Posts by wiredotter14

Alexander Moore67 said:(nothing but the GPU is running off that PSU)

Oh, so you’re using some kind of dummy ATX adapter to trigger the PSU through the motherboard since the rig is running dual power supplies? My first thought was that the main PSU handling the motherboard might just handle that third GPU too, without needing extra adapters.

fadedorca66 said:Just grab two Molex to 1x PCIe adapters and you're good.

Yeah. Each Molex provides 75W. You can make a 6-pin out of one, or an 8-pin PCIe from two. If the PSU puts out roughly 600W on the 12V rail, it can pull plenty more from the wall. It should be fine. Obviously, depends on what else is pulling juice in the build.

Rachel Fox4 said:Photoshop does NOT run incredibly well on a mac.*
Especially on an older CPU with integrated graphics and only 128 GB of storage, which you'll fill up before you even get to work.

The laptop itself is too small for comfortable use, particularly with that 13" screen at 900p resolution. Plus, the color gamut is much narrower than what you'd find on a standard monitor, making it unsuitable for Photoshop.

You might have thought this was a great opportunity to pick up a Mac and switch over to iOS, but it really isn't worth it.

For that kind of money, you can buy a much better laptop. You might even be able to grab an external monitor as well.

Exactly. You're better off grabbing a Windows laptop or a desktop PC paired with a decent monitor. Or, if you're dead set on needing macOS plus an external display, just pick up a new M1 Mac Mini.

fadedorca66 said:https://www.silverstonetek.com/produ...id=930&area=en

The site says it only comes with one daisy-chain cable. Pretty useless.

2 x 8-pin PCIe connector ("700mm / 150mm")

If it's just one cable and the issue is that the 150mm stretch is too short, you can always extend it. Honestly, it should be enough length to reach from one card to the next. Unless the first card already needs 2x8-pin, but the OP didn't specify.
Either way, you can just grab a Molex to PCIe adapter and use the
3 x 4-Pin Peripheral connector ("600mm / 150mm / 150mm")

graniteharbor952 said:Hey, I need some quick advice on a power supply issue.
I just picked up a new EVGA SuperNOVA modular PSU. The box only came with one PCIe cable for the GPU. I’m trying to hook up an extra card—an ASUS GTX 1070—but I'm short one power cable.
Is it safe to use a cable from a different brand (looks like it's from an XFX unit) to connect this PSU to my GPU?
Thanks in advance.

Too easy. Just return the PSU if they didn't include the cable that was supposed to be in there. Otherwise, you could always try making a PCIe adapter from a Molex connector.

Roger Booth2 said:I'm liking this Acer one. Is Newegg actually legit though? Never heard of them before.

Eh, they're Canadian. It could be fine, but I've heard people run into issues with their returns. You can find that same monitor here in the US, just at a higher price tag.

Roger Booth2 said:Alright, thanks. I think I can squeeze that PSU into the budget too.

Now there's just one thing left. What monitor should I pair with this rig? I'm aiming for 1440p resolution, and the budget for the monitor would be around $1000 $200-$100. It doesn't need to be huge since I'll be sitting pretty close to the screen. I've got a 24-inch Dell 1440p monitor myself and it does the job.

EDIT: Maybe this one?

Ugh, 24", TN panel, and 1440p makes zero sense. 24" is way too small for 1440p, and IPS panels blow TN out of the water.

Your monitor budget is actually pretty high. Honestly, you might as well go for a 27-32" with an IPS panel, 144Hz, and Freesync.

Something like this:

https://www.nabava.net/monitori/acer...16-9-106831391
(From a shop in the US)

Alexander Moore67 said:If you're already dropping cash on an $1333 5700xt, don't be cheap with the PSU. That i5 10400f can hit 130W under heavy multi-threaded loads, plus the GPU pulls over 220W... I'd go with a reliable Corsair TX550M for $206 gold efficiency!

