Posts by analogtiger19

Brian Campbell36 said:I overclocked my CPU to 3.8 GHz (it's stable)

If you overclocked a non-K processor using BCLK, you basically overclocked your RAM too...😉

Jeremy Fowler4 said:Hey there,

So I need to pick up a new graphics card. I do modeling in Autodesk Revit, plus I use a few other construction software suites (Robot, SAP2000, etc.), and my current GPU (I assume it's a GPU) is just too weak.
My rig looks like this:
FX 6300 with a CM Hyper TX3 Evo
Asus M5A97 R2.0
XFX TS 550W (80+ gold)
Sapphire Radeon HD7770

Budget is around $400 max. Doesn't have to be brand new from Best Buy; I'm fine looking on Craigslist. Thanks. 👍

Hmm, that card should actually handle those programs... you didn't mention how much RAM you've got or what monitor resolution you're running. What kind of issues are you hitting exactly? How does it act when you're working in those apps?

Timothy Kim60 said:It really depends on the specific unit. I'm pretty sure guys like Linus or JayZ2C would vet the cards to pick out the good ones—the ones without coil whine and top-tier overclocking potential—before shipping them out. There was this one guy who went through four different units, and he said his Asus Strix ended up being the loudest one yet. It’s just like what Daniel Popovic says 🤣

I get that, but from what I've gathered about coil whine, the PSU plays a massive role. Honestly, someone is more likely to fix their coil whine issues by swapping out their PSU for a different brand than they are by hunting for a better sample of the same card. The issue isn't necessarily that "one" bad card; it's more about the general frequency compatibility between that specific GPU brand and the existing PSU... maybe I've got that totally wrong, I can't remember where I read it to drop a link here ☕

Linus says "No coil whine here" 😬
(around 3:30)

Adam Moore3 said:Respectfully, you're just plain wrong. Saying that CPU is a massive bottleneck for a 970 isn't right. It's clear and simple. Cheers 🙂

Exactly! Right here your point hits the nail on the head. I was still under the impression it had dual cores (damn it, those 23xx models threw me off 😬), and by the time I realized, I couldn't even edit the post anymore. That’s why I thought my last reply clarified my take on the bottleneck situation—there's one, sure, but it's hard to actually feel it in modern games. 🙂

@Larry Ortiz5/">@@Larry Ortiz5
No fighting, just a "misunderstanding"...
Regarding your GTX 970, I was actually scouring the web a couple days ago trying to decide which one I'd pick for myself (assuming I can hide the transaction so my wife doesn't lecture me on how much I spent 😬). For me, the Asus Strix GTX 970 looked best (around $1.00). It might not be the absolute fastest, but it's definitely the quietest, and that's what matters most to me. People also speak highly of MSI gaming. The Gigabyte GTX 970 WF3 is decent, but it's too noisy for my taste... though hey, if you aren't picky, just grab the cheapest one you find (like an Inno3D) for about $250 😬

@Adam Moore3/">@@Adam Moore3
If you're naturally an anxious person, don't be—it’s bad for you. If someone in your life is getting under your skin, just deal with them directly. There's no need to ramp up the tension when talking to me; my opinion isn't carved in stone, and I'm not claiming to be 100% right. 😉

Adam Moore3 said:The i5 2320 and the i5 2500K are basically identical chips, except the 2500K has a higher clock speed and an unlocked multiplier. His i5 2320 @ 3.8 GHz is effectively the same as an i5 2500K @ 3.8 GHz, and tons of people running 2500Ks have a GTX 970 without any bottlenecking issues at all.So, your claim about there being some massive bottleneck here makes zero sense.Like I said, if a bottleneck ever actually happens, it'll be barely noticeable, and it would likely only occur in Battlefield 4 Multiplayer with 64 players on Ultra settings at 1080p with those kinds of extreme settings. Saying you can't pair anything stronger than an R9 280 with that CPU is just nonsense.

I never said you can't pair something better than an R9 280 with that processor; I said it would be the best value option for the budget he laid out. As for the GTX 970 and your grasp of what a bottleneck actually is, your quote of my comment pretty much speaks for itself.

