Neutraliz

i mean... dont you think a video or audio recording would help? we're just left guessing here otherwise. 
 
*if* its the your psu, you maybe could have the fans running constantly (if it has that feature) as it might alleviate this noise... not ideal, but other than that there's nothing you can do about it, *if its the psu, be it coilwhine ,or something else".

Yes
 
It depends of certain factors, but for most users, it's not a massive difference.
 
I can't really see the link here ? Dual channel memory is a perfectly normal and standard thing.
 
Yes



I would just add that you might want to try to find the exact same sticks you already have and buy the same reference. It's not a massive deal if you can't find it, but matching memory sticks avoid some headaches/instabilites that can happen.  

99.99% its your ram, just try some none corsair that are on the qvl.
 
 
Vengeance + Ryzen is never a good fit and a known issue, tbh
 

Most likely ram timings. Your new gpu is pushing your cpu/ram harder. That Corsair lpx is the most issue prone ram with Ryzen.
 
bump up the voltage / loosen the timings / drop the speed and see if the issue goes away.

7800XT would be a better value.
It's constantly slightly faster than the 4070 in rasterised scenario, while being a bit cheaper and offering you extra vram. (12 for RTX vs. 16 for the RX)
 
 

Saying that, AMD Radeon remain slower in raytracing performance, doesn't have a direct competition of AI reconstructive upscalers like DLSS (No, FSR isn't a direct competitor. That's why it's also effective.), and the H264 encoder is subpar. (Althought in AV1, they are virtually the same vs. NVIDIA) If any of thoses things is important to you, the 4070 isn't a terrible choice either. 

7800XT
 
has better traditional rendering performance
has more vram
is cheaper
FSR is almost as good as DLSS (and getting better fast)
raytracing performance is only slightly worse

(Just don't pay extra for OC versions of these cards)

I forgot to update this thread. After a little bit of prodding around and shutting down random programs one day, I realized it was Elgato Camera Hub that is causing the problem.

I re-tested it and ran my system for 7 days. I was able to consistently see the entire system rise in CPU usage (as if it's throttling), and then as soon as I close Camera Hub, it goes from 10-20% idle down to 4-6% idle. I was able to reproduce it a few times now in various tests.

I will file a bug report with Elgato at some point.

With the fix, here is what the Task Manager looks like after 6 days. Usually at this point, the CPU experiences 25-40% idle where all progarms on the entire system are all using more CPU. It was insane finding this out and seeing my CPU finally come back to normal ever since I got this webcam over a year ago.

Open resource monitor or/and process lasso, and see what's using your CPU that much. Could be a service maybe ? 

Not worth it in my opinion, barely no uplift over the 6800XT, if not slower in some occasions. It's more like, a new positionning in the market vs. nvidia, and some features here and there.
 
 

It's a good card, but only for people looking for a new build or upgrading older cards (like RTX 10 series/20 series / RX 5000 series / RX Vega...). 
Keep your money for newer generations in the future with an actual uplift in performance. Your 6800XT gonna keep banging for few years. 

and or you could see it as

paying 80$ for a card that isn't much better and replaces an already known working card , however you want to see it is up to you. for me consistency is more valuable than 80$

Ultimately, they are two different ranges and two different price class. 
You have to make a choice based on your budget and performance target at this point.

In my strict opinion, you'll be fine with a 7800XT looking at what you want to do with it. And it's a good value.

VEGA 64 should be fine with a 2700X. 
I had my GTX 1080 (which is about the same level of performance as V.64) with a Ryzen 5 2600 (so same generation, IPC and gaming performance as the 2700X), then a Ryzen 5 3600. Virtually the same performance. I was totally GPU bound at 1440p.  
And Radeon tend to do better with weaker CPUs. So it's even more unlikely you'd be CPU bound with your V.64. 

VEGA 64 should be fine with a 2700X. 
I had my GTX 1080 (which is about the same level of performance as V.64) with a Ryzen 5 2600 (so same generation, IPC and gaming performance as the 2700X), then a Ryzen 5 3600. Virtually the same performance. I was totally GPU bound at 1440p.  
And Radeon tend to do better with weaker CPUs. So it's even more unlikely you'd be CPU bound with your V.64. 

