Posts by Kimberly Gomez34

Does he need a monitor and other peripherals too?

From what I can tell, you can't find the Ryzen 3 2200G or 3200G as standalone parts anymore. Man, those were the days—it feels like we might be heading toward another hardware shortage. It might actually be smarter to look at pre-built setups from shops that know how to put a decent system together (like Best Buy or Micro Center). Alternatively, you could build something around an Athlon 3000G if you want something entry-level, or go with an Intel Core i3-10100 if you want more muscle.

https://www.harveynorman.com/desktop-computers/r...m_medium=click

Keep in mind, this one comes with the monitor included.

The only real question is whether 240GB is enough storage (especially if he’s hoarding movies and stuff). But honestly, adding another drive later is a breeze.

I’m not entirely sure why, but I think the idea that performance gains are exclusive to Ryzen because of the Infinity Fabric is total nonsense. Generally speaking, across all processors, gaming performance scales with RAM speed when you're pairing them with a high-end GPU—whether it’s an Intel or a Ryzen, or whether you're running an old Intel Haswell or a "modern" Comet Lake setup. As we know, Intel doesn't use CCX designs, chiplets, or Infinity Fabric. A friend of mine actually saw this firsthand using an older i5 and i7 (Devil's Canyon) setup; switching from 1600MHz RAM to 2133/2400MHz while running a GTX 1070 made a very noticeable difference...

The tech media only really caught on to this and started focusing on it once Ryzen hit the scene. If I recall, Digital Foundry was the only one making these claims regarding Haswell or Devil's Canyon architectures back in the day, but since their testing results didn't align with everyone else's, nobody took them seriously—myself included.

As for this whole business with four RAM sticks—or having four memory ranks—that's also news to me, though I've been hearing more about it lately with the Ryzen 5000 series. Steve from Hardware Unboxed actually tested the specific part I linked quite a while ago, but I wasn't aware of it at the time. It turns out that if you want a true high-end gaming rig, you basically have to load up on 32GB of RAM using four sticks. It's hard to find decent 8GB dual-rank modules to just use two of them, and there's no point in using four 4GB sticks, so the reality is you end up needing four 8GB sticks...

It likely comes down to how the CPU accesses the memory. AMD released their "SAM" feature based on a similar concept, which I believe NVIDIA is planning to roll out as well.



It’s been confirmed that it doesn't make a difference when you switch from PCIe 4.0 to 3.0. Furthermore, NVIDIA is announcing a similar feature that will be open to all platforms, meaning it won't be restricted to just the Ryzen 5000 series or the 500 chipset.

Anthony Jackson2 said:The whole idea is to grab this as a temporary fix and pair it with a 1660S, which might end up staying in the build anyway. Honestly, I don't really care about 4K resolution or ultra-high detail settings when gaming.

Knowing how I operate, "temporary" usually turns into five or six years. But down the road, I can always swap in an i5 or an i7 on this motherboard and squeeze out more performance by doubling my RAM.

I’ve added a bit more detail to my previous post, so take a look. That’s basically the plan.

@Alexander Moore67/">@@Alexander Moore67

Hey Gogo, why are you so on edge? You’re constantly reacting so defensively. I’m not looking to debate fake hardware here, and nobody is trying to provoke you...
You've been right on the verge of losing it several times before; let's not make this a situation where we have to start managing your temper.

wiredotter14 said:It isn't necessary. Honestly, if you're sticking to a budget and going with an H410 motherboard (since grabbing an overclocking Z490 makes zero sense here), your memory speed is capped at 2667MHz anyway, but that isn't a huge deal for Intel.

That’s a misconception. Intel scales just as well with faster RAM—maybe for different reasons than Ryzen does, but the scaling is definitely there. Somehow, the media has just made it seem like Ryzen is the only one that benefits from it.

Take this i7 7700 k as an example; it's the closest thing to that i3.



Or look at this i9 setup using RAM up to 4000mhz.



You can see the same trend in older socket 1155 and 1150 i5 systems running DDR3. It's just that back then, we didn't realize it. Either the testing wasn't thorough, or games simply weren't demanding enough and GPUs weren't nearly as powerful.

