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


About Plutosaurus

  • Title

Contact Methods

  • Star Citizen

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Computers, Video Games, Memes
  • Occupation
    Cubicle Crusader


  • CPU
    Intel i7-8700k 5.0ghz Delidded @ 1.355v
  • Motherboard
    Gigabyte Aorus Z370 Gaming 5
  • RAM
    16GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4 3200
  • GPU
    Sapphire Vega 64 Reference UV/OC 1677/1050
  • Case
    NZXT S340 White
  • Storage
    1TB Intel 660P, 120GB PNY CS900, 480GB PNY CS1311, 1TB Hitachi
  • PSU
    Seasonic Focus Plus Gold 850W
  • Display(s)
    ASUS VG248QE 1080p/144 + ASUS VG245H 1080P/75
  • Cooling
    Cryroig H7 Quad Lumi
  • Keyboard
    Eagletec KG010
  • Mouse
    Logitech G502

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. The more interested ones as the Ryzen 5 1600s that show up as 8/16s
  2. that sounds like its all one channel......i think your motherboard is broken
  3. Try resetting BIOS to default before installing the memory?
  4. That's better. With a 2060S you could just use NVENC for streaming, which doesn't use the CPU. There are a lot of benchmarks out there using the 2080ti to remove the gpu limitations to test all three generations of Ryzen. In those cases yes there will be a rather large gulf in performance especially at 1080p, but at 1440p it starts to equalize, and at 4k, it's pretty much gone. It's likely the 2060S will top out in 1440p, and reflect similar utilization and limitations as the 2080ti at 4k. I would probably wait for the 2060S to come in and see how it performs. Check the utilization and see if a CPU upgrade would even help. IMO, upgrading from a 1600 to a 3600 to get more fps on a 2060S on a 1440p display isn't going to help as much as you think it will. If you were on a 1080p/144+ display, I would feel different. At 1440p, there will be gains in minimum FPS, but you may not notice it and it's unlikely to be large changes in average framerate. If I were you, with only 100gb free on your SSD, a larger SSD would be more helpful impact on your gaming experience than a cpu upgrade. Or if you are not overclocked, spend money on a good cooler (that you can reuse later) and try to get your 1600 to 4ghz.
  5. Because in many circumstances, of you are gaming, you won't notice. Are you using a 60hz display? Won't notice. Better to spend money on a better display. Using an RX 570? Won't matter. Using a mechanical drive? Better to spend on ssd. There's lots of reasons to get more information.
  6. Update to latest bios Make sure ram in correct slots per manual If not disable xmp and input speed and timings manually and try again
  7. But why? Missing too much information to know if this would even help. In all likelihood dude is better off spending the $200 on an SSD, or saving it for a new GPU etc.
  8. The more voltage and heat and current you pass through your chip the faster it degrades. Instead of lasting 20 years at stock, it might only last 16 at 1.44. Or it could fail sooner. It might fail anyway. Too hard to tell, but one thing to consider is that monitoring software and sensors don't always measure the voltage right. It could be way more than 1.44. Or less, or accurate. I personally don't think it's worth worrying over. All likelihood it will outlast it's usefulness. Just put some airflow over your VRM on the motherboard, especially since you're using an AIO.
  9. 1440p, 2070....you won't really notice a difference between the 2600 and most of the other chips. Unless it's stock settings, at which point it's because the stock boost on the 65w 2600 sucks. OC to 4ghz+ and it should be fine. Just like the 2600x.
  10. WoW used to be notorious for not giving a shit past 2-3 threads. Meant it ran like shit on anything but a highly clocked Intel. Recently with Ryzen launch after like 13 fuckin years, they updated it and now it's much better. It can now really take a lot more advantage of resources. Still not perfect but, I'll take it.
  11. The good news though is that no matter how bad the next chips are, our current minimum level of graphics realism/immersion is already so good that even if it takes a few years to get some big gains, it won't really be that bad. And it's likely that in terms of gaming, hardware gpu level RTRT will be the next big thing and won't really care about CPUs anyway. If the market mainstream are potent 6/12s, game developers already have way more resources to work with than they ever had.
  12. Except even with the CB single core score, the 8700k+ still beats the 3900x at most games. It's not just straight synthetic benchmarks, there are other factors. Unless you are doing something specifically that requires more cores there's absolutely no reason to upgrade from an 8086k. At all. Your gaming experience will be worse or unchanged by going to a 3900x.
  13. And the 9900k is proof that the process still works. It's not a huge stride forward for them conpared to themselves, but remember, it took until 2017 for AMD to catch up to Haswell, and only now with 3000 series has AMD actually caught up in single threaded performance to Coffeelake. The problem with present Intel isn't their node but their product segmentation and prices. We can sit on 14+++ for another year as long as the options are competitive. If 10nm isn't working out as planned, it is better to go with what they know works than put out a bad product. AMD did that, and they are never truly going to love it down. People will never forget FX, no matter how many Ryzen 3000s AMD has. Hopefully 10th gen will have compelling configurations and prices , and they come out swinging in 2021 with 7nm. And hopefully AMD keeps churning out refinements on Zen. Maybe in another 5 years they'll be on Zen3+++ and it will still be amazing. And that's fine.