When using this resource, please read the opening post. The Tech Support forum regulars have helped create countless of desktop systems without any compensation. The least you can do is provide all of the information required for them to help you properly.
Now the good and bad news, the good news is AMD are rebating early launch sales to allow us to hit £449.99 on the stand alone [RX Vega 64] black card which has no games. This is a launch only price which AMD at present are saying will be withdrawn in the near future, when if it happens is unknown, but remember do not be shocked if the price jumps nearly £100 in a few days.
From OCUK staff and confirmed by a few other retailers
--
IMO the Vega launch was a huge disappointment. Architecturally it must have been a flop to end up with this level of efficiency and also performance given the die size and hbm2, it's a step further behind Nvidia rather than being a gapcloser like most were hoping for. I think that even at the launch price the performance per dollar was not strong enough to justify the drawbacks against pascal, especially on a reference blower card (aka vacuum cleaner on a card of that power draw).
It's an AMD option at 1070 / 1080 level of performance but there is not much going for it otherwise. It's almost as if they can only get one type of processor architecture right at a time after turning the CPU side around
Reference blower coolers on 250-300w cards :D
Wait for custom cooled cards IMO for vega 64 and/or OCing at all
Vega 56 seems pretty good as a stock card for noise and perf/dollar if you're not planning to OC any GPU because the out-of-the-box power limit is 1.4x lower, a lot less stress on a subpar cooler.
Isn't the pricing issues just caused by the retailers themselves jacking up the prices, due to the high demand for these cards? I remember reading this somewhere, I'll have a look to see if I can find a couple articles on it.
Not entirely, read the quote in post above. AMD doesn't control retailer pricing but if they give a $125 rebate on every card then the retailer can sell it $125 cheaper while making the same amount of $$ per card
I need a new gpu. Bluescreen with "attempt to reset the display driver and recover from timeout failed". It was nvidia gtx 460 1GB OC, yeah served 7 years for me. Win7 64bit,1980x1080. Which one I should buy? Only SC2 and Diablo3. Call a few suggestions. Low price (~120€) and low power assumption one. Ti750? I am/was super happy with 460.
1050 and rx460 are current gen around that price range, also kinda the lowest end stuff available of those gens. They're huge overkill for sc2 even on max settings but respectable for other games. Other stuff is usually end of life or second hand but maybe options for cheaper&weaker cards from older gens
hey fellas, I am currently doing a new build for destiny 2 that is coming out and planning to build around the Ryzen. is X370 really needed over the B350 and is anyone able to suggest what is currently the best b350 motherboard taking into consideration OC and mem support.
Long time everyone. I'm finally ready to upgrade my 2010 system and this is sort of where I'm leaning towards:
Intel i7-7700K
Asus - TUF Z270 mk2
G.Skill - Trident Z RGB 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-3866
Samsung - SM951 128GB M.2-2280 SSD
What I'll be using the system for? Heavy emphasis on the following: audio programming in Max, digital design work in Photoshop and Illustrator, gaming (ofc). I just wanted some extra eyes on whether this seems like a good build. I'll be jumping into an M.2 SSD for my OS so that should be fun
edit: i might actually go to 32GB of RAM as I tend to have ps and ai open at the same time
8700k may be on shelves within 1-2 months, basically a 7700k w/ improved manfacturing process & 50% more cores.
Intel's other platform, x299, used some old tech and changed the CPU core design in some major ways which led to large performance drops in many games and tasks. They also cost more so there are unfortunate tradeoffs and those 6-8 core skylake-x CPU's don't compete as well with the 7700k as they really could/should have.
The 8700k will be much closer to the 7700k in terms of design but just better in some ways and with 50% more cores so it should be a straight upgrade and be the new gaming king with strong performance in those kinds of multithreaded workstation tasks as well.
Skylake used 14nm, Kaby Lake used 14nm+ and Coffee Lake (~8700k) will use 14nm++.
That refinement from 14nm to 14nm+ gave ~300mhz better clocks from the low end of clock speeds all the way up to max OC (hitting ~5ghz with the ease of ~4.7ghz on previous gen). The jump to 14nm++ is also supposed to be very significant, even more so - it's quite plausible that around 5ghz across all 6 cores won't be uncommon and if you're not overclocking, the stock speeds will be high. The single core turbo boost is heavily rumored to be 4.7ghz which is quite aggressive compared to the 4.5 and 4.2ghz of the 7700k and 6700k.