That 130W figure for that CPU is strictly for stress tests or rendering. Even then, 130W + 220W puts you at maybe 350W—maybe 400W if you're hitting some impossible peak scenario. In reality? You're looking at 300W. Still, more headroom is better. If the budget allows, I’d grab that TXM myself, though it isn't strictly mandatory. Getting that Gold certification might save you a few bucks on the electric bill over the years.

Without overclocking, you should be fine sticking to the stock specs; you might just have to crank the fan speed up a bit sometimes. If you don't care about noise, then go for it. Otherwise, look at the LC-CC-120 or the Freezer 34 if you want something with more punch.

Roger Booth2 said:Thanks, I won't overcomplicate things further. I'll just grab what was suggested at Micro Center with that better power supply.

One more thing. The case you suggested is a bit too, how should I put it, plain 😁 My sister is younger, so she wants something with a bit more style. We were looking through what's available at Micro Center and she got stuck on this one:

https://www.microcenter.com/product/sharkoon-skiller-...66174/product/

Is that a decent case, or should we stick with the Zalman one you recommended?

It's fine. It mostly comes down to personal taste. Maybe just toss in an extra fan.
https://www.microcenter.com/product/xilenc-fan...60884/product/

Check if they have it in stock. Honestly, your best bet is to just throw everything in the cart and order it (put a note in saying you want them to build the PC for you). If they're out of anything, they'll let you know. If they change anything, post it here so we can make sure they didn't swap something out for something worse—like a lower-quality PSU for the same price.

It’s happening, but how much do you think you'll actually end up paying for that percentage?

Timothy Kim60 said:@wiredotter14/">@@wiredotter14

Checked out some reviews for those Gigabyte power supplies. They look solid. Seems like a sweet deal for the money.

Look, I'd honestly rather just go with... $13 Might as well go with Seasonic and that 5-year warranty if the budget allows for it... assuming they actually have it in stock, of course.

You might find something slightly cheaper, but honestly, TNG did a solid job putting this together. ADM is a reliable shop—they actually pick up the phone, so I’d suggest giving them a call to confirm they have everything listed in stock. Plus, they handle the assembly for free.

My only suggestion would be to grab a better power supply if you can swing it within your budget. Though, who knows if they even have it; they were out of stock when I checked last week.

Alexander Moore67 said:Seasonic Bronze$33 difference isn't enough to make it a smart choice if you can grab the TXM instead

$50 If you're cutting it close on the budget, there are a few things that actually matter. Don't get distracted by the shiny stuff. Focus on what keeps the system running.

boldharbor7 said:It's not about the card payment; it's just the only one they actually have in stock, according to PCPartPicker. I'm planning to pay cash, which will obviously be much cheaper. If I could find it for around $120-$130, I’d probably grab both the R5 3600 and the 3060Ti.

What's missing from Amazon?
Looking at this Ryzen 5 3600 deal. It’s sitting there on the shelf. Just another chip. Another way to spend money if you're looking to build something mid-range without breaking the bank too badly. Not much to say about it, really. It does what it says on the box. If you need an upgrade for an older AM4 setup, maybe it makes sense. Otherwise? Just another piece of silicon.
+[Links] You get a much better cooler than what comes with the 3600X.
Wait, what? You're just saying "or"? Not much to go on there. Give me some actual context if you want an answer.
AMD just dropped the Ryzen 5 3600. It’s out. If you’re looking at upgrading, check the specs. It’s standard stuff. Typical mid-range release. Just another day in the hardware cycle.

I 1850 i $667 That’s way too much for 3600. I'm sticking with my choice—the Core i5 10400F. $433...or maybe the 1600AF. $300).
If you actually pull the trigger on the 3600, definitely check if the 3600X is sitting there at the same price. They’re basically twins. The only real difference is that the 3600X comes with a slightly better stock cooler, which gives you those marginally higher clock speeds and performance bumps.

