-solved- Help

[AA12YT553]

Is this good for the price?
https://pcpartpicker.com/user/Daniel5522/saved/ddy9GX

[Mephi00]

The wraith max isnt the best cooler for the price, Id go with a drp4 or a nhd 15 or the boxed.

 

And the graphics seem a little bit underpowered, Id recommend to do 3600 and a rtx 2060 super or something around that.

 

You need to look for a way to update your mobo bios, amd has a program where they get you a cpu for updating

[Fasauceome]

The 3700X already comes with the wraith prism, which is the same size as the max.

 

You went and got a SFX PSU which is just a smaller, more expensive PSU, and you got a 750 watt when 550 does the trick.

 

If this is for gaming, you overspent on the CPU, but I'll assume you need 8 cores for the time being.

 

Samsung SSDs are pretty overpriced, and so is Trident Z memory, but at least Trident Z looks really pretty.

 

PCPartPicker Part List

Type	Item	Price
CPU	AMD Ryzen 7 3700X 3.6 GHz 8-Core Processor	$327.79 @ OutletPC
Motherboard	MSI B450 GAMING PRO CARBON AC ATX AM4 Motherboard	$159.99 @ Amazon
Memory	G.Skill Trident Z RGB 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3200 Memory	$104.99 @ Newegg
Storage	Silicon Power A55 512 GB 2.5" Solid State Drive	$51.99 @ Amazon
Storage	Seagate Barracuda 3 TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive	$79.78 @ OutletPC
Video Card	Sapphire Radeon RX 5700 8 GB PULSE Video Card	$369.99 @ Amazon
Case	Cooler Master MasterBox Pro 5 RGB ATX Mid Tower Case	$94.99 @ Amazon
Power Supply	Corsair RMx (2018) 650 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply	$87.99 @ Amazon
Operating System	Microsoft Windows 10 Home Full - USB 32/64-bit	$134.89 @ OutletPC
Monitor	Acer XF251Q bmiirx 24.5" 1920x1080 75 Hz Monitor	$129.99 @ Best Buy
	Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts
	Total (before mail-in rebates)	$1562.39
	Mail-in rebates	-$20.00
	Total	$1542.39
	Generated by PCPartPicker 2019-08-31 18:04 EDT-0400

 

Now this has better value for the money.

[AA12YT553]

16 minutes ago, Fasauceome said:

The 3700X already comes with the wraith prism, which is the same size as the max.

 

You went and got a SFX PSU which is just a smaller, more expensive PSU, and you got a 750 watt when 550 does the trick.

 

If this is for gaming, you overspent on the CPU, but I'll assume you need 8 cores for the time being.

 

Samsung SSDs are pretty overpriced, and so is Trident Z memory, but at least Trident Z looks really pretty.

 

PCPartPicker Part List

Type	Item	Price
CPU	AMD Ryzen 7 3700X 3.6 GHz 8-Core Processor	$327.79 @ OutletPC
Motherboard	MSI B450 GAMING PRO CARBON AC ATX AM4 Motherboard	$159.99 @ Amazon
Memory	G.Skill Trident Z RGB 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3200 Memory	$104.99 @ Newegg
Storage	Silicon Power A55 512 GB 2.5" Solid State Drive	$51.99 @ Amazon
Storage	Seagate Barracuda 3 TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive	$79.78 @ OutletPC
Video Card	Sapphire Radeon RX 5700 8 GB PULSE Video Card	$369.99 @ Amazon
Case	Cooler Master MasterBox Pro 5 RGB ATX Mid Tower Case	$94.99 @ Amazon
Power Supply	Corsair RMx (2018) 650 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply	$87.99 @ Amazon
Operating System	Microsoft Windows 10 Home Full - USB 32/64-bit	$134.89 @ OutletPC
Monitor	Acer XF251Q bmiirx 24.5" 1920x1080 75 Hz Monitor	$129.99 @ Best Buy
	Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts
	Total (before mail-in rebates)	$1562.39
	Mail-in rebates	-$20.00
	Total	$1542.39
	Generated by PCPartPicker 2019-08-31 18:04 EDT-0400

 

Now this has better value for the money.

Thanks so much  I want to play games like, minecraft (not returning ive stayed for who's wondering), farming sim 17, farming sim 19, cod4, the sims 4 and forza 4. EDIT: I also want to do recording and lite editing every now and again.

Edited August 31, 2019 by AA12YT553

[Crunchy Dragon]

-Moved to New Builds and Planning-

[LogicWeasel]

3 hours ago, Fasauceome said:

Storage Silicon Power A55 512 GB 2.5" Solid State Drive $51.99 @ Amazon

You're recommending a DRAM-less SSD for the boot drive?  No Bueno.

 

Replace with something not el-Cheapo:  https://pcpartpicker.com/product/7stQzy/hp-ex900-500mb-m2-2280-solid-state-drive-2yy44aaabc  (bonus, it's NVMe) or https://pcpartpicker.com/product/V3mxFT/a-data-ultimate-su800-512gb-25-solid-state-drive-asu800ss-512gt-c

[Fasauceome]

Just now, LogicWeasel said:

You're recommending a DRAM-less SSD for the boot drive?  No Bueno.

