even turn on. When the 11 series Nvidia cards start coming it, it may change the story, but until then, that's how it is for me anyway. 6-I am a little bit concerned by reports I've read that AMD will only be making quite a limited amount of the RVII and that it's essentially a stop gap product until Navi is ready to launch either later this year or early 2020. That does make it seem like the RVII might not have been completely thought out, and is pretty much just a way to show the simple improvement they can get just by switching to the 7nm manufacturing. All that being said, right now, its a hurry up and wait situation. I'm waiting for the review videos to come out, and then I'll decide if I get one or not.
  15. For your build, I'd say 8GB is fine honestly. Of course, more is always better, but the other components in your system will prevent you from gaming on 1080p highest settings anyway, so you don't have to worry.