NubCak

My old computer is just gathering dust at this point, whats a fair price to let it go? I know theres a bit of a following for working x58 rigs. Specs: i7-970 - validated to 4.4ghz at 1.3v Asus X58 Sabertooth TUF, chipset repasted last year (so i've kept up the maintenance) 6 x 2gb Corsair DDR3 Asus RX480 STRIX OC Thermaltake 750w full modular rgb psu Fractal Design celsius 360mm aio ThermalTake View 31 dual TG Rgb case

im using 3900x and 5700xt to run my 34" ultrawide 3440x1440p most games will easily hit the refresh rate of my 115hz monitor

The Ram itself won't be the big difference maker, moving to a 8core, 16thread Ryzen processor will be the difference maker vs 4 cores, 4 threads. Take a look at the video below:

My previous rig was actually an I7-970 based rig, which is 6 core / 12 thread processor based on the same architecture as the X5650. It's clearly showing its signs of age, which is why i decided to build a new rig late last year. I'm not aware of any 10c/20t CPUs that will overclock well on a budget. With that being said, IPC has significantly improved since the days of sandybridge, for games you'd probably want something like the following: ~4ish ghz with atleast 6 cores, with IPC comparable to something within the last 3 years. Although Tomshardware is not usually the

2060s or 2060 both get crushed by the 5700xt

I don't think 1500 gbp will be enough... right now at the very least for a gaming machine you will want 4 cores, 8 threads. As there could potentially be 3 people using it, that would mean atleast 12 cores, 32 threads. However you need some overhead to from hyper visor etc. So i'd say you need atleast 16 cores, 32 threads, which basically means: 3950x or like a 9980xe. Just processor is already over 50% of your budget or more than your budget.

I don't remember which gigabyte board it was, you can however watch Buildzoid's reviews. When i did my research, the TUF x570 gaming plus with Wifi was pretty much the same price. Plus all my previous rigs used TUF boards and I was very happy with how reliable they were, so i didn't bother with trying another brand.

I'd make several changes: I'd go with a different mobo, such as the TUF X570 plus, pretty much the budget king along with the gigabyte one. Secondly i'd get a better power supply and probably full modular.

5700 xt user here: I can run most new games at 80-120fps maxed out at 3440x1440p So i believe for 1080P its definitely not a problem. For 1440, you'd probably hit the numbers you want, if you just turn down/off AA.

now that theres a viable thunderbolt 3 solution for you in Ryzen, theres really no reason to go intel. Unless you are chasing every last one of those fps at 200+Fps.

PCPartPicker Part List CPU: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X 3.5 GHz 16-Core Processor ($1079.00 @ Canada Computers) CPU Cooler: Deepcool GAMERSTORM CAPTAIN 360X WHITE 64.4 CFM Liquid CPU Cooler ($158.99 @ Newegg Canada) Motherboard: Asus TUF GAMING X570-PLUS ATX AM4 Motherboard ($229.50 @ Vuugo) Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws V 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR4-3600 Memory ($215.99 @ Newegg Canada) Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws V 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR4-3600 Memory ($215.99 @ Newegg Canada) Storage: ADATA XPG SX8200 Pro 1 TB M.2-2280 NVME Solid State Drive ($199.98 @ Amazon Canada) Storage: Samsung 860

Hi, There are actually several Ryzen motherboards with thunderbolt 3. I think AsRock makes two of them.

Its totally cool to dig up this thread.Doesn't look like it wiill work, due to where the mounting screws are. I've circled the 3 mounting screws that look the most problematic, as they don't exist on the gaming oc.

I find it interesting that you shun AMD for removing headroom in overclocking when has and is doing the same thing, look at the new i9-10900 or whatever its called, its clocked at 5.2ghz out of the box, just like what overclockers were able to push on 9th gen, nothing about that chip is different than the 9th gen aside from minor changes. When the 10900 or whatever gets into overclocker's hands it will be the same deal, is already tapped out. AMD is not really the economy option, the top end AMD processors have a correct price, it's intel who's stuck in the past and refusing to compete in

Its pretty budget if you ask me, but everyone's priorities and budgets are different. He says he goes for cost/performance, a $300 board doesn't perform any better than the $200 board that's available, talk about contradiction.