Posts by wanderingbison9

Oh man, did you see that?! Zhou Guanyu just went flying right over the barriers.
Thank goodness the Halo was there to protect him.

Is there any way I can actually verify this on my ASRock board? Since I'm running an R5 1600 x, CPU-Z just shows me PCIe 3.0 x16, so I'm left guessing about the actual bandwidth available.

I have a feeling that for certain tasks within video editing software, having PCIe 4.0 x16 and Smart Access Memory might offer a noticeable performance boost compared to just running at x8. When you're working against a deadline that's already passed, doesn't every little bit of speed count?😬 Of course, I haven't been able to track down any specific benchmarks that would give me a definitive answer.

wiredotter14 said:Honestly, using a PCIe 3.0 x16 slot isn't really a bottleneck for almost any graphics card out there that supports an x16 interface, is it? It’s not that the motherboard itself is inherently bad or outdated; rather, it feels like some of those newer AMD cards are just being a bit unreasonable regarding how they utilize the available lane bandwidth. Since the Ryzen 3600 doesn't actually support PCIe 4.0 anyway, does it really matter which route you take? It feels like it makes little difference in the end.

You might run into a tiny bit of a bottleneck with the 6600XT when it's running on a PCIe 4.0 x8 connection, but honestly, it’s nothing compared to the absolute disaster that was the 6500XT with its limited x4 lanes, right?

Is the jump from the 5600XT to the 6600XT actually worth all the hype? To me, it doesn't feel like a massive leap forward in performance. If I were in your shoes, I’d probably just hold off until the end of the year and wait for a better opportunity. Wouldn't it make more sense to aim for something in the realm of a 6700XT once prices settle down? By then, you could likely snag a much more substantial upgrade for a significantly better price.

I've been sitting here with my old Asus Prime x370 Pro—running that latest AGESA BIOS—and my R7 3700 x, just poking around in CPU-Z to see what's what. Can you believe what I'm seeing? It actually lists PCIe 4.0 (16 GT/s) right there on the screen. Since everything I've read says the Ryzen 3000 series supports 4.0, including the R5 3600, shouldn't this be expected? It’s all a bit of a head-scratcher, isn't it?

Well, I actually have that same ASRock board in my other rig right now, which got me thinking—if an older 3-series motherboard can be upgraded to support PCIe 4.0 through a BIOS update, isn't it possible that this 4-series board could handle it too? I'm honestly going to go double-check that just to be sure.

So, if I decide to upgrade to a graphics card that supports PCIe 4.0 x16 while sticking with my current R7 3700 x, would I actually be able to utilize the full PCIe 4.0 bandwidth? Of course, I'm not trying to claim there will be a massive performance jump, but theoretically speaking, would that connection still run at its full potential?

Look, at least the graphics are roughly twice as fast as before, which isn't exactly groundbreaking, but it might just be enough to push certain games from being unplayable to actually playable. As for video decoding, wouldn't you agree that having a dedicated chip handle that load uses significantly less power than forcing every single core to run at full throttle?

urbanheron4 said:It’ll work fine for browsing or watching YouTube and stuff. But don't forget, since you're using integrated graphics, that 8 GB of RAM is being split up to act as video memory. That isn't exactly a huge amount to work with. If you're planning on gaming, you won't be very happy with the results.

But honestly, how much fun can you really have with ancient HD 4000 graphics paired with an old Core i7? Most games that are even remotely playable on hardware like that don't really demand much RAM anyway—once you subtract what the video memory takes, you're mostly looking at things like Tetris 😛. I think the only truly useful detail would be knowing if there's room to upgrade the RAM or if there are two extra slots available, though since it's a pre-built machine, I wouldn't hold my breath.

Lawrence Garcia89 said:It doesn't really make sense to pair an AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT with this motherboard since it runs on x8, and from what I can see, this board doesn't even support PCIe 4.0. As for the 6700 XT, it would perform better, but you're still stuck with that PCIe 3.0 limitation, which makes this a pretty poor choice of a board.

