Help me choose parts for my new pc.

[AbdulAziz113]

1 minute ago, Bombastinator said:

I can say this:

my system very old.  2008.  It must be replaced soon. My budget is higher. I am old.

 

  I will be getting the exact same tomahawk board, a 3600 or 3700, cas 16 3200 ram (I would get 3600 but the board only goes to 3466) a tier a or b PSU, a nvme m.2  and the biggest baddest video card i can afford.  Probably a 5700xt. I fear even it may not be enough for the 2020-2021 consoles.  I am considering a 580 and assuming I will replace it. Everything else should live though.

@Bombastinator seems like a really solid build. How many years do you think my pc will live

[Meganter]

6 minutes ago, AbdulAziz113 said:

@Plouffe and also will 2666 speed ram be enough for that cpu?

At least 3000MHz (3600MHz is the sweet spot).

 

7 minutes ago, AbdulAziz113 said:

@Plouffe yeah i guess. Thank you so much for the help but can you please reccomend a mobo for the 3600 that is around 80 euros, cause 120 euros seems like a bit too much

Look at the Asrock B450 Pro4, they should be Zen 2 ready with a lower price

[Meganter]

4 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

I can say this:

my system very old.  2008.  It must be replaced soon. My budget is higher. I am old.

 

  I will be getting the exact same tomahawk board, a 3600 or 3700, cas 16 3200 ram (I would get 3600 but the board only goes to 3466) a tier a or b PSU, a nvme m.2  and the biggest baddest video card i can afford.  Probably a 5700xt. I fear even it may not be enough for the 2020-2021 consoles.  I am considering a 580 and assuming I will replace it. Everything else should live though.

https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/B450-TOMAHAWK-MAX/Specification

 

The frenquency goes up to 4133 for 3rd gen  

[Bombastinator]

30 minutes ago, AbdulAziz113 said:

@Bombastinator why would the gpu need to be swapped?

Because the new consoles have navi21 and the power of navi21 is a secret.  It’s supposed to have much much better raytracing.  if raytracing can be ignored it’s a non issue.  But software developers are greedy for system resources and lazy with code.  If they can use the raytracing hardware to do something useful they will.  Or they might just not bother to make it so it can be turned off because it was pizza day at the caffeteria and they were in a hurry.

 

  Software raytracing is possible but it’s very very processor intensive.  This navi21 is a console GPU. very low power.  There is hope that a 5700xt could handle the software raytracing.  Barely.  Maybe.

 

im a worst case scenario kind of person.  Santa hat thinks none of this will matter.  He may turn out to be right.

[AbdulAziz113]

7 minutes ago, Plouffe said:

At least 3000MHz (3600MHz is the sweet spot).

 

Look at the Asrock B450 Pro4, they should be Zen 2 ready with a lower price

@Plouffe that it?

[AbdulAziz113]

8 minutes ago, Plouffe said:

https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/B450-TOMAHAWK-MAX/Specification

 

The frenquency goes up to 4133 for 3rd gen  

@Plouffe i also found this mobo which is better 

[AbdulAziz113]

6 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

Because the new consoles have navi21 and the power of navi21 is a secret.  It’s supposed to have much much better raytracing.  if raytracing can be ignored it’s a non issue.  But software developers are greedy for system resources and lazy with code.  If they can use the raytracing hardware to do something useful they will.  Or they might just not bother to make it so it can be turned off because it was pizza day at the caffeteria and they were in a hurry.

 

  Software raytracing is possible but it’s very very processor intensive.  This navi21 is a console GPU. very low power.  There is hope that a 5700xt could handle the software raytracing.  Barely.  Maybe.

@Bombastinator yeah i have a ps4, but hoe many years do you think my new oc can handle

[Meganter]

1 minute ago, AbdulAziz113 said:

@Plouffe that it?

Yes but to be confirmed that it's Zen 2 @GoldenLag

 

2 minutes ago, AbdulAziz113 said:

@Plouffe i also found this mobo which is better 

At that price get the ATX (the one at 152).

[Bombastinator]

20 minutes ago, Plouffe said:

https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/B450-TOMAHAWK-MAX/Specification

 

The frenquency goes up to 4133 for 3rd gen  

Does it?  Fascinating....

[Meganter]

Just now, Bombastinator said:

Does it?  Fascinating....