If you're looking for something brand new, I think the RX5500 is pretty much your only option at that price point—honestly, probably performs better than the 1650 Super too. If you go used, you could find something significantly better, like a GTX1070 at minimum, but the selection out there is pretty thin right now.

https://www.amazon.com/s?k=rx5500

Alexander Moore67 said:https://www.amazon.com/corsair-psu/
Your build won't pull more than 550W at peak load; you're looking at about 340W max.

I've got a TX650M; solid unit. A high-quality 550W is plenty.
Personally, I’d grab the 3060Ti. It’s a tier above the 5700XT. On paper, you're looking at an R5 3600 vs a Core i5 10400F, probably because of motherboard price gaps. If forced to choose between those two CPUs, I'm going with the 3600.
Just a heads-up: watch out for shops like those overseas retailers that ship from abroad. They can be cheap, sure, but customer service and returns can be a total nightmare.

You could also look at this one:
It isn't modular like the one pictured and availability is iffy, but it's a Seasonic Bronze with a 5-year warranty. For the price, it's a decent deal.
https://www.newegg.com/p/seasonic-power-supply...61540/product/

P.S.

Looking at it now—you're picking the R5 3600 for $667? Just because of credit card fees? $667 is way too much for that chip.

Sam Diaz2 said:I don't really see it that way. If you're dropping $100+ on a chip from 2017 and a B450 board, there's no guarantee that some future 6th gen Ryzen will even stick to the AM4 platform. Plus, who knows if AMD will even bother innovating now that they've taken the lead? They might just sit there milking their 5th gen by releasing X and XT versions or whatever other junk they come up with, which means those Intel 12th Gen prices might stay high for a while. And once they finally drop in two or three years, how much will a 5 or 6-year-old processor even be worth?

On the flip side, with LGA1200 and Intel's 11th gen trying to hold its own—either through raw power or price—you'd at least have the option to pick up a faster chip or jump to an Intel Core i7-10700 when things get cheaper. An i3 is usually easier to offload too, since it stays relevant longer.

Just to be clear, this is just my take. I'm not trying to act like I've outsmarted anyone 👍 . I'm just looking at it from my own experience of picking a CPU, back when I wasn't even looking at Intel. I ended up spending some time on: https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/ sort by Best value for money

I knew from the jump that if I went with AMD, I'd want a B550 board (for the reasons I mentioned), or LGA1200 if I went Intel. When I compared the prices, the form factors, and the features—having Wi-Fi was a non-negotiable for me—I ultimately went with Intel because of the cost.

Personally, I picked up the 10100F for $203 during Black Friday. I'm not saying it's the smartest move ever made, but it felt like a good deal. Honestly, if I were going to buy an NVIDIA RTX 3060 for $1467, I'd make sure the motherboard, CPU, and cooling all actually made sense in terms of quality and looks. I wouldn't pair a card like that with an i3 or an R3.

1) Fine, you snagged a Core i5 10400F for Black Friday. Like I said, the value is great.
2) The Ryzen 5600 will probably launch around $667, maybe less later. Right now, the only Intel chips even remotely competing with the 5600X are the i7s, and their prices aren't going down anytime soon.
3) AMD's 6000 series won't be on AM4, which makes the 5000 series fantastic. You're paying $300 for a legitimate 6-core processor. But again, a Core i5 10400F isn't bad; it just has a terrible upgrade path and you overpay for the motherboard.

4) "Checked Userbenchmark" — 🤣🤣
UserBenchmark is a disaster. It's the antichrist of hardware sites and is banned on half the forums out there.

Alexander Moore67 said:The price for the Intel Core i5-9600K was sitting around $567 when it first hit the shelves here, and it never actually dropped below $500. Now that it's hovering above $600, there's no way we'll ever see a price cut like the one on the Intel Core i5-12600K dropping from 2900 down to 2000.

The 3600 sat at about $500 for a long time, and briefly went under 1500.
The 5600X isn't dropping from 2900 to 2000. Instead, they'll just release the 5600 for probably $229, which is $29—or roughly $83 more (with tax)—than what the R5 3600 cost.
So, like you said, the 3600 was around 1700 at launch, and the 5600 will be around $667. Maybe not on day one, but since the 5600 with a $300 MSRP is currently 2900, hitting 2000-2100 is realistic for the 5600.
Doesn't matter to the OP though. They aren't buying a 5000 series processor right this second anyway.

