Posts by wiredotter14

darkmaker13 said:So this is just an estimate?

I checked that other thread first. Thought they were identical.😁

Why double post? This is the wrong thread.

That’s a solid perk, honestly, but if you aren't printing much, I’d rather just grab something with cheap, budget-friendly toner cartridges.

Tyler Ross86 said:Not from ST,
How big is the quality difference between the one on Craigslist and this one:
https://www.newegg.com/p/graphics-card-product-08043/product/

The power difference is basically like comparing a Tomos to a police-issue Yamaha.

Just go look online, maybe on Amazon or something, and see what the user reviews are saying. Check if people are actually running into major issues with them. If it doesn't look like a total disaster, don't sweat it—you'll have a warranty anyway.

swiftfalcon89 said:Your CPU is going to bottleneck that 144Hz refresh rate way before the GPU does...

With that processor, you're better off sticking to 1440p.

Terry Foster5 said:did some digging and turns out those old VA panels were ghosting like crazy, so they switched to IPS and dropped the input lag down to 2.8ms. Plus, there's a 3rd party VESA mount adapter on Amazon for $30, so that’s an easy fix. I'm pulling the trigger on this one. Thanks for the tip.

If anyone wants the full breakdown on this monitor, everything is right here

https://pcmonitors.info/reviews/aoc-q3279vwfd8/

👍👍👍🙂

Kate Kern77 said:Hey. Is this any good? I’ve seen some recommendations floating around. I need a printer for home use—stuff for the kids, worksheets, coloring pages... but I don't want an inkjet. I can't deal with the ink drying up after two weeks of non-use. This looks like a decent option since the toner is cheap. Or do you have something better? Budget is flexible, maybe up to a few hundred bucks...

https://www.amazon.com/pr...99025/product/

If you don't need color, it'll work fine. Just compare the cost of third-party toner against other models and check the user reviews on Amazon.

Is the image an exact match? Like, are you seeing the Windows taskbar and mouse cursor at x4 scale?

If that's the case, it's possible your display settings are set to show input at x4.

Terry Foster5 said:Thanks. My budget is just a rough estimate—I wouldn't mind pushing it up to $2,000 if the value is actually there. ^^

That Dell monitor is a steal at that price point. If you decide to bump up the budget and need VESA mounting, you'll have to dig around a bit unless someone here has them all memorized.

By the way, that Dell uses an MVA panel, not IPS. It’s not bad for gaming, though. I have no idea why American retailers would list it as IPS.

IPS EDIT: Looks like they actually carry both versions...

Terry Foster5 said:Thanks for the help, man. Any idea if there's another monitor similar to yours that actually has VESA support?

Ugh, I don't know off the top of my head. Just hit up Best Buy or Newegg and use their filters. Once you find a few models that fit your budget, just check them one by one.

Are you sure the screen is actually split, or are you just seeing the same image x4 on your monitor?

Alexander Flores3 said:swiftfalcon89...

Is a Pentium considered an APU?

No.

Terry Foster5 said:Does FreeSync work with Nvidia cards, or is it strictly an AMD thing?

It works on Nvidia GTX 1000 series, RTX 2000 series, and probably the GTX 16xx series too. Just make sure you're running updated drivers.

A curved screen on a 23" monitor doesn't really offer any real benefits.
It’s fine otherwise.

Like > said, you either go for size and resolution, or stick to a smaller 1080p screen with a higher refresh rate.

Terry Foster5 said:Hey, looking for some monitor recommendations around $500. Mostly using my PC for gaming and movies. Specs are an Intel Core i5-8400 and an EVGA GeForce RTX 2060.

I was leaning towards but I keep seeing people say stay away from TN panels.

Not sure why you'd pick that one. $500 For a 27" 1080p, it's a TN panel and looks like it lacks FreeSync.

https://www.nabava.net/monitori/aoc-...2-169-56714371

IPS, 75Hz, FreeSync, 31.5", 1440p

wanderingbison9 said:It doesn't technically support it for the CPU fan, but as long as you set your fan curve to stay below 40% for a specific temperature range, the fan won't actually spin up. For instance, if you notice your CPU stays around 40°C while idling, you could just set the curve so the fan stays at a minimum of 20% until it hits about 50°C—just to give yourself some breathing room—and then let it start ramping up from there. In that scenario, wouldn't the cooler itself just keep the fan from spinning until the CPU finally reaches that 50°C mark?

Right, so the cooler is "smart" enough to just not move the fan if the voltage is too low. 👍🎉

wanderingbison9 said:It's done right in the BIOS... just using a standard Microsoft's Q-Fan profile.

Huh. Didn't realize it supported 0rpm mode👍

wanderingbison9 said:With a Cooler Master Hyper 212, you can actually customize the fan curve so it stays in a passive mode—meaning the fan won't even kick on until the CPU hits a certain threshold, say 40°C or 50°C if you set the baseline at 40%. If he decides to go through with an undervolt, wouldn't he be able to spend most of his time just browsing the web, typing up documents, or watching YouTube in total silence? For what it's worth, I personally run my Intel Core 1600x overclocked to 4GHz using that same cooler, and it holds steady at around 70°C during an IBT test.