Unless they lie, I hope so  

[Bombastinator]

10 minutes ago, AbdulAziz113 said:

@Bombastinator yeah i have a ps4, but hoe many years do you think my new oc can handle

It depends.  If it can beat the ps5/scarlet as long as that console lasts.  Maybe 5 years.  If it can’t until the ps5/scarlet games are ported. So 6 months to 5 years depending on luck.  Will the the consoles be on time? Will navi21 be beatable?  Will the game developers think to make allowances for old hardware if the new consoles are not bearable?  Many ifs.

[AbdulAziz113]

13 minutes ago, Plouffe said:

Yes but to be confirmed that it's Zen 2 @GoldenLag

 

At that price get the ATX (the one at 152).

@Plouffe can you give me a pc build example with 1660s ryzen 3600 and that mobo. Thank you 

[Meganter]

4 minutes ago, AbdulAziz113 said:

@Plouffe can you give me a pc build example with 1660s ryzen 3600 and that mobo. Thank you 

PCPartPicker Part List

Type	Item	Price
CPU	AMD Ryzen 5 3600 3.6 GHz 6-Core Processor	€204.00 @ Amazon France
Motherboard	ASRock B450 Pro4 ATX AM4 Motherboard	€97.89 @ Alternate
Memory	Patriot Viper 4 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3000 Memory	€64.98 @ Amazon France
Storage	Crucial BX500 240 GB 2.5" Solid State Drive	€29.99 @ Amazon France
Storage	Seagate BarraCuda 1 TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive	€39.89 @ Amazon France
Video Card	Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1660 Super 6 GB OC Video Card	€259.00 @ TopAchat
Case	Cougar MX330 ATX Mid Tower Case	€42.33 @ Amazon France
Power Supply	be quiet! System Power 9 500 W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply	€55.44 @ Amazon France
	Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts
	Total	€793.52
	Generated by PCPartPicker 2019-11-20 12:35 CET+0100

 

[GoldenLag]

38 minutes ago, Plouffe said:

Yes but to be confirmed that it's Zen 2 @GoldenLag

Doesnt usually have the correct Bios, unless its recently stocked. 

 

Only the AC model has the correct Bios from ASrock. 

[AbdulAziz113]

48 minutes ago, Plouffe said:

PCPartPicker Part List

Type	Item	Price
CPU	AMD Ryzen 5 3600 3.6 GHz 6-Core Processor	€204.00 @ Amazon France
Motherboard	ASRock B450 Pro4 ATX AM4 Motherboard	€97.89 @ Alternate
Memory	Patriot Viper 4 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3000 Memory	€64.98 @ Amazon France
Storage	Crucial BX500 240 GB 2.5" Solid State Drive	€29.99 @ Amazon France
Storage	Seagate BarraCuda 1 TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive	€39.89 @ Amazon France
Video Card	Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1660 Super 6 GB OC Video Card	€259.00 @ TopAchat
Case	Cougar MX330 ATX Mid Tower Case	€42.33 @ Amazon France
Power Supply	be quiet! System Power 9 500 W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply	€55.44 @ Amazon France
	Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts
	Total	€793.52
	Generated by PCPartPicker 2019-11-20 12:35 CET+0100

 

@Plouffe that is a 100 euro mobo . A lil bit expensive i am looking for a mobo around a 70 80 euro

[Meganter]

50 minutes ago, AbdulAziz113 said:

@Plouffe that is a 100 euro mobo . A lil bit expensive i am looking for a mobo around a 70 80 euro

You won't have any that will be Zen 2 ready then or a have flash bios button.

[AbdulAziz113]

39 minutes ago, Plouffe said:

You won't have any that will be Zen 2 ready then or a have a flash bios button.

@Plouffe i looked and saw that ryzen 5 3600 and gtx 1660s is actually worse than i5 9400f and gtx 1660ti

[Meganter]

2 minutes ago, AbdulAziz113 said:

@Plouffe i looked and saw that ryzen 5 3600 and gtx 1660s is actually worse than i5 9400f and gtx 1660ti

Where ?

[Skipple]

38 minutes ago, AbdulAziz113 said:

@Plouffe i looked and saw that ryzen 5 3600 and gtx 1660s is actually worse than i5 9400f and gtx 1660ti

 

5 hours ago, AbdulAziz113 said:

Last time i checked i5 9400f was 11% better than the 2600x

 

"Worse"

 

Where are you pulling this from?

 

In what way? Just saying "worse" means absolutely nothing. It's not taking into full account dozens of variables.

 

Who is telling you it is worse?

