B550 motherboards have dropped in price lately, which makes me think high-end B450 boards are starting to lose their edge. Honestly, a mid-range B550 is basically on par with a premium B450 when you look at the VRM quality.
If we look at the CPU, motherboard, and RAM combo I mentioned, we’re looking at roughly $2167. It’s a solid platform. That leaves $167 on the table—if he sells the CPU for about $400-$$167, the motherboard for $200-$$83, and the RAM kit for $150-$$67 (honestly, if he lists the whole set for $100, it’ll sell like hotcakes). That should cover a 1TB SSD perfectly. From there, he just needs to wait for the dust to settle regarding the next generation of mainstream GPUs, because upgrading his graphics card alone is going to cost him way more than his $7k budget. Once he finds something suitable, he can offload the current GTX 950 for $100. He doesn't need to jump straight to a high-end $3,000 beast right away; an RTX 3050 or a 3050Ti with 8GB of VRAM would be a massive upgrade . Cheaper CPU alternatives: R7 5800X at $1233, i7 10700K at $1000 (though obviously, Intel requires a different board), R7 3700X at $833, or perhaps the R5 5600X for $900, depending on whether his software suite prioritizes single-core or multi-threaded performance—unless the R5 5600 becomes available .
Word is that by mid-January, we'll see the GTX 1660 Ti arriving. It's built on the GA106 chip (unlike the 3060Ti which uses GA104, similar to an RTX 3070), and it should feature 12GB of VRAM thanks to that 192-bit bus. There might be a 6GB version floating around, but a leak on the official ASUS site suggests the 12GB variant is coming, which is definitely a win. I wouldn't count on any massive price cuts for the RTX 2000 series; that rarely happens during a generational shift—they usually just get phased out of stock.
It shouldn't take long before the 3050Ti and 3050 hit the market, though rumors say the standard 3050 will arrive first.
If you want my advice, hold off until at least February. You'll want to wait for better availability of the hardware already out there and for the arrival of the new mainstream GPU models (yes, those 3000-series cards are officially considered mainstream now $1667). Basically, save up until you can afford:
An Intel Core i9-12900K (roughly $1533) A decent B550 motherboard (something like an ASUS Prime B550 or a Gigabyte Aorus B550m elite) for about $283, unless you specifically need extra features like dual GPU support. In that case, don't go overboard—stick to something like a Gigabyte X570, MSI Tomahawk, or an ASUS ROG Strix X570, which should run you around $600. Those are high-end boards, and anything more expensive won't offer much tangible benefit. Just check if you actually need DDR4 RAM DDR4 RAM 2x16gb 3000/3200mhz (around 900-$333) The GPU mentioned earlier—either look for that GTX 1660 Ti 12GB or stick with the current RTX 2060 8GB Super. Alternatively, if you wait longer, the cheaper RTX 3050 or 3050Ti models should come with a 128-bit bus and an 8GB VRAM option. For storage, a 1TB NVMe SSD is plenty. I grabbed a SanDisk Extreme Pro 1TB for $287 during a Black Friday sale on Amazon
You can always grab the graphics card later, but you can pick up the SSD right away.
wanderingbison9 said:@Timothy Kim60/">@@Timothy Kim60: The issue is that all GTX cards are capped at just 6 GB of VRAM, though I have considered running AMD alongside Nvidia using OpenCL mode. RT in Resolve isn't particularly helpful here, and while they claim Tensor cores help with Optical flow, TNR, and other tasks, in reality, that's not really how it plays out.
In most operations, the RTX 2xxx and 3xxx series outperform Navi quite nicely. However, interestingly enough, when it comes to Temporal Noise Reduction x1 and Optical flow—where Tensor should theoretically dominate—Navi holds its own. The RX 6900 XT and the 3090 show nearly identical performance, and in some cases, Navi actually beats the 3090!
Bizarre results...
It's tough to be an expert these days. The smartest move is to find actual results based on the specific use case you need. Like you asked that guy, mainstream models aren't even seriously benchmarked or reviewed much anymore (for example, a comprehensive roundup of mainstream GPU coolers is almost non-existent).
Regarding VRAM, people online seem shocked by the potential 12GB on the rtx 3060 (especially since the 256-bit 3060Ti has 8GB), but honestly, this will be a more powerful GPU than the gtx 1080 which had 8GB back in 2016. It’s ridiculous to act surprised that a newer GPU has more VRAM five years later—even if it's only 50% more rather than double what was standard before. It just highlights how stingy Nvidia is with memory and how used to low standards everyone has become. In their style, they’d probably release a 6GB version too (or maybe a 3GB version of the gtx 1060 for anyone interested ;D).
wiredotter14 said:Man, what happened? At one point, was polaris considered a budget pick?$333 Maybe there's another mining craze and people are grabbing the cheap ones again.
I was looking around recently and couldn't find any RX 5700XT available anywhere (the RX 5700s vanished long ago). Now I see a few 5700XTs popping up online, but who knows if they actually have stock; they end up costing almost as much as a cheaper RTX 306Ti when they do appear. The cheapest 5600XTs have moved from $800 to $900. It seems like Navi 1.0 has been phased out, especially now that the mainstream models of the new generation are arriving. Right now, the best bet is to wait.
Exactly. AMD pivoted toward gaming architecture, which essentially means they sacrificed a good chunk of compute power just to boost efficiency. How do Nvidia's RTX cards stack up against Navi when it comes to running Resolve?
I suspect you won't find much luck with the mainstream Nvidia lineup either. Even though they started letting gamers touch more of that compute architecture starting with Turing—something AMD used to reserve—these mid-range models are just the "GTX" 16xx series. They lack the Ray Tracing cores and Tensor cores found in the RTX 2xxx models.