Honestly, it's highly probable you didn't even read my post properly, or maybe you didn't read it at all and you're just throwing info around blindly. I don't know how you went from "...just to be clear, that doesn't mean you won't be able to run most games on Ultra settings but simply that when things stutter, the CPU will be the culprit even if the GPU could handle more..." to saying "massive bottleneck""... 🤷

This isn't a constructive way to communicate, and nobody gains anything from it...☕

Take care. 🙂

Brian Campbell36 said:Don't they say the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 and 980 are built specifically to prevent CPU bottlenecks? Like, they're designed so weaker processors can communicate perfectly without hitting those "dead ends," keeping the CPU from lagging behind the GPU.🍿

Look, depending on what kind of games you're running, you might never even notice the bottleneck, but let's be real—that processor just isn't going to squeeze every ounce of power out of that card.

To be clear, it doesn't mean you won't be able to crank most games up to ultra settings; it just means when things start to stutter, the CPU is the one to blame even if the GPU could have handled more.😬

Brian Campbell36 said:Some guy told me my CPU could handle an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 (but trying to $1167 it would be suicide)

It's overclocked to 3.8 GHz 🍿

Glad you mentioned the overclock... 🙄 😬 ...$1167 Yeah, it's suicide, but for an Intel Core i5-2500K-Intel Core i5-3000 series, you might just end up "critically wounded" 😁 (though honestly, I think even an overclocked CPU is a massive bottleneck for an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 😛 )

Look, if I'm working with a budget up to $0.67, I’d be weighing the options between the Radeon R9 280 ($0.50), the R9 280x ($0.63), and the Asus Radeon R9 290 ($0.74). Personally, I wouldn't bother going past the 280x when pairing it with an Intel Core i5-2320. It really comes down to whether he wants to max out his budget to get every bit of power possible, or if he just wants to spend the bare minimum to see a decent jump from what he has now. Plus, if he's planning on swapping out that processor soon, that changes the whole math...🤷

crimsonstag84 said:If you want any actual upgrade over CrossFire, an R9 280 x is the bare minimum. Ideally, you’d aim for an R9 290, though that would probably be hitting the ceiling for your CPU.

Even with an R9 280 x, you're basically redlining that processor...

Brian Campbell36 said:Exactly. I'm not happy with this setup, so I'd rather just jump to a single card with at least 2 GB—ideally 3 GB—just so I don't have to worry about it for a few years.🍿

Running dual HD 7770s in Crossfire just doesn't cut it anymore with modern titles like Far Cry 4, the latest CoD, or anything else coming out now.

If I were you, I’d grab that R9 280 x I sent you the $633 for. It’s basically the best bang for your buck right now, even if it only has a 2-year warranty. Otherwise, you can go with something weaker that offers a full 3-year warranty.🤷

Hold up, hold up... you're actually running a 7770 in crossfire? 😬

Brian Campbell36 said:I'm just worried about getting scammed—like they pull the money from my checking account, but instead of hardware, I end up with a literal brick. If it's a fixed payment, I won't be able to pay it off in installments if things go south.

What kind of online retailers in a major US city would you recommend?

AMD, Centro, Futura-IT, MagazinRS...these are all legit shops. Nobody from these places is going to send you a "brick."😬

There are probably others, but these were the first ones that came to mind since I've dealt with them all before...

Brian Campbell36 said:Hey;

I'm looking to pick up a new GPU for Christmas (considering stores like Best Buy or Walmart will have sales)

PSU: Corsair RM1000x
CPU: Intel Core i5-12400, 8 MB cache
RAM: 16 GB
Current GPUs: 1x Sapphire HD 7770 GHz Edition 1GB GDDR5
1x Sapphire Vapor-X Radeon HD 7770 GDDR5

I plan to play at 1920X1080 resolution
My absolute max budget is $667

An R9 280 x is pretty much the ceiling for that budget ($633)