[AbdulAziz113]

1 hour ago, Plouffe said:

Where ?

@Plouffe well first i watched a bunch of youtube benchmark videos then in google and i compared the two build. It wasnt a lot more powerful, but i5 9400f and gtx 1660ti always came out with like 10-15 fps better. 

[AbdulAziz113]

51 minutes ago, Skipple said:

 

 

"Worse"

 

Where are you pulling this from?

 

In what way? Just saying "worse" means absolutely nothing. It's not taking into full account dozens of variables.

 

Who is telling you it is worse?

@Skipple well i compared this video 

 that uses benchmarks for ryzen  5 3600 and gtx 1660s and i took those results and compared them to the results from thus video 

and i5 9400f and gtx 1660ti most of the times came out better.

[Meganter]

2 minutes ago, AbdulAziz113 said:

 

3600 vs 9400f with the same GPU.

 

1660S vs 1660Ti with the same CPU.

 

Those videos are more relevant.

 

The 3600 beats the 9400f and the 1660Ti beats the 1660S.

 

All in all I'd say 3600+1660S = 9400f+1660Ti.

 

[dizmo]

21 hours ago, Bombastinator said:

Doubtful.  I think You picked CoD because it doesn’t do a lot of multithread.  It best supports your point across the gamut of new games.  Let’s take your statement that it was random at face value though you seem unwilling to do such yourself. As evidenced by your attempting to say stuff for me.

Outer worlds:  I’d call that new.  It’s not on steam yet.  I can’t even play it though I want to.  I’ve never been able to make the epic game launcher work right for me.  I couldn’t even finish the new stalker because the launcher was so buggy for me I gave up.  I suspect it’s steam interfering in much the same way that google messes with Apple and netflix will no doubt mess with Disney+ or visa versa.  It doesn’t matter

Division 2: possible.  Not my kind of game. I didn’t pay attention. Might be older.  You seem to be defending it like you think it is.

The conflation is cute. Some new games becomes all recent games.  You arguing  like a trumper.  Conflation and name calling and assumptivism.  It only works on those who don’t want to look.  I’ve seen you do it better.  I’m going to try and keep it data oriented though because this is actually about things and not about some scorecard.

 

I mentioned only two, neither of which are particularly new. Red dead redemption two was built for console and has been out on console for a long time.  Only the port is new.  Rust isn’t very new either.  I don’t play either of them.  I don’t like MMOs, especially PvP ones, and I can’t make epic launcher work effectively.  None the less they barely run on low thread machines.

 

 I do play breathedge.  I had to download a legacy comparability patch to keep it from crashing on load and that’s just an indie game.  It was mostly about the GPU, but I feel it’s a clear indicator of the road to come.  The reason it didn’t work was they were only bothering to test on GPUs with 8gig or more. When asked they squeezes it down to 2.6, but the point is they didn’t even look.  I’d it wasn’t an in development game I would have been locked out not because of necessity but because of development convenience.

 

Its happening. It’s happening now.  I think personally that when the new consoles come out it’s going to happen a whole lot more.  I could be wrong about that one.  I’d prefer to be actually.  It would save me a thousand dollars for a new rig.  I’m not going to assume for convenience though.

You'd be wrong. I picked games I actually know work, since I play them.

OuterWorlds can be ran through the Xbox Game store. Runs perfectly fine on my quad core.

Division 2 came out this year. Again, runs perfectly fine on my quad core.

Destiny 2. Runs perfectly fine on my quad core.

 

So why did you pick those two? Because they're both poorly optimized (which they are)?

 

So, how can you say these games run poorly on low thread machines? Have any proof to back any of this up, or just pointless conjecture?

 

Have you looked at the system requirements for Breathedge? Might be disappointing for you.

Minimum: Intel i3, 3rd gen

Recommended: Intel i5, 4th gen

The first doesn't even have four physical cores...

 

The Xbox One came out with 8 cores. It's been 7 years. Where are the requirements for these 8 cores??

[Bombastinator]

5 hours ago, dizmo said:

You'd be wrong. I picked games I actually know work, since I play them.

[/QUOTE] ..and the double team is back.

 I think I was replying to a post from @goldenlag maybe for all this?  It’s a 5 page thread now.  I tried going back to find stuff but the whole thing is a day old now and is becoming an arduous search to even follow up.  Hard for me to find.  It’s possible he took up the argument in your place.  In any case it’s already been done on this thread.  Also it would be “game” not “games” since it was the only example given in that instance iirc

[/QUOTE]

OuterWorlds can be ran through the Xbox Game store. Runs perfectly fine on my quad core.