Here is how four sticks of RAM compare to two (meaning four ranks of chips, which would be the same result if you used two dual-rank sticks).



In fact, it might even turn out that Intel scales slightly more.

So, even with Intel, especially if you're aiming for high-end performance and trying to squeeze out every last drop of power, you really need fast RAM and four memory ranks. It's all about maximizing that potential.

@Tijs budući

Since the CPU is $217 and the motherboard is $150, there's really no point in trying to push for extreme performance. You won't lose any noticeable FPS when pairing it with mainstream graphics cards (and nowadays, mainstream GPUs start around $1000). This combo (CPU + mobo) actually costs less than a decent mid-range motherboard for any other socket. You can run it for 2, 3, or 5 years depending on how intensive your usage is, and once you're done, you haven't lost much. Even then, you still get some value back; the loss is measured in a few dozen dollars, which is peanuts for technology. Plus, it’s upgradeable to a CPU with more cores and threads, though whether those will even be available or worth it by then is anyone's guess. You might upgrade, or it might make more sense to sell it and grab whatever the best deal is at that time. Either way, don't overthink it—whatever path you take, this is a solid, cost-effective move.

Adam Moore3 - just grab a new i3 10100f (which performs right on par with an Intel Core i7 7700k liquid cooled) for $210 along with an H410 motherboard for $150, all backed by a full 3-year warranty 😁

If you're holding onto those older high-end i7 or i5 chips, you have to face reality: their market value has absolutely cratered. But hey, there’s always someone out there living in the past, completely oblivious to how much better modern budget tech actually is.

Guys, your sources are unreliable and frankly, they aren't worth much. It’s highly questionable whether TechCrunch even owns the hardware they claim to be testing—they might just be making things up or cobbling together data from other reviews. Even if they weren't, the whole argument that this would theoretically outperform an R5 1600AF or 2600 is moot click. And don't even get me started on UserBenchmark. If people actually relied on that site, they'd end up buying products that are objectively slower according to any legitimate, professional review. That's why it's banned on certain forums like Reddit; it's useless and only serves to stir up unnecessary drama.

To get to the heart of the matter: starting a thread about which CPU is faster is pointless because the performance gaps are tiny, especially when you're testing them with entry-level GPUs like a 10-series $0.00. Realistically, you're better off dumping most of your budget into the GPU and picking the cheapest CPU that can still handle modern titles.

In reality, his CPU and motherboard combo will cost him $367. He'll have some fun with it for a while, but when he goes to resell it in a few years, he’s going to be looking at a loss of hundreds of dollars. Sure, in theory, a 6-core/12-thread chip is more "future-proof" than a 4-core/8-thread one because it won't start stuttering in games as early (just like we see now with pure quad-cores), but until then, he can play current games for years. Who knows what the AAA titles will require in a year or two, though.

If he were going to invest more wisely, the OP should really focus on beefing up the GPU. Instead of settling for a 1650 Super, he should go for a 1660 Super. https://www.amazon.com/s?k=gtx+1660+super
https://www.bestbuy.com/site/graphics-cards

That's where you'll actually feel the difference. At the end of the day, gaming performance is almost entirely dependent on the GPU.

Edward Thompson86 said:That processor is practically a steal. I was hunting for an i7 7700 and the prices were absolute garbage because they're just used units.

Honestly, people clinging to older i5s or especially i7s are living in a complete fantasy land.

Take this exact comparison between a modern i3 and an i7 7700. Those owners look at it like they dropped $2,500$1000 back in the day, so they refuse to let go for anything, but you really have to move with the times.

boldpilot5, there’s honestly no point in picking up a 1050Ti; a single 1650 super will absolutely crush it. That card is outdated and just isn't worth your cash right now.

Also, don't go pushing for an R7 Ryzen if you can't afford a decent GPU within your budget. It’s a completely different ballgame when you're aiming for cards that sit above $1000, which means you'd have to look at other processors. Bottom line: focus your energy on the graphics card.

Here is what I would suggest:

* (It's not worth grabbing one with lower speeds since the price difference is negligible; plus, they lack a heatsink, so they'll just run at whatever speed they manage to hit.)