No lol, that is most likely thermal paste/pads on the VRAMs.

Hi.

Did you upgrade some hardware within the same installation of windows ? If yes, what ?
Did you ever tried DDU ?
Do you have any bluescreens ?
Does your pc ever struggle to boot ?
What about temps on the CPU ? (CPU cooler seems way off for a 9900k)
Tried to update bios ?

I'm french. And thoses guys are absolute clowns. 
I'm just not surprised. 

- They talk about bottlenecks calculators... Which are mostly bs.
- They claim the 4500 is much more powerfull than the 3600X : Which is just not true. Both are still Zen 2.
- They don't precise the 5500 is mostly a 5600G without IGP, monolithic, and are both Zen 3 but the cache is cutted in half vs. the 5600/5600X. And that influence performance. Then they claim you can paire it with a 4070Ti max, which is insane. And they're then goes back to the fact that the 4500 has more frequency, so they prefer the 4500... Which can't be compared, because Zen 2 vs. Zen 3, not the same IPC. But at this point, you get it, they are a lost cause.
- They talk about how "not future proof" DDR4 is when presenting the 5700X...   
- They claim the 13400F overall performance is equavlent to the 5700X : Which is just not true at all.
- They claim the 13600KF "doesn't heat up too much", when this CPU litterally consumes about 120-130w, which is the same as my 5950X. 
- They claim the 7600X has "the same number of cores" as the 13600KF. Which is excluding e-cores completly at this point. 

I just can't be arsed. The whole french pc hardware media on youtube is plagued of thoses clowns. They are unfortunatly not alone, and most of them are actually pretty big youtubers. Which is : Sad, at this point.  
Avoid french youtubers at all cost as a whole for pc hardware recommandations.  
Please consider real medias, like Gamer Nexus or Hardware Unboxed.

Can confirm. I speak French as a second language, and I was shocked by these claims.
 
But it's even worse than I think you realized: The Ryzen 5 4500 is actually closer to the Ryzen 5 2600 for gaming, it's not even on the level of the 3600X. This is because while the cores are Zen 2, they have half the L3 cache of the Ryzen 5 3600(X), which really hurts the gaming performance.
 
I had been using French hardware channels to help me learn French about two years ago, and I noticed that problem with the ones I found - their advice tends to be terrible. So I stopped watching them.
 
C'est triste.

I'm french. And thoses guys are absolute clowns. 
I'm just not surprised. 

- They talk about bottlenecks calculators... Which are mostly bs.
- They claim the 4500 is much more powerfull than the 3600X : Which is just not true. Both are still Zen 2.
- They don't precise the 5500 is mostly a 5600G without IGP, monolithic, and are both Zen 3 but the cache is cutted in half vs. the 5600/5600X. And that influence performance. Then they claim you can paire it with a 4070Ti max, which is insane. And they're then goes back to the fact that the 4500 has more frequency, so they prefer the 4500... Which can't be compared, because Zen 2 vs. Zen 3, not the same IPC. But at this point, you get it, they are a lost cause.
- They talk about how "not future proof" DDR4 is when presenting the 5700X...   
- They claim the 13400F overall performance is equavlent to the 5700X : Which is just not true at all.
- They claim the 13600KF "doesn't heat up too much", when this CPU litterally consumes about 120-130w, which is the same as my 5950X. 
- They claim the 7600X has "the same number of cores" as the 13600KF. Which is excluding e-cores completly at this point. 

I just can't be arsed. The whole french pc hardware media on youtube is plagued of thoses clowns. They are unfortunatly not alone, and most of them are actually pretty big youtubers. Which is : Sad, at this point.  
Avoid french youtubers at all cost as a whole for pc hardware recommandations.  
Please consider real medias, like Gamer Nexus or Hardware Unboxed.

Warzone is quite CPU intensive and benefits a lot from the extra cache on the Ryzen X3D CPUs and also runs considerably better on AMD graphics cards. 

Calculators aren't reliable. UserBenchmark can be used to compare performance, but those results are often skewed towards higher performance as a baseline because so many people overclock.
 
An 8600K would only give you a minor frequency increase and overclocking support, it wouldn't be good for much beyond that. If you really wanted to upgrade, I'd look at an i7-8700K.
 