Division 2 came out this year. Again, runs perfectly fine on my quad core.

Destiny 2. Runs perfectly fine on my quad core.

[/QUOTE] yes...  a lot of games still run fine .  A lot of games still run fine on dual cores too.  Games that were released when dual cores were all that could be had.

You seem to be going after the term “recent” if I even used it and attempting to define it as “anything released this year” which was not what was being said.  I was talking about only some stuff just beginning to be released.  The change from 4 and 4/8 thread to 6 and 6/12 thread happened this year.  Only games released after this change could possibly have an issue. Even the. They might not.  This is about this moment and upcoming ones.  An attempt to predict the future to a degree.  The issue is anything less than 6 thread and possibly more than 12 thread appears to be starting to reach end of life for games released after PC CPUs with more capacity than that started to become easily available.  Not because they necessarily need to but because it looks like they are.  It’s not about what should happen or did happen in the past.  Sheerly about what it looks like IS happening.

So why did you pick those two? Because they're both poorly optimized (which they are)?

not why, though I’m not sure that’s important.  I picked them because of multiple reports on this site and the net internal that they don’t run well on low thread count machines.  They very well may be poorly optimized though.  They did run on much slower devices. With enough optimization a game can often be made to run on a phone.  It has been done.  I present those games as evidence that developers are starting to release games that aren’t optimized for 4 or fewer threads anymore. 

I’ve got an older CPU too.  I don’t play them because A, they’re so new I can’t get em on steam yet (again, really new. Not merely released in the last 12 months)

and B. Apparently I couldn’t run them if I could get ahold of them.

So, how can you say these games run poorly on low thread machines?

“these” you mean the fewer only just released games I already said I can’t get ahold of or the older games you mentioned?

Assuming the ones I was actually talking about and not your additions, because there are reports and articles and all kinds of stuff claiming they don’t.

Have any proof to back any of this up, or just pointless conjecture?

ah. “Proof”.  Do You want me to go back through the site and the internet looking for reports of how these games run poorly even though you said already that you know they don’t because they’re poorly optimized for 4 thread? Or do you want me to spend a benjamin buying games I can’t download  and run them on a CPU I have read they can’t be run on?

I already said in earlier posts on this thread that I don’t own them. (This one too but this post doesn’t count for these purposes)

it seems to me to be a legwork “bury em in paperwork” charge.  How ‘bout I just use your own statement?

Have you looked at the system requirements for Breathedge? Might be disappointing for you.

Minimum: Intel i3, 3rd gen

Recommended: Intel i5, 4th gen

The first doesn't even have four physical cores...

did you miss the part where I said with that game it wasn’t about CPU?yep.  I played breathedge fine on my machine until there was an update and it suddenly didn’t work anymore. It was a GPU issue.  I mentioned it as evidence of the behavior of developers starting to not bother to optimize stuff for older hardware.  It wasn’t about core count. I said that.  I also said that when they did bother to optimize it they dropped the actual requirement for GPU memory from 8gb to 2.6.  There are statements made by the developers that they felt they didn’t need to do this and that they thought it was very magnanimous of them to even do it.  It’s not about what can be or should be done with programming, it’s about what is being done after higher spec gear becomes available.

The Xbox One came out with 8 cores. It's been 7 years. Where are the requirements for these 8 cores??

 Nowhere.  Lots of conjecture has been made as to why.  The primary one is apparently that for a very long time games were single thread and that’s what programmers knew how to do. As a result games were single thread only at the beginning of those seven years and gradually increased thread count requirements as developers learned the difficult methods of using more and more threads.  They’ve had seven years to do it though.  They’re good at it now as shown by games released later in those seven years that no longer run on dual core even though stuff developed for those same 8 cores ran fine on dual core stuff at the beginning of that 7 year period.  It’s apparently about to jump from 8 threads (or 6) to a minimum of 12 threads (though it might be 14. I don’t know.  That depends on Sony and Microsoft)

it was mentioned in this thread btw, possibly by you, possibly by @goldenlag that because of the way the Xbox stuff was done even though jaguar had 8 cores only 6 could be used by developers.   So a six thread machine where many games started using only 1 thread, but increased over time to max the thread load.  The developers learned how to multithread. They know how to now.  It could be argued that it could take them the same amount of time to increase beyond 6 thread.  My understanding is that the progression is more like 1,2,many rather than being linear.

