Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/g/ - Technology

Search:


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
>> No.71698923 [View]
File: 364 KB, 1920x1080, f-faster RAM doesn't matter on intel I swear.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71698923

>>71698620
Only with a Z* board.
That's just one of the reasons you don't buy intel

>>71698692
No, everyone says that Gigabyte makes the worst AM4 boards.
You must be trolling.
>>71698710
>ok thanks how would i attach that to the vrm?
with your fingers

>>71698724
>Got a deal on a 9th gen intel chip.
No you didnt
You thought you did, but the 9700k is worse than the upcoming $250 Ryzen.
>B360 board
so you're further screwing yourself over here with shitty RAM. Even worse of a deal.

>> No.71668473 [View]
File: 364 KB, 1920x1080, f-faster RAM doesn't matter on intel I swear.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71668473

>>71668410
Yes.
Lying shills will lie and tell you otherwise, though, to make it seem like Intel is somehow a better deal when it's not.

3000 is decent as long as it's CL15 or lower, though. 3000CL16 is pretty slow.

>>71668432
You mean $300.

>>71668443
What model is it? For shitty models, yeah that's not abnormal. You can try undervolting it but it might require lowering clock speeds as well.

>>71664196
>3466 CL14
nice la
>spinning rust drive
mediocre

>> No.71650833 [View]
File: 364 KB, 1920x1080, f-faster RAM doesn't matter on intel I swear.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71650833

>>71650773
>lying this hard to shill intel
>14% is 3%
Kill yourself
inb4 you reply in a way that shows your inability to do basic math

>> No.71525168 [View]
File: 364 KB, 1920x1080, ram.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71525168

>>71525123
Cucking the ram this hard to.

>> No.71523533 [View]
File: 364 KB, 1920x1080, f-faster RAM doesn't matter on intel I swear.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71523533

>Create a parts list
https://pcpartpicker.com/
>Learn how to build a PC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69WFt6_dF8g

Want help?
>State the budget & CURRENCY
>List your uses e.g. Gaming, Video Editing, VM Work
>For monitors include purpose & graphics pairing
>NO Speccy or "bottleneck checkers"

CPUs
>Athlon 200GE - HTPC, web browsing, bare minimum gaming
>R3 2200G - Light 30-60fps gaming(dGPU optional). 2400G if you want a CPU which can last into a GPU upgrade
>R5 2600/X - Good 60fps+ gaming & multithreaded use
>R7 3800/X - Best for gaming, launching 7/7
>R9 3900X/3950X - Budget HEDT or gaming+streaming on a single PC, launching in September
>Threadripper - HEDT

>Intel CPUs are now defunct. Even used i7 workstations are no longer worthwhile due to vulnerabilities and related performance regression

RAM
>NEVER use only a single stick
>8GB - very light use, and/or if you don't mind closing programs regularly
>16GB - standard amount. If you have to ask if you need more, you don't
>CPUs benefit from fast RAM; 2800MHz+ is ideal. Check "more" link for true latency formula

Graphics cards
1080p
>RX 570/580 - value.
>1660 - Slightly better perf for more demanding games on high/maxed 60fps+
> 1660Ti / Vega56 - higher framerates
1440p (WQHD)
>used 1070Ti / Vega - 60-120fps+ in most games on high/maxed
>High end models of 2070 like the Strix have been on sale for ~$460
2160p (4k)
>Wait for better priced GPUs. 2080Ti is only 1.85x the performance for 4x the cost of a $300 GPU, and still only does 30fps in many games.

>RX 5700/XT is launching on 7/7. Nvidia Super soon as well. Wait for independent benchmarks if considering a >$300 GPU

Other
>Consider a larger SSD (better GB/$) instead of small SSD & HDD
>M.2 is a form factor, NOT a performance standard
>PLAN BUILD AROUND YOUR MONITOR IF GAMING

https://rentry.co/pcbg-more

Prev >>71515965

>> No.71372068 [View]
File: 364 KB, 1920x1080, f-faster RAM doesn't matter on intel I swear.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71372068

>>71371208
>AMD wins the games which are lower FPS
>Intel wins in the games which are already higher FPS than your monitor's refresh rate
So AMD is better cool.

>>71371407
They used the same RAM on both, in their disclosure. You use slower RAM with Intel and it'll perform worse. Stop lying.
And who knows how many more dozens of security vulns are out there affecting intel which will be patched over the next few years further worsening their performance.

>>71371960
Huh. That's interesting to see, if true, that the 3900X isn't worse than the 3800X in any of those games.
By those numbers, it matches it in the worst case, and in a few cases like CS:GO is even 10% higher.

>> No.71320394 [View]
File: 364 KB, 1920x1080, ram.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71320394

>>71319247
Yeah it does.

>> No.71247670 [View]
File: 364 KB, 1920x1080, f-faster RAM doesn't matter on intel I swear.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71247670

>>71247625
Even 400W would generally be enough. 550 is overkill.

>>71247532
I'd get new board and RAM. 3000CL16 is pretty bad for ANY CPU.

>> No.71245726 [View]
File: 364 KB, 1920x1080, ram.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71245726

>>71245701
And yes it's relevant.

>> No.71237905 [View]
File: 364 KB, 1920x1080, ram.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71237905

>>71237875
What ram did you get? 3200-4000Mhz is optimal for the highest FPS you can get.

>> No.71230242 [View]
File: 364 KB, 1920x1080, ram.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71230242

>>71228576
It matches/beat next gen ryzen 8 cores with 3200/4000mhz memory. It's fast as hell and current best for gaming if you're into high the highest framerates. Reason why amd "beat" it in games is because they gimped it's memory in tests.

>> No.71224317 [View]
File: 364 KB, 1920x1080, ram.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71224317

I'm sorry but I've got to say something here. Every single instance AMD bench marked vs Intel, AMD was using 2933 mhz ram while the tested Intel chips were using 2666 ram. I'm no shill but why couldn't they have used the same hardware in both systems? All of the AMD funded benchmarks matched or came ahead by 1% in single threaded, If Intel used 2933 mhz wouldn't still be ahead by a fair amount?

>> No.71223998 [View]
File: 364 KB, 1920x1080, ram.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71223998

I'm sorry but I've got to say something here. Every single instance AMD benchmarked vs Intel, AMD was using 2933 mhz ram while the tested Intel chips were using 2666 ram. I'm no shill but why couldn't they have used the same hardware in both systems? All of the AMD funded benchmarks matched or came ahead by 1% in single threaded, If Intel used 2933 mhz wouldn't still be ahead by a fair amount?

>> No.71184801 [View]
File: 364 KB, 1920x1080, ram.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71184801

>>71184737
It kind of does matter



Navigation
View posts [+24] [+48] [+96]