There’s a chance they might trickle down the Ampere architecture (the 3000 series) into the mainstream segment this generation, which would finally give budget GPUs access to RT cores and Tensor cores.
I was thinking along the lines of—depending on your budget, of course—if you're aiming for something more ambitious or if this is strictly for professional work intended to last five years like you mentioned—that you should grab an Intel Core i9-12900K paired with two 16GB sticks of DDR4 RAM (maybe 3200MHz). That way, you have the flexibility to add more later, and if you ever need to, you can just sell off the extra stick along with the CPU and motherboard. As for the GPU, maybe aim for a GTX 1660 Ti once availability improves; honestly, the only place you'll see decent prices is through a link like $1300 . Look, it’s hard to give a solid recommendation without knowing your budget. Just that Intel Core i9-12900K alone will run you $1517, but it offers the best bang for your buck regarding productivity in the current generation .
I suspect it might be a core count issue, or perhaps even the GPU acting up while running After Effects... though we really need to dig deeper to be sure.
If you're planning to keep this rig for the next five years, my advice is to go with a brand-new platform—meaning a fresh CPU, motherboard, and RAM combo. You should also look into a new GPU and a 1TB SSD, plus some HDDs if you need extra storage; those old drives are likely on their last legs, and a 120GB SSD just won't cut it anymore. Do you have a rough budget in mind? I ask because $1667 could potentially be an upgrade for the entire system, or it might just cover a single component. 😁
Zachary Martin4 said:Thanks for the input! I decided to stick with the same brand but went for a slightly smaller, much more budget-friendly model. My main priority is remote work, though I'll occasionally use it like a TV. I ordered the Dell UltraSharp 27" 27B2H, VGA, HDMI, 75Hz for $352 including shipping. https://www.amazon.com/example-monitor-link
It’ll be a great value for that price. Honestly, grab the 27" version—especially if you plan on using it as a TV from a distance. Just pick up some decent speakers, and as long as the tuner supports digital broadcasting, you should be fine. Every modern monitor has an HDMI port anyway, if I recall correctly.
An older R9 isn't necessarily going to outperform a modern R7 when it comes to gaming. Even an R7 will likely beat an R5 because newer architectures deliver much higher per-core speeds. Games crave fast individual cores and a decent core count, though let's be honest—no CPU has actually needed to run at 100% utilization across all cores for gaming in years.
Think of it this way: an R5 5600X with its 6 cores and 12 threads is surprisingly close to last generation's 8-core, 16-thread R7 3700X in multi-threaded tasks (where all cores hit 100%, which games don't do). As noted in the Linus Tech Tips review, the R7 3700X probably won't ever outpace the 5600X in gaming; if it does, it'll be a rare exception in the distant future. In 99% of cases, the 5600X is going to be the winner. You have to factor in that entire year where the 5600X stays consistently ahead.
But honestly, discussing CPU speed at this level is pointless unless you're pairing it with a high-end GPU, which nowadays starts at around $2333... If you're looking for pure value, the Intel Core i5-10400F is currently the best buy at $433. I'd suggest putting any extra cash toward a better graphics card instead. Ultimately, though, it all comes down to your total budget.
It would be most prudent to adjust the rest of your build to accommodate an RTX 3060 (roughly $667). For the processor, I would suggest opting for a Ryzen 5 5600 or perhaps an even more budget-friendly Core i3-12100f. In the realm of gaming, the graphics card remains your most critical component; after all, even a card like the 1660 Super isn't exactly a powerhouse when it comes to modern, high-demand titles or pushing maximum settings at 1080p
northernmarlin79 said:Thanks for all the suggestions! 😊 In the meantime, my old monitor finally kicked the bucket, so I'm in a bit of a bind. I’d really rather avoid ordering from some random online store—I don't want to prolong my days without a screen! I need to find something at either Links or Best Buy (gaming and micro-tech stuff), since there aren't many other options here in San Diego... (I checked Micro Center, but they just told me this last Acer isn't in stock, and anything else they actually have would have to be shipped in from Chicago).
There are only two options at Links within your budget, but neither is available locally in San Diego (you'd have to wait for them to ship it from another branch anyway).
Based on specs and price, both look like solid choices.
wanderingbison9 said:I used a power meter to check exactly how many watts the whole rig pulls from the wall during a stress test (pushing both the CPU and GPU at the same time), and it hit about 380 to 400 W. Running Unigine Heaven pulled 300 W, but the CPU wasn't being pushed to its absolute limit there.
The maximum undervolt I managed to achieve before the driver crashed was dropping from 1.150V down to 1.075V.
ja 9 t using Tapatalk
That’s exactly it. About 95% of your total draw comes from the CPU and GPU combined. If your graphics card were only pulling 110W, you wouldn't see a total consumption this high, because your CPU definitely isn't drawing 250W alone.
Under full load, your GPU will pull roughly 220-250W (if it's at Stock), the CPU might take around 100W, and the rest covers everything else.
Bottom line: there is absolutely no debate here—you are going to need a more powerful, higher-quality power supply if you plan on running two GPUs.
Exactly, but that’s just the GPU—specifically the GPU-chip—not the entire card itself. That's what you're seeing if those are stats from a monitoring program.
Those cards pull about 200W at Stock during gaming, though they can jump to 220-250W under stress tests, depending on the specific model. I highly doubt you can cut power consumption in half just by undervolting; you're likely only looking at the GPU portion of the draw.
The cooler is decent—pretty middle-of-the-road if I recall correctly (some are better, some are worse).
Now, regarding temperatures, it's hard to say for sure since you'll have two units sitting right next to each other, plus we don't know what kind of case you're running. If you can, definitely install that side cooler.
As for power consumption—that reading only shows you the GPU itself. You've still got to account for the memory subsystem (DDR5), the VRM draw, and the fans.