 

[dizmo]

3 hours ago, Bombastinator said:

-snip-

Ah, I see, so now your back tracking on your original statement.  Perhaps because you realize you're wrong?

Don't try to use reading back as an excuse. It's 5 pages, not 50.

Quote

yes...  a lot of games still run fine .  A lot of games still run fine on dual cores too.  Games that were released when dual cores were all that could be had. You seem to be going after the term “recent” if I even used it and attempting to define it as “anything released this year” which was not what was being said.  I was talking about only some stuff just beginning to be released.  The change from 4 and 4/8 thread to 6 and 6/12 thread happened this year.  Only games released after this change could possibly have an issue. Even the. They might not.  This is about this moment and upcoming ones.  An attempt to predict the future to a degree.  The issue is anything less than 6 thread and possibly more than 12 thread appears to be starting to reach end of life for games released after PC CPUs with more capacity than that started to become easily available.  Not because they necessarily need to but because it looks like they are.  It’s not about what should happen or did happen in the past.  Sheerly about what it looks like IS happening.

You do realize the games I listed are all new within the last year, right? Your comment is irrelevant to the information I provided. Why are games just being released any different than games released this year? It's not like the games released in the past month are built on drastically different architecture. No, the change to 6 cores did not happen this year; not sure where you got that. Have any proof? No, you don't, because it doesn't exist.

Quote

not why, though I’m not sure that’s important.  I picked them because of multiple reports on this site and the net internal that they don’t run well on low thread count machines.  They very well may be poorly optimized though.  They did run on much slower devices. With enough optimization a game can often be made to run on a phone.  It has been done.  I present those games as evidence that developers are starting to release games that aren’t optimized for 4 or fewer threads anymore. 

I’ve got an older CPU too.  I don’t play them because A, they’re so new I can’t get em on steam yet (again, really new. Not merely released in the last 12 months)

and B. Apparently I couldn’t run them if I could get ahold of them.

Let's take Red Dead Redemption 2, since that seems to be what you're focused on.

Here's a video using a 2500k...a very old, quad core processor.

Look at that. At high, it averages around 70 fps...

 

Issues with the game running didn't have anything to do with core count. They have to do with poor optimization, as I said, and that's proven by this article:

https://www.techradar.com/news/red-dead-redemption-2-pc-patch-fixes-pretty-much-everything-thats-wrong-with-the-game

 
" Obviously that wasn’t ideal in both those respects, but now Rockstar says in the latest patch notes that the following has been implemented: “Improvements to address an issue that resulted in stalls on 4-core and 6-core CPUs.”"

 

Oh, and for the specs...

Spoiler

Minimum PC specifications:

• OS: Windows 7 SP1
• Processor: Intel Core i5-2500K / AMD FX-6300
• Memory: 8GB
• Graphics Card: Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB / AMD Radeon R9 280 3GB HDD
• Storage Space: 150GB

Recommended PC specifications:

• OS: Windows 10 April 2018 Update (v1803 or later)
• Processor: Intel Core i7-4770K / AMD Ryzen 5 1500X
• Memory: 12GB
• Graphics Card: Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 6GB / AMD Radeon RX 480 4GB
• Storage Space: 150GB

 

Surprise!! A quad core!!! Even at recommended spec, all we see is 4 core/8 threads!!

 

Quote

did you miss the part where I said with that game it wasn’t about CPU?yep.  I played breathedge fine on my machine until there was an update and it suddenly didn’t work anymore. It was a GPU issue.  I mentioned it as evidence of the behavior of developers starting to not bother to optimize stuff for older hardware.  It wasn’t about core count. I said that.  I also said that when they did bother to optimize it they dropped the actual requirement for GPU memory from 8gb to 2.6.  There are statements made by the developers that they felt they didn’t need to do this and that they thought it was very magnanimous of them to even do it.  It’s not about what can be or should be done with programming, it’s about what is being done after higher spec gear becomes available.

Ok, then why mention it at all? Again, you're bringing up things that aren't relevant.

 

You stated that "4 threads won't even work on games now", and you're clearly wrong. Your whole argument is based on the fact that future consoles are going to use an 8 core/16 thread CPU, yet we've had 8 core machines for almost a decade and games still run perfectly fine on quad core systems, because that's what most gamers have. 1080p, 4 core machines.

 

Funny, you say both me and @GoldenLag are double teaming you? So, two people are telling you you're wrong, yet you can't admit it...