 

Replace with something not el-Cheapo:  https://pcpartpicker.com/product/7stQzy/hp-ex900-500mb-m2-2280-solid-state-drive-2yy44aaabc  (bonus, it's NVMe) or https://pcpartpicker.com/product/V3mxFT/a-data-ultimate-su800-512gb-25-solid-state-drive-asu800ss-512gt-c

I've used a few of these, they may be El cheapo but they're not bad, not for the price.

[The Torrent]

3 hours ago, AA12YT553 said:

Is this good for the price?
https://pcpartpicker.com/user/Daniel5522/saved/ddy9GX

U can buy windows 10 for 2 quid of eBay I always do that,

 

get a 500gig sabrent rocket instead of that ssd

[LogicWeasel]

4 minutes ago, Fasauceome said:

but they're not bad, not for the price

Dude seriously?  The SSD I suggested to replace is hardly $5 more.  Do I really need to link why DRAMless SSD's are bad?  Even Linus points out how craptastic they are as an OS-drive.  DRAMless SSD = not a primary SSD, good for scratch-use.  SSD w/ DRAM = will not perform like trash on random I/O.

[Fasauceome]

5 minutes ago, LogicWeasel said:

Dude seriously?  The SSD I suggested to replace is hardly $5 more.  Do I really need to link why DRAMless SSD's are bad?  Even Linus points out how craptastic they are as an OS-drive.  DRAMless SSD = not a primary SSD, good for scratch-use.  SSD w/ DRAM = will not perform like trash on random I/O.

I know why DRAMless SSDs are worse, but I've used this SSD as a boot drive before and you're making it out to be worse than it is. For $5 more is a better SSD a good investment? If you feel like it is, then go for it, but I see this as a good way to save 5 bucks. Still fast with windows on it, tons of times faster than a mechanical drive.

[Herman Mcpootis]

PCPartPicker Part List

CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 3700X 3.6 GHz 8-Core Processor  ($327.79 @ OutletPC) 
Motherboard: MSI B450 GAMING PRO CARBON AC ATX AM4 Motherboard  ($159.99 @ Amazon) 
Memory: OLOy WarHawk RGB 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3000 Memory  ($64.99 @ Newegg) 
Storage: Sabrent Rocket 512 GB M.2-2280 NVME Solid State Drive  ($59.98 @ Amazon) 
Storage: Seagate Constellation ES 3 TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive  ($57.40 @ Amazon) 
Video Card: MSI Radeon RX 5700 XT 8 GB EVOKE OC Video Card  ($429.99 @ Newegg) 
Case: Cooler Master MasterBox MB511 RGB ATX Mid Tower Case  ($79.99 @ Newegg) 
Power Supply: Corsair RMx (2018) 650 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply  ($87.99 @ Amazon) 
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Home Full - USB 32/64-bit  ($134.89 @ OutletPC) 
Monitor: VIOTEK GN24CW 24.0" 1920x1080 144 Hz Monitor  ($159.99 @ Amazon) 
Total: $1563.00
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2019-08-31 22:10 EDT-0400

[AA12YT553]

1 hour ago, LogicWeasel said:

Dude seriously?  The SSD I suggested to replace is hardly $5 more.  Do I really need to link why DRAMless SSD's are bad?  Even Linus points out how craptastic they are as an OS-drive.  DRAMless SSD = not a primary SSD, good for scratch-use.  SSD w/ DRAM = will not perform like trash on random I/O.

All I want is a reliable PC that gets more than the max 10 fps I'm getting out of my 2in1 now

[AA12YT553]

Here is my current list finished https://pcpartpicker.com/user/Daniel5522/saved/ddy9GX

[Herman Mcpootis]

3 minutes ago, AA12YT553 said:

Here is my current list finished https://pcpartpicker.com/user/Daniel5522/saved/ddy9GX

so you have zero intention of actually listening to us?

[AA12YT553]

2 minutes ago, Herman Mcpootis said:

so you have zero intention of actually listening to us?

I do just not when there's a argument I'm my comments 

[AA12YT553]

12 minutes ago, AA12YT553 said:

I do just not when there's a argument I'm my comments 

15 minutes ago, Herman Mcpootis said:

so you have zero intention of actually listening to us?

I got the m.2 sad and it said 1 pcle was needed

 

[Fasauceome]

1 hour ago, AA12YT553 said:

Here is my current list finished https://pcpartpicker.com/user/Daniel5522/saved/ddy9GX

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/W3Jtt6/tcsunbow-x3-1-tb-25-solid-state-drive-x3-480gb-1

@hello_there_123 pointed out that the sunbow is available for cheaper, and is better. missed it on my first search.

[LogicWeasel]

14 hours ago, Fasauceome said:

I know why DRAMless SSDs are worse, but I've used this SSD as a boot drive before and you're making it out to be worse than it is. For $5 more is a better SSD a good investment? If you feel like it is, then go for it, but I see this as a good way to save 5 bucks. Still fast with windows on it, tons of times faster than a mechanical drive.