I see you're also looking at SSDs.

You can actually snag some killer Black Friday deals on Amazon sites across the USA. Check out this group search engine for American Amazon storefronts—definitely worth browsing every day.

https://www.hagglezon.com/

Just keep in mind that you won't pay that exact sticker price right away; you'll need to account for the sales tax and shipping costs. The site will walk you through those final totals during the checkout process before you commit to the purchase.

Honestly, I think you’re dealing with a bandwidth issue rather than anything else...

Have you checked your CPU load in Task Manager while streaming 1080p video? Just hit ctrl+shift+esc and head over to the Performance tab.

If you're building a budget rig, the smartest move right now is grabbing an i3 10100f. You can snag one for roughly $100, and honestly, it’s basically a rebranded i7 7700.

https://www.amazon.com/s?k=i3+10100f

From there, just pair it with a decent H410 motherboard for about $167, throw in 16GB of RAM (2x8GB), and put every remaining cent into your GPU. A killer deal would be picking up a used GTX 1070 for around $433.

Honestly, the 75Hz model is probably your most logical bet. Unless you're some hardcore competitive gamer, you really don't need to jump up to 100Hz or 144Hz; otherwise, you're just paying extra for specs you won't even notice. Plus, it features an IPS panel, which is what you're already used to and likely your best move here.

It really depends on which games are being tested. TPU hasn't covered a massive library, and most of their tests end up being GPU bound anyway. Take Hardware Unboxed or TechSpot, for instance; they have titles like Death Stranding where Zen 3 absolutely crushes even the beefiest Intel chips by about 20%. On average, across 11 different games, it comes out as the fastest gaming CPU. Plus, they don't typically focus on "e-sports" titles.

And just look at this absolute slaughter in CS:GO.



There are certain titles where Intel’s i9 and i7 still hold their own—Far Cry is a good example due to its engine—but those are mostly marginal cases. Overall, I suspect reviewers will stick with Ryzen 5000 series in benchmark rigs for testing new GPUs. When it trails an i9, it doesn't trail by much, but when it wins, it wins big.

rapidpuma59 said:Any recommendations?
In any case, we'll wait a little longer, so it’s no big deal.
You helped me out ages ago with advice for this specific build, and it’s been running flawlessly for years!

This one looks like a pretty solid deal right now.

https://www.amazon.com/s?k=B550m+pro4

Just ordered that 1TB SanDisk Ultra 3 D SSD 2 TB 😁

It’ll cost me $287, whereas the cheapest one in the States is $450. For what it's worth, the WD Black NVMe SSD is basically the exact same drive under a different label, also sitting at $450 here in the US
.

They’ve swapped out the standard x86 processors—like those from AMD or Intel—for their own in-house ARM chips. If it were me, I’d stick with the Intel builds. Those are legitimate, high-performance processors, whereas who knows what kind of compromises they made to squeeze those "M1" chips into shape?

At the end of the day, the real story isn't about some massive leap in technology; it's simply about how Apple is maximizing its profit margins.😁

That SanDisk drive I mentioned in my last post is back on sale, bringing the final price down to about $125.

Also, we’ve got a great deal running at our shop on the Crucial P1 1TB https://newegg.com/product/A_CT100...m_medium=click

Technically, it isn't an official sale, but the price matches what you'd see during a major Amazon blowout. Once you factor in shipping and everything else, it actually ends up $17costing more than buying it directly from us.

rapidpuma59 said:Should I stick with the MSI B450 Tomahawk Max, or is it worth upgrading to something beefier?
We’re definitely grabbing the RAM too.

Officially, the 400 series BIOS updates are slated for January, but some motherboard manufacturers have already dropped beta versions. In fact, plenty of people are already running the 5000 series on 400-series boards.

By the way, there are some really solid, budget-friendly B550 boards available now for about $267

It’s entirely up to you. You’ve got a few ways to play this:
- Wait for the theater release and drop $50
- Put down $30 right now
- Just make do with what you've already got

$220 budget max

If you're picking up an RTX 3070, aim for 1440p resolution. If you go with the RX 5700 XT, stick to 1080p at 144Hz. That's my take. 😁