EDIT: I missed that you're looking specifically in SB (though honestly, why wouldn't you just order from a major city where it's way cheaper?), so here is the best option currently at Best Buy in SB (an R9 270 x for $617) within that same budget... in my opinion, buying an R9 270 x when you can get an R9 280 x for almost the same price is just total nonsense... 🤷

swiftfalcon89 said:Let me jump in here 😁 regarding that ASUS P5KPL-AM motherboard. That board tops out at 4GB of RAM (2x2GB). Looking at his specs above, he’s running two 1GB sticks, so he’d have to pull those out and buy two 2GB sticks to make it work. I actually own that exact same motherboard, a Q8200, and an HD6850. To be blunt, modern titles like Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare or Far Cry 4 just aren't happening. It’s a mix of heavy hardware requirements and terrible game optimization. I tried running Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare at 1024x768 with everything on Low and turned off, and it was basically unplayable due to lag. Even if they release a patch, I doubt it’ll perform miracles. As for Far Cry 4, it’s playable on some Medium or even certain High settings if you turn off AA or FXAA, but you're still going to see the frame rate tank to 10-15 FPS in any area with decent detail. So, when it comes to newer games, he can forget about having a good time, especially if he's aiming for "High" settings. Not to mention that most recent games really need at least 6GB of RAM to breathe. Older titles run fine, though. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, Call of Duty: Black Ops, Battlefield 3, and Need for Speed: The Run all run without a hitch on High or Ultra. Once you get to Battlefield 4 and Call of Duty: Ghosts, you're looking at a High / Medium combo at best.

Everything you said holds water. I was running a Q8200 with stock settings, 4GB of RAM, and an HD7850 until recently, so I'm speaking from experience. I was playing everything at 1080p too. 😬 Just don't forget that the OP is looking for options to run Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare. standard...and honestly, this thing can handle it without breaking a sweat, even if you have to shell out a little extra cash. 😉

If that motherboard from the link actually has four RAM slots, then fine—but at the end of the day, it all boils down to what he’s actually looking for and how much cash he wants to drop.

Adam Moore3 said:Wait, what? 🤔 Why would he want an overclockable i5 and a pricey motherboard for a build with less than 4 gigs of RAM? He's blowing 60% of his budget on the CPU and motherboard for a gaming rig, only to slap in a weak R7 260 non-X. An FX 6300 would be the move, paired with a better GPU—probably some R9 270 for that kind of money.

👍 Just add another 4 GB of RAM and it'll be perfect.

I get the point, but he could just stick with the Q8200, grab another 2GB of RAM for about $100$50 and an R7 265 for $1,160, which I suggested as my second option. Then he can upgrade the rest later and swap the card. Even the Q8200 can run almost anything on High with this GPU. He’s just looking for something to play Call of Duty on normal settings; with these minor tweaks, he gets way more than what he actually asked for...

If I can keep my current case and power supply (keeping the drive too), I'll sell off the rest and grab this for $1.25:

1 x ASRock Z97 PRO4, s1150, Intel ® Z97
1 x Intel Core i5-4670K 3.4GHz, Haswell
1 x DDR3 8GB (1x8GB) Kingston, HyperX Fury, 1866MHz, CL10
1 x MSI Radeon R7 260 OC 1GD5, 1GB DDR5, DVI-I, DVI, DP, HDMI, R7 260 1GD5

Or maybe just pick up the Sapphire R7 265 2GB GDDR5 Dual-X, 2GB GDDR5 256bit, 28nm for $0.39 (the Q8200 should still pull through most games) and then once I save up another $1.00 I'll get the rest of the 😬

It's a bit of a joke that there isn't 4GB of VRAM, though...🤔

James Gomez2 said:I'm pulling the trigger regardless! I skipped out on the Amazon deal and want to know if these $1090 through Admin.com are available, and if there's any way to shave off at least $33 from the price? I could save about $50 by dropping down to 4GB of RAM instead of 6, assuming the performance hit isn't massive.

The stuff he linked is from Future IT and if you just grab 4GB of RAM, you're looking at roughly $1043. (That includes swapping the cooler to the LC-CC-97 since the LC-CC-95 is out of stock).

At ADM, the exact same setup (4GB RAM paired with the Spira Kepler Rev.2 cooler) runs you about $1027, so the difference is basically nothing...

mellowtiger83 said:Totally agree here.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/gaming-pc-deal-example

I'd go for the $317.

You gotta change the number too, not just the name.😂

James Gomez2 said:This setup is definitely my favorite, but I've got a bit of a snag. My budget might end up slightly under $1167, and for some reasons, I'm stuck buying the PC at Best Buy. Is it actually possible to put together a build there using a GIGABYTE GA-970A and an AMD FX-6300 that doesn't suck? (meaning, something even remotely close to how good your config is)

Hah, you're never going to get anywhere near McLovin's build for that price at Best Buy... like I already told you, Best Buy is just way too overpriced