Which software do you use to set that up?

Amanda Kelly said:First things first—what are we actually using this thing for? That’s probably the most important part.
My multitasking setup is pretty basic—usually just 3 to 4 apps open at once, maybe stretching up to 10 if I'm feeling ambitious. Nothing heavy-duty. It’s mostly just a browser with 15 or 20 tabs eating up my RAM and some terminal windows for managing various VMs and servers, though most of that heavy lifting happens elsewhere, so my local CPU isn't breaking a sweat. My current Intel Core i5 rarely even hits 70% usage; the processor isn't exactly a bottleneck. Honestly, nothing is actually slowing down my workflow or driving me crazy. I guess I just want something new. Maybe I’m just addicted to the dopamine hit of shiny new hardware. That’s probably a good enough reason, right?

Second thing is, the budget is decent. Honestly, most of the limits are just in my own head. I’m not looking to blow money unnecessarily—even if it looks that way to some people—but when it really matters, I’m willing to pay up. I'll grab as many drives as I need. And the monitor. And the keyboard.

The New Guy I can't even begin to process this. It’s just... wow.
If you’re looking to run RAID on two NVMe drives, it looks like it's doable—just make sure you actually check your motherboard specs first. Don't skip that part.
Doesn't seem worth the hassle.

I'm currently running two SATA SSDs in RAID 0, and it got me thinking—just how much of a massive speed boost would I actually see if I threw two NVMe drives into a strip?
Alright, fine. That’s one less thing to worry about—though I say "potential" problem because my current stripping setup hasn't given me a single headache yet.

wiredotter14 Asks:
If you're looking to get any real work done with multithreading, you might as well just go with the Intel Core i5. It’s the only move that actually makes sense for the money.
Honestly, the absolute best move right now is grabbing that 1600X. It's easily worth it. $0.35 You end up with an Intel Core i5 that actually handles multithreading.

It's cheap and doesn't come with a cooler, but paired with a decent one, it'll stay cool and quiet.
https://www.amazon.com/cooler-arctic...m_medium=click

You don't even strictly need to overclock. The X model has fine stock clocks, but bumping it up to about 4GHz is pretty easy with a few clicks.

You could jump up to the 2600, but that's pricier. It comes with a cooler that works if you aren't overclocking, but an aftermarket one is quieter, so the 1600X plus a separate cooler would be the quieter bet.
...

Alright, point taken. I was just looking into the differences between the standard and the X version. 🤔 Good grief, a 30 W difference.
So why would anyone bother with the X model?
Where exactly is that extra 30 W of TDP being dumped?

Never heard of that.
Honestly, sounds ten times—maybe a hundred times—better than those useless hybrid drives. It's practically halfway to a pro-grade storage setup.
Though, I don't really see the point in speeding up data drives that already hit 120-130 MB/s.
Still, I might give it a shot (probably will).

I'll think about the GPU. My priority is specific outputs and silence; some level of raw power is secondary.

I'm in no hurry, so I could probably wait.
What are the actual expectations or rumors so far?

TDP is a number people throw around pretty loosely.
The X model simply has better clock speeds—basically, it boosts higher.
In principle, there's no reason not to go with the X, unless you're worried about them being slightly pricier.
With the 1600 and 1600X, it's a weird situation where the X can actually end up being a tiny bit cheaper than the non-X. The reason is the X comes without a cooler, but if you grab a cooler for around $67, which is better anyway than what you'd get with the non-X, you end up with better clocks plus a quieter setup.

As far as overclocking goes, those two processors are pretty much identical; both can hit around 3.9 GHz without much trouble.

You also have the 1700 model below it $400, which is a total breeze for an 8-core/16-thread processor.
https://www.newegg.com/special-offers...m_medium=click

Expectations for the next generation are high; likely 12-16 cores on the flagship (still on the same AM4 platform).
While the 6-8 core models will probably consist of a single CCX (right now they're all made of 2 CCXs; having one CCX for the same core count is better due to latency.)
7nm process—lower power draw, higher clocks, and likely better IPC too.

But if you need a CPU for multitasking, you won't be making a mistake picking up a 1600X or 1700 right now. Current prices are a steal for that many cores, and I doubt the next generation will launch cheaper for the same multi-threaded performance.

Regarding the GPU, I'm telling you... you could even pick up a passive GT 1030 for dual monitors (though I doubt it handles 2x 1440p; shouldn't be any issues if you aren't trying to play games or anything.
You mentioned your HDMI isn't pushing 1440p—not sure why, it should work.

The thing is, cheap Nvidia cards are overpriced right now. You could get by in total silence with something like a GTX 1060 4 GB Nitro (around $467).
It has xHDMI 2 x Displayport, 1x DVI

Otherwise, you could always find a used card with a warranty for under $333 for a model like that.