Posts by wiredotter14

Robin Young7 said:If those new NVIDIA GTX 1060s end up being just as overpriced as they are right now, what older cards should I look at instead?

Sent from my LG-D855 using Reddit

A bit more expensive (or cheaper if you go used), maybe an NVIDIA GTX 970 or an R9 390.

Cheaper options:
NVIDIA GTX 970

Robin Young7 said:$1000, though honestly, you might need more.

If you actually plan on gaming, that setup is cutting it way too close. Your best bet is to hunt down a used i5 and a motherboard first. As for the GPU, just hang tight. You might be able to squeeze a new RX 470 into your budget soon, or better yet, plenty of last-gen cards will hit the used market once everyone upgrades to newer stuff.

Going this route would save you the most cash.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/processors/listing-example

edit: I’m guessing your RAM is DDR3, so look for processors starting with 2, 3, or 4 (like an i5 4460).

Robin Young7 said:Guys, can someone tell me which used GPU would be the best move here? I don't want to buy new just to watch the value tank in a year. I need a graphics card, motherboard, CPU, and an SSD. I already have a 500W PSU and 8GB of RAM.

Budget?

Jeffrey Allen92 said:https://www.newegg.com/p/example-card-V650-4096B-RMA

Is this any good?

https://www.newegg.com/p/example-card-VGA-670-A1-RMA

Or this one?

I was thinking about pairing it with something like this:

https://www.newegg.com/p/example-pc-Gbit00008

Like the guy above said, refurbished isn't a bad deal if the price is right. As for the warranty, you should legally get at least 12 months on used gear in the US.

This PC is a decent price if it comes with Windows and a company is buying it for an office.

For personal use, it’s nothing special. More importantly, you probably won't be able to upgrade the GPU—unless maybe a low-profile card fits in the PCIe slot, but then all those options above are out.

It’s not just that—for 1080p, you realistically won't need more than 4GB, and if that changes
Look, I honestly think for 1080p gaming, a 4GB GTX 1050 Ti is going to be a much better deal. Even without any overclocking, it should still come out ahead of the RX 480.

ugh, missed it in the screenshot

pretty sure it's centerline.com

Alright, back to the old AMD playbook. They're pulling way more power than Nvidia relative to what you actually get in performance, OC headroom is pretty weak, and power draw just spikes once you start pushing it. But hey, you get similar performance for less cash, slightly better consistency, and better DirectX 12 support.
Basically the same drama we saw with the 290/290 x cards vs the GTX 970, etc. It’s fine—people get decent value for their money.

Except AMD spent the whole time bragging about efficiency, yet this card's performance/watt is basically on par with a Maxwell GTX 750Ti, and it's closer to a GTX 980 than any Pascal card (Linus Tech Tips).

So they leaned hard into marketing and made promises they couldn't keep. Reminds me of some shady maneuvering in the US Congress—not trying to be political here, but they essentially tried to sell us a bill of goods. I'm not exactly disappointed in the hardware itself; at the end of the day, the stock performance is there, but their marketing hinted at something else entirely.

What worries me more is how these cards will work in mobile devices. The RX 460 and GTX 1050 Ti were supposed to be amazing for laptops, but they won't come close to what was promised. If the RX 460 uses half the power of this thing, it’s still nothing special.

Look, saying a die shrink from 28nm down to 14nm yields a 1.7x improvement over the power-hungry pigs from the last generation is total bullshit. Especially since they kept hyping up that performance-per-watt metric, only for it to turn out that the GTX 1070 still hits those power limits without even throttling.

It’s not about raw wattage, it’s about the quality of the build.

A decent 350-400W unit would get the job done, but Best Buy/Micro Center doesn't carry anything in that range. I'm stuck wondering where else to look.

I wouldn't dream of buying a power supply rated under 250-$100

I wouldn't bother looking below this point; unfortunately, there aren't many shops around here carrying anything better worth your time.

https://www.links.com/en/power-supply-500w-vent-052703016

Alright, so all that efficiency talk was total bullshit. At best, this is just a die shrink of the previous architecture, and we can't even see any real overclocking potential yet.
Turns out the efficiency is miles worse than Pascal, so we're stuck hoping for some decent custom OC models. Honestly, it’s fucking unbelievable they released a reference card that power-throttles.
If things stay this way, a used GTX 970—specifically from people jumping over to Pascal—is going to be a hell of a bargain.

AMD still holds the edge in DirectX 12, but let's be real, most users won't care.

Timothy Kim60 said:Yep

Here's the link

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphic...olaris-Promise

Something is seriously off here—either with this specific sample, the drivers, or something else entirely (maybe just the architecture itself)

PC Gamer measured power draw directly at the card using specialized gear, and it turns out the thing is pulling 150W the whole time.
As far as I know, the reference card only has a single 6-pin connector, so we're looking at some aggressive power throttling here. (The GTX 970 in the test doesn't have this issue, presumably because it has at least an 8-pin, whereas this thing draws power similar to an AMD RX 480)

Also, trying to overclock a card that’s already power-throttling at stock boost frequencies is insane. No wonder the OC results are pathetic. Honestly, it's a miracle they even hit nearly 200W with just one 6-pin connector; that flies in the face of all standard specs.