 

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/dramless-ssd-roundup,4833-10.html

Quote

"...Unfortunately, DRAMless SSDs also have a sinister side. Updating the map directly on the flash requires small random writes, which takes a bite out of the SSD's endurance. This is a particularly vexing issue with low endurance planar 2D TLC NAND flash. At Computex last June, one SSD vendor told us about an OEM 2D TLC SSD that will burn through the rated endurance in a little over a year. The SSD has to last a year because of the notebook's one-year warranty, but anything beyond a year's worth of use is up to the user to fix. Tactics like that are the driving forces behind putting cheap DRAMless SSDs in $500 notebooks.

...but the configurations aren’t ideal for all consumer workloads. 

 

...didn't deliver stellar performance. The SSD Plus wouldn't look as good in comparison with just about any modern DRAM-equipped SSD.

...The vendors proposed the SSDs for special applications in light-use environments, like signage, point of sale, and industrial applications where a machine reads data back to make a few thousand parts a day but doesn't write more than a few megabytes of data in the process.

The fact that some of these products couldn't even complete an industry standard performance test tells us all we need to know."

 

 

@ your claims about "tons of times faster than a mechanical drive":

Quote

"That doesn't mean you should feel inspired to buy one of these products. All three would make a poor boot drive. The SSD Plus 480GB is the only model that we would consider a true entry-level SSD. You could use the others as low-cost mass storage with comparable sequential write performance to modern 7,200 RPM 2.5" disk drives.

...It's true that the drives are faster than a hard disk drive, but when you lean on them with a slightly elevated workload, they can stall, stutter, and deliver a worse user experience than you would get with a spinning mechanical disk. "

Don't expect speedy writes, and Windows does tend to need to write data...

[LogicWeasel]

13 hours ago, AA12YT553 said:

I do just not when there's a argument I'm my comments 

Herman wasn't doing any arguing and he posted a very valid build.  Not sure why you chose to disregard what he posted all because I'm explaining something about SSD quality.  That's not an argument, it's information.

[Fasauceome]

32 minutes ago, LogicWeasel said:

 

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/dramless-ssd-roundup,4833-10.html

 

 

@ your claims about "tons of times faster than a mechanical drive":

Don't expect speedy writes, and Windows does tend to need to write data...

This is all pretty worst case stuff. In day to day use I can hardly say this is representative of their performance, either as a boot drive or secondary drive. Storing games and/or OS is perfectly suitable.

 

As unofficial as my point of reference is, I'm quoting only from personal experience with DRAMless drives. They meet my standards of very basic use, and like I said before, if the worst case scenario is something you want to avoid at all costs, what's $5? But otherwise, a penny saved is a penny earned.

[LogicWeasel]

19 minutes ago, Fasauceome said:

This is all pretty worst case stuff. In day to day use I can hardly say this is representative of their performance, either as a boot drive or secondary drive. Storing games and/or OS is perfectly suitable.

Worst case?  Yes, but think of what that says about even the modern DRAM-less drives, when the industry admits this type of drive is not ideal for OS use or writing much data at all over time.

 

Day to day OS use ok at first?  Yes, but what happens when the drive gets close to full or the NAND cells wear out extremely fast compared to a proper SSD, the performance becomes trash and the reliability goes with it.  That TomsHW article is just 2 years old; if the user wants the part to last more than a year of OS use doesn't $4 seem like a small price to pay for reliability?  Seems odd that this is worth arguing to you over such a small amount of money to be able to avoid the bottom-of-the-barrel in SSD choice.

 

You mentioned using that drive before, but I see in your signature that you don't display owning it now and you use a far nicer MP500 NVMe drive in your main rig and none at all in your server.  If you see the value in an SSD like the MP500 for yourself why does the rationale change here?

[Fasauceome]

8 minutes ago, LogicWeasel said:

You mentioned using that drive before, but I see in your signature that you don't display owning it now and you use a far nicer MP500 NVMe drive in your main rig and none at all in your server.  If you see the value in an SSD like the MP500 for yourself why does the rationale change here?

The MP500 is a high performance NVMe drive, which fulfills an entirely different purposes from a cheap 2.5" SSD. For a gaming PC, the MP500 has the exact same real world performance as the cheapest SSD with a DRAM cache, and you'd be unable to detect a difference. On my profile you'll see my other drives, and I actually have not removed any drives from my PC since I built it. My original boot drive was my Seagate Barracuda, then my DRAMless Kingston SSD which is still a game drive. My server was a cheapo project so I used a discarded HDD as a boot drive because it was free, so also irrelevant.

 

My rationale is the same. If you need a cheap SSD, the cacheless drives aren't as bad as their specs let on, but if you want I'll get back to you when my brother's A55 has aged a bit more and we'll see if the speed is unbearably slow.

[LogicWeasel]

12 minutes ago, Fasauceome said:

For a gaming PC, the MP500 has the exact same real world performance as the cheapest SSD with a DRAM cache, and you'd be unable to detect a difference.

Another reason in favor of recommending SSD's that actually have a cache.  Why not tell gamers to buy those vs the A55 which is bound to hit real-world performance dips as displayed in the full Tom's article (not just the text snippets I was showing to summarize why they concluded it's best to skip these least-viable type of products).