In any case, you're not losing enough performance that it makes a ton of sense to only upgrade one part. An 8700K would certainly mitigate the bottleneck, but you likely won't notice the difference much, if at all(depending on your use cases). I'd suggest holding off on the upgrade, saving up some more money, and doing a full system overhaul in a year or two, possibly a jump to 13th or 14th gen instead of a minor increase on 8th or 9th gen.

8400 vs. 8600k would be a simple frequency bump, that's it. Not worth it at all and will not have a significant impact. 

Even if you are so called "bottlenecked", it's not worth it, both ways. 
Your CPU is gonna hold back a potential GPU upgrade.
Your GPU isn't gonna perform much better with a faster CPU. Maybe more consistancy, better 0.1% and 1% lows, with newer big games. 6 cores / 6 threads could be a limiting factor nowadays. 

If you really want to upgrade your CPU within your plateform, i'd go with the 9900k. But even used, this CPU is ridicously expensive vs. performance, because of that "i9" name. (Cause I can't see any other reasons why tbh) 
And a 120/140mm AIO like you have right now isn't gonna keep up with such CPU. 
I don't think it's worth it. 

Personnally i'd hold back, stack some money to have a new complete new plateform, along with a new cooler. And then upgrade the GPU down the line. A new PSU might be required tho, depending of your choices. 

8400 vs. 8600k would be a simple frequency bump, that's it. Not worth it at all and will not have a significant impact. 

Even if you are so called "bottlenecked", it's not worth it, both ways. 
Your CPU is gonna hold back a potential GPU upgrade.
Your GPU isn't gonna perform much better with a faster CPU. Maybe more consistancy, better 0.1% and 1% lows, with newer big games. 6 cores / 6 threads could be a limiting factor nowadays. 

If you really want to upgrade your CPU within your plateform, i'd go with the 9900k. But even used, this CPU is ridicously expensive vs. performance, because of that "i9" name. (Cause I can't see any other reasons why tbh) 
And a 120/140mm AIO like you have right now isn't gonna keep up with such CPU. 
I don't think it's worth it. 

Personnally i'd hold back, stack some money to have a new complete new plateform, along with a new cooler. And then upgrade the GPU down the line. A new PSU might be required tho, depending of your choices. 

You're missing the point. The problem isn't that there are errors. The problem is that they are way too frequent, they are not corrected properly, and then that bald guy from Labs claims that their testing is better than GN's or HUB's.
 
You, my guy, are clearly biased.

The community is mad about Linus' response. He is acting like a child. And you're acting like a fanboy.

Linus I've been following you and have respected you since I was a kid, and have defended you (to my friends :P) through all the prior controversies etc etc etc you've heard this a million times from a million people lol.

But this one went too far. (So much so that I had to dig out my old forum account, usually I just comment on YT. And obviously update my profile here...)

Everybody is telling you the pace of the channels is too much, your friends, your employees, your fans... this breakneck pace obviously worked well in the early days, but these issues are obviously not caused by malice or malpractice (well, most of them), but just by not having enough time to fix them. And you are in the very unique situation of being able to do something about this.

I mean take the Youtube channel of nvidia, for example, and say they made an ltt-esque error, accidentally using the wrong settings in-game (let's say for one of AMD's products) over repeated testing. I mean we'd all clown on them for it. You might say well, NVIDIA should do better. But for us, when it comes to trusting benchmarks... we trust independent reviewers - like Linus Media Group - to get it right, without the marketing rubbish. Mistakes are understandable, yes, but these are just completely avoidable. Yes, you're human, as are your employees, but humans make more issues under pressure and when rushing things. I'd bet it's not even a linear scale. The fact that LTT is able to keep this high of a journalistic standard - and I'm not being sarcastic here - really speaks volumes to the quality of both the leadership and the talent in your ranks. But there's no use squandering that talent on half-baked rubbish, because that's increasingly what this pace seems to be resulting in.

Regardless, this topic has obviously blown up. While you may want to avoid a media sniping war, IMO it looks worse if you say nothing much at all, as most of your youtube fans don't visit the subreddit or the forum. You need to make a video detailing exactly how the company as a team will move forwards towards fixing this issue, or else this issue may become much larger than anyone anticipates.