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

ClusterJones

Member
  • Content Count

    3
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Awards


This user doesn't have any awards

About ClusterJones

  • Title
    Newbie
  1. Well I can always update the BIOS. That does introduce another risk factor, though, and that's like ehhhhh...not sure I wanna do that. I think I'm gonna go with the 2600, unless I see the 2700 on sale any time soon.
  2. Right, but the IPC will be the same because it's the same architecture and number of cores. So I can just overclock to make up the performance lost from lack of clock speed. The 2700 non-X is $150 for me, and the 2700X is like $180. I don't see the point in spending $30 to have it overclocked for me, when I could spend that money on faster shipping, or save it for a GPU. So whichever CPU I get, it will be the non-X version. That aside, you think the 2700 would be the better buy over the 3600?
  3. I would prefer to keep my CPU choice under $200. I'm currently on a B450 board, the Gigabyte Aorus Pro WiFi, and am therefore limited to Ryzen, as I have no interest in buying a new board, nor do I feel Intel offers compelling, competitive CPUs at this price point. As for the chip I'm upgrading from, it's The Ryzen 3 1200. I'm considering the 2600, the 2700 (not the 2700X), and the 3600. What's got me a little torn is: 1, Whether the jump in performance between 2nd and 3rd gen Ryzen is enough for the 3600 to be worth the extra ~$70 over the 2600. 2. Whether the extra two cores on the 2700 make it worth the extra ~$30 over the 2600. My current GPU is a 1050Ti, and I'll be upgrading to either a 1660 Super, or a 5600XT. Not sure yet, waiting for benchmarks. I'm looking to hit 1080p 75 FPS minimum in most modern titles (SotTR, RDR2, Spyro Reignited, Darksiders 3 and Darksiders Genesis, etc), with a strong preference to be able to go as high as 144 FPS. What should I get?
×