Aren't we being a little dramatic here? Sure, you might see a slight bump in frame rates when using PCIe 4.0 x8, depending on which game you happen to be playing.

dustybadger11 said:That’s pretty much where my head is at too.

These i7 units were likely used by developers for their own niche requirements—my current company is in the IT sector, after all.

What am I supposed to do with 32 GB of RAM on a rig from 2012? Just sit there and watch YouTube? :😁

Well, nothing much, really, though you have to admit that modern laptops handle those basic tasks perfectly fine even with just 8 GB of RAM...

With that i5 processor, you should still be able to stream YouTube in 1440p if you happen to have a monitor that supports that resolution...

But honestly, if you're looking at the Core i7, the graphics are pretty weak, and the multimedia capabilities just aren't there. An i5 actually comes with decent video decode and encode support for things like h264, h265, and VP9, whereas the Core i7 lacks all of that—and let's be real, it definitely isn't going to handle those tasks through software alone. If you can't rely on the hardware, why would you even bother using this machine for heavy rendering in Austin or similar programs?

There isn't really much room for debate here, as a 7th gen i5 is pretty much your only logical move for what you're looking to do. I just find myself wondering, though, what kind of games were you actually planning on running on a setup like that?

Douglas Roberts49 said:And why? Is it perhaps the driver at fault?

I suppose I get it, though—that whole crumble zone concept... almost like the car was designed to just split right down the middle, isn't it?

Good grief, Haas F1 Team, how on earth do you manage to build such a subpar car?

Seriously though, folks, it’s looking like a total washout out there—it’s basically like having knee-deep flooding in a town like Memphis... how on earth are we supposed to actually race in conditions like this?

And he even went ahead and grabbed some beer and chips

P.S. there’s absolutely nowhere for this water to drain around here... putting the beer back in the fridge

Let's hope the sun stays out until the very end...

Watching those Red Bull cars slide through the corners... they just look absolutely effortless, don't they?

When you're looking at running Autodesk, you really need to focus on those compute cores... which makes Nvidia probably the smarter play here... specifically if you can grab as much VRAM as possible... Personally, I think an RTX 3060 with its 12 GB of VRAM strikes a pretty solid balance between cost and performance, don't you think?

I honestly feel like 16 GB of RAM just isn't going to cut it for what we're trying to do here.

I wanted to circle back to the monitor situation for a moment, if you don't mind.

This particular model looks like a fantastic option—it's newer, more affordable, and I even spotted an extra 10% discount over at Best Buy:

In case you want to dig deeper, here is a full review: https://www.displayninja.com/samsung-u32j590-review/

Edward Peterson70 said:So, what about the setup? 😁

Here is what I am looking at:

https://www.mall.com/lcd-monitors/sam...32-curved

https://www.mall.com/desktop-computers/...-extian-gy7-6-

I honestly can't figure out why I keep checking mall.com in the first place. 😬

But why not?

wiredotter14 said:but what exactly can he afford right now?

Looking at the current selection, if that Samsung doesn't sell, I think I'd probably just stick with that one mentioned earlier...

Review:

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews...itor,6265.html

It hits over 300 nits, and while it doesn't seem to push much past sRGB, it covers that range completely, which is actually a win in my book. Isn't trying to mess around with partial DCI-P3 or Adobe RGB coverage without a dedicated calibration tool just asking for trouble? It feels like such a gamble. The review even mentions some "calibrated" presets for WB and gamma.

wiredotter14 said:I’m looking to pick up a replacement for my RX580 later this year, specifically something that can handle 3440x1440p at 144Hz.
I’m really hoping that by the second half of the year, something significantly better than an RX6700XT shows up on the market for around $600.

I have to admit, my experience using the RTX 3060 for video editing and post-production hasn't been particularly impressive, especially with all those annoying bugs. Like you, I'm just waiting for an affordable AMD card that offers at least 2x or 3x the performance of my old Rx580; I haven't really warmed up to Nvidia unless we're talking about a Quadric, but there's just no way I can swing that kind of budget right now...