It does hurt to wait a month or two but i'm still kicking myself for buying a system 2 months before the Sandy Bridge release (jan 2011) so after waiting 7 years, maybe those few months is for the best No guarantees, hopefully we get a release date soon. A lot of people expected one yesterday but Intel just talked about the eclipse for half an hour and showed some 15 watt mobile CPU
haha, yea yesterday was kind of a letdown. After looking further i found some clues that z370 might be in around in Q4, so maybe Coffee Lake will be announced by late September, early Oct? ? There's also a lot of confusion around the clock speeds. Some saying base will be 3.7 which seems low if it's the kabylake successor, some say 4.
I'm not sure that I want to wait that long as things are gonna get really busy soon, but idk if I missed it, is there any major benefits of the 370 chipset over 270?
Nothing that i can recall, it should be Q3 release though
base clocks unconfirmed and they're only relevant when the CPU is hitting power limits, they're usually happy to sustain turbo clocks forever even on all cores
I've got an HP Pavilion P6000 that I plan to move to another room after completing my new build. It's specs are:
AMD Phenom II 840T Quad Core 2.9ghz 6GB DDR3 Ram Running Windows 10 64bit
What would be my best upgrade to run games at 1080p? I don't wanna bottleneck bad to the point where I'm blowing money on a higher end card if I dont plan on updating the CPU anyway. I don't mind throwing more RAM in it.
Goal is to have it play most games or is the CPU to old that I'm not gonna be able to do that?
On August 28 2017 05:11 ExPresident wrote: Quick question on upgrading an old PC.
I've got an HP Pavilion P6000 that I plan to move to another room after completing my new build. It's specs are:
AMD Phenom II 840T Quad Core 2.9ghz 6GB DDR3 Ram Running Windows 10 64bit
What would be my best upgrade to run games at 1080p? I don't wanna bottleneck bad to the point where I'm blowing money on a higher end card if I dont plan on updating the CPU anyway. I don't mind throwing more RAM in it.
Goal is to have it play most games or is the CPU to old that I'm not gonna be able to do that?
Doesn't have a GPU already? Ram is probably ok although PUBG eats a lot of ram i think
On August 28 2017 05:11 ExPresident wrote: Quick question on upgrading an old PC.
I've got an HP Pavilion P6000 that I plan to move to another room after completing my new build. It's specs are:
AMD Phenom II 840T Quad Core 2.9ghz 6GB DDR3 Ram Running Windows 10 64bit
What would be my best upgrade to run games at 1080p? I don't wanna bottleneck bad to the point where I'm blowing money on a higher end card if I dont plan on updating the CPU anyway. I don't mind throwing more RAM in it.
Goal is to have it play most games or is the CPU to old that I'm not gonna be able to do that?
Doesn't have a GPU already? Ram is probably ok although PUBG eats a lot of ram i think
It's only got an ATI Radeon HD4200 on board. Years, and years ago I had a graphics card in it but honestly I can't even recall what that was and it died so I took it out and never replaced it (started playing games on PS3/PS4). The PC still runs fine so if I can continue to use it in another room for 1080P gaming I'd love to do that.
My GF wants to join me in Azeroth (World of Warcraft) and her laptop isn't quite up to the task.
So I'm trying to get away with building a tiny as possible PC at a low cost for her that just does WoW. My idea was to go with an AMD APU but that's before I found out the last one they made was a the A10-7850k in early 2014. Too bad, that would be really cheap.
The smallest / cheapest option I could find was an Alienware Alpha with an i5 (Broadwell, T), 250 GB SSD and that Frankensteined GTX 960 (if it is indeed a 960 and not a 960m) for 630 Euro. Not exactly a great deal for the performance but not atrocious if you consider the size.
If I build a Broadwell / GTX 1050 PC, the price would be something like 550 Euro, albeit much larger.
I built a Broadwell i5-5675C powered system a while back, with no discrete GPU thx to the tiny but mighty iris pro 6200, and it fared great in light gaming at 1080p at not necessarily the lowest. Past tense, because, while the system is still very much operational and runs great, inside a relatively small Bitfenix Phenom M (with mATX board), its now graphically powered by a 660ti I bought from a friend for a sixpack :E A considerable improvement (it now even runs GTA V reasonably well) that I didn't really need with my light gaming needs.
EPT
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/KNQ8Mxk.png)