Bottom line: something is wrong with this card. Either the scaling is abysmal, or Polaris has efficiency levels similar to Maxwell, which I find hard (read: refuse) to believe.
After all the massive hype surrounding Polaris's performance-per-watt and the speculation that the card would only pull 90W, it turns out the reference model starts power-throttling right out of the gate.
http://www.pcper.com/image/view/7091...de%2F65643

http://www.pcper.com/image/view/7091...n=node%2F65643

Timothy Kim60 said:On Amazon in France, they had it listed for 269 euros. Once you factor in the sales tax, you're looking at $707. It might be slightly more expensive here in the States, but anything over that is just a total rip-off (which is definitely what we'll see right out of the gate)

That was probably just some random eBay seller. Amazon will likely stick closer to MSRP, but expect prices to be all over the place during the first few weeks

Sure, it’s fine overall, but that power supply? Not worth the money.

The PSU and SSD here are actually decent quality.
You won't even notice the difference between a Pentium and a Core i3. Honestly, the machine will feel faster just because of the SSD. Plus, the newer Core i3 has the same graphics as the Pentium—better than what you listed—and the faster DDR4 memory helps too.

I only included the case so it looks like a complete build; without it, we'd be right around your budget.

You can swap things out: grab an HDD instead of an SSD if you need massive storage space.
Swap the Core i3 for a Pentium (Core i3 instead of this one).
Get a better case, and maybe look for USB 3.0 if you're spending more than $50

Chris Robinson25 said:You had your chance to grab this card for $1000. It’s built like a tank. Now you can kick rocks. 😛

Built like a tank? Yeah, well, it consumes power like one too. I'd rather just grab a GTX 1060 in a few weeks for way less cash.

If money isn't an issue, just go for it.
You could always grab a smaller NZXT Kraken; they look pretty much the same anyway.

Regarding that PCPER link you posted

And yeah, it's true—prices are absolutely skyrocketing. These days, if you push an i7K to its limit, it’ll probably pull as much power as a beefier 45nm chip running at stock settings. Cooling a quad-core isn't the struggle it used to be, but manufacturers still need to turn a profit, and they'll always find a few suckers willing to pay whatever price they set.

BTW, I wasn't a fan of how they ran that test. They tested the Ninja at Low (50.2), Medium (45.3), and High (40.3), but then just slapped the Noctua NH-D14 on PWM (40.8).
Those are the temps I pulled from their test using an i5 6600K @4.3GHz under stress.

The problem is, you can't tell how fast the Noctua is actually spinning. The noise level is basically the same as the Ninja at high, but since the Noctua has dual fans, it doesn't mean the PWM was cranked to the max. A temp of 40.8 with similar noise levels doesn't guarantee it's running at full speed unless they explicitly stated that—which they didn't.
That's why I think there are discrepancies here. When I was reading a Noctua review a while back, they mentioned it performs great even at low RPMs (I think they even have one of those low noise kits, if I recall correctly).

thanks 👍, does this look alright?
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/spire-term-past...-93-w-m-k.aspx

BTW, looking at one of these tests, the Ninja runs about 4°C warmer than the Noctua, though both temps are actually fine. It’s totally acceptable for a standard i5 or i7K, but if someone is dropping cash on a 140W stock processor, they’re probably planning to overclock it. They'll likely want to look into a beefier cooler instead.

Do you have a link comparing the Ninja against its competitors?

Anyway, since we're talking about CPU overheating,

if I’m planning to overclock an Intel Core i7 920 by bumping up the voltage after 6 or 7 years, should I swap out the thermal paste as a precaution?

Right now, I've only overclocked via the base clock. These are my temperatures on P95 Small FFTs, and it's pretty warm in the room right now.
The cooler is a Scythe Kabuto (blowing air downwards).

crimsonstag84 said:You don't necessarily need to go with a Skylake hexa-core; I guess the Intel Haswell 5820K might actually be the better value here, which would also help lower the cost for $183.

Since he's already committed to going with the last generation anyway.

Kimberly Gomez34 said:Forget the NH-D14. That's old news. You really need to check out the reviews for the Scythe Ninja 4; it's a total game changer $123 right here in this link

It's overpriced as hell, but those ugly-ass Noctua dual fans? I can't stay away from them.

feralrider92 said:Look, I get it, really—but since I already have an NZXT case and I’ve always wanted to try liquid cooling, I think I'll just go with that one. I like for my PC to feel pretty, don't judge me 😁
Anyway, thanks for the advice 👍

Fine, just be ready to deal with pump hum that's usually louder than something like a Noctua NH-D14 air cooler.

Just pointing out you're basically halfway to a Broadwell-E build with that budget.

So your setup would run about

Intel Core i7 6700K $917
Z170 Motherboard $383
That NZXT Kraken X61 cooler 1350
----------
Total=5250

While you could get a hexa-core for $333 more. For me, that's a no-brainer.



It shows how much of a waste it is to pay $333 way too much for a cooler. An Intel Core i7 Skylake isn't exactly hard to cool; you could pull some serious overclocking even with a $100 cooler.

You can push this Intel Core i7 6800K pretty far on that Noctua NH-D14, or just pick a prettier cooler if aesthetics are your priority.

edit: not halfway, more like almost there. 😲