Sam Diaz2 said:If we're talking price, then the i5 and the R5 are 100% more expensive (and not even in the same league). If we aren't talking savings, then there's that $333 difference on the processor. In a year or two, you could just swap in a new chip. The socket is fresh, so it’ll definitely support at least one more generation.
On YouTube benchmarks, the i3 actually pulls a better average FPS than the R5 2600.

The Intel Core i3-10100 has hyperthreading.

A few years back, people used to recommend the Intel Pentium G4650 for budget builds because it was so good that its price quickly climbed to nearly 80-100% of what was actually recommended. I'm worried they did the same thing with the Intel Core i5-9600K, driving the price way up. I think back in the summer, it topped out around $500.

Throughout my whole component picking process, I was certain I'd go with AMD. They were better, had better tech, and were affordable... until recently. Honestly, once you bundle a solid motherboard and a processor together, I don't think the price is a best value for money anymore. Just my humble opinion.

Personally, if I'm gaming heavily and want to stay current, I'd rather invest in a Z490 board now. For $567, I'd have a CPU and mobo setup ready for the future instead of dropping $567 just for an Intel Core i5-9600K.

1) Nobody on this thread recommended the Intel Core i5-9600K just because the price spiked.
2) Sure, the i3 10100 has HT, but it’s the same situation as those quad cores without HT from a few years ago—demands are just rising.
3) The i3 10100 is basically on par with the R5 2600. A few FPS better on average, maybe a few worse on the minimums. The Intel Core i5-7500 is right there too. The Intel Core i5-10400F is significantly better.

4) The i3 10100 is great value because the prices are ridiculous, no question. What's questionable is the futureproofing and the upgrade path.
5) The Intel Core i5-7500 offers a much better upgrade path for not much more cash + you can run 3200MHz RAM on a B450 board. You can't do that on B460.
6) The i3 10100F performs well, but the futureproofing sucks. If new games like Cyberpunk 2077 push the limits of the Intel Core i5-9600K, how will a quad-core handle it? The i3 has a mediocre upgrade path since used Intel chips are historically way overpriced (for example, a couple-year-old quad core costs the same as an i3 10100 now).
7) The Intel Core i5-10400F has solid performance and a good price—the current sweet spot. It doesn't have a great upgrade path, but you probably won't need one.
8) I’d go with the Intel Core i5-7500 if I planned a decent upgrade in a year, or the Intel Core i5-10400F if I wanted to just leave it alone. I wouldn't touch the i3 10100 with this budget because it'll eventually bottleneck a card like the NVIDIA RTX 3060, especially once you upgrade the monitor.

P.S.

Regarding what you wrote at the end about $567 for the Z490 and the i3 10100F... I follow similar logic, but I think it's far better to grab the Intel Core i5-7500 and a solid B450 board. That way, you can upgrade to something like an Intel Core i5-12400, which beats almost anything on the LGA1200 platform, and you can pick one up for roughly $667 new (or less as time goes on). With Z490, you're stuck with expensive Intel options, whether new or used.

Sam Diaz2 said:Personally, I'd grab the MSI and just go with Intel.

I’d probably pair it with the Intel Core i3-10100F too—it's actually 18% faster and about 20% cheaper.

18% faster than what? The Intel Core i5-7500?
Maybe in games where you aren't even hitting your FPS ceiling. Once the heavy hitters arrive, you're going to feel those missing cores (the 10100F is just a quad-core). We saw this exact same thing happen with non-hyperthreaded quads about a year ago. There's no reason to settle for a quad when you can step up to 6-core (whether it's an Intel Core i5-10400F or an Intel Core i5-7500).

Example: Cyberpunk 2077 hits 80% CPU usage on the Intel Core i5-9600K (with decent performance), so a quad-core would just be choking.