They both are the same, except one has a nicer cooler and backplate. That’s all you are paying for to be honest. Other than that, they both will perform within a fps of each other and one might overclock slightly more.
you're gonna need a bigger desk.
Well the RTX 2060 will play 1080p games for a long time. I just mean't that it wont last 5+ years for ultra graphic settings for new/future games. That card should def last 5+ years or whenever you feel like upgrading. Either option would be a good choice and should last a really long time with 1080p low to medium settings.
For AAA title games with all the DXR or DLSS features you'll probably awalys need a newer generation card. For ESPORT games like CSGO, DOTA, League or Overwatch. Well, you should be set for a really really long time.
Yeah, true I guess I shouldnt have said the GTX 970 is done. Ive always been someone who buys low to mid and turns the graphics down anyways. I can't stand all the lighting, smoke and added graphic features. I could make the GTX 970 last me a very long time. As for 1080p gaming at "ultra" settings its pretty much not strong enough for newer/future titles.
The next 5 years? None probably. Look at the GTX 770 vs 970. They are both pretty much shot. If you are planning to keep a card for 5+ years then you should be looking into more high end than mid range.
Well I know for a fact that the GTX 1060 6gb card will not hit 144hz in most AAA title games at high graphic settings. If you do some tweaking or just set graphics to low/medium you will achieve 100+ fps in most games. I personally think a 144hz monitor is worth upgrading over your GPU. You will just noticed that not only will games be smoother but the whole windows environment being smoother. Just keep that GPU a little longer until RTX lowers in price or AMD actually makes something worth buying.
Aside from the RTX GPU being overpriced, then yes you will get a better experience with a RTX 2070 at high/ultra settings. Now is it worth spending $500 dollars on a GTX 1080 "like" performance GPU? Not really sure but IMO no. Atleast not upgrading from a 1060 to a 2070. If you had a 1050TI or 970 then I'd say its worth it.
I also own a similar system paired with a 1700X and a 144hz (ASUS VG248QE) non freesync/gsync monitor and I dont get screen tearing in those games. Then again, I'm all about high fps and I usually just turn AA and graphic settings to low/medium anyways. I can't stand all the smoke/sun and all the other random stuff that can distract you.
So if you were to upgrade to a RTX 2070 it would be a crime to not pair that RTX 2070 without anything thats not 1080p 144hz or 1440p 144hz gysnc/freesnyc.
I agree with the Corsair LPX. I paired 16gb 3200 mhz Corsair LPX memory with a 1700X and just enabled XMP profile and thats about it. Runs perfectly at 3200mhz with a 4.0 ghz overclock on the CPU.
Just set up a hot key to turn on and off the overclock, thats usually what I do. I never keep the overclock on when I'm not gaming.
If you set a overclock in AB and you just close the application. Your GPU will still be overclocked until you open up AB and set the GPU back to default or physically restart your computer.
Thats why its best to set a hotkey for overclock and default.
I'm not sure it would be worth upgrading from a i3 to a i5. It would probably be best to at least go to an i7-7700 non k. Yeah, I know its expensive but you can find some off ebay second hand for $220ish.
Sell your i3 for around $85+/- and buy a i7-7700 for $220+/-. Basically a new cpu for $135 and a huge jump in performance vs motherboard and CPU upgrade.
If you are keeping the 970, then either CPU will perform the exact same in gaming.
Well, if you only plan to game. Then it's better to spend the extra $100 on a better GPU than a CPU. Whats you budget for a new build and are you planning to build an entire new system or adding some components?
Is the upgrade worth it? IMO no but its a personal preference. Yeah, the performance will be better but not enough to buy a teir better card. A better upgrade would be a RTX 2070/2080 but the price is pretty high. I'd just wait a few months and turn off the fps counter on the 1060. If they release 11 series cards and the price is around $250 then sure. For $350 when the 1070TI was $399 a year ago no. This card seems to be a better upgrade from a 960/970 or something.
Turn the FPS counter off and just enjoy whatever you buy. You dont need to be fixed on a FPS counter.
Only thing AMD has right now is the Vega 56 or 64 and they are pretty expensive. Later today AMD might release info on its NAVI lineup 9am PT. I've never used freesync or gsync. I jumped onto the 144hz prior to the whole gsync/freesync thing.
Something like this would do what you need. Yes, the price doesnt include a OS, Monitor or Peripherals. Notice that I recomended the RTX 2060 (Relases 1/15/19 for $350). Basically giving you slightly better performance of a GTX 1070TI for less.
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant
A used GTX 1060 6gb or RX 580 8GB. You really shouldnt go budget if you can have these for around $120-180. Even new you can find them around $180-200.
If the RTX 2060 is $300-350 it will be another overpriced card. The 1070 before the whole minning thing could be bought for $325 new and GTX 1070 TI was $399. Not much is different between the two if both are overclocked. Yes its RTX and its to be more expensive but since the 2080 and 2080TI can barily ray trace why would the 2060 do it? They should just dump the whole RTX with the 60 series card and release something around $250 with GTX 1070ti performance.
Probably wont get a better review then this.
Everything does look realisic, except when you start to look at the 12/24 and 16/32 chips. So far every ryzen has been a Ryzen 7 and the ones that didnt peform that well were just limited down to a Ryzen 5 and so on. So why are the base/boost speeds of a Ryzen 9 so much higher than say a Ryzen 3 3300X? No way that chip is just utter crap and a Ryzen 9 3850X could possibly run 5.1 ghz boost.
IMO they just need slightly higher clock speeds with Ryzen 7/6 and that will be a solid performer. You dont need to destoy Ryzen 1 and Ryzen 1+ just yet. They already perform pretty close to Intel for content creation. They just need to up the frequency to get those higher frames for games.
If these rumors are true then WOW!
I'll be very surprised if amd could pull off a 4.5 ghz overclock. A 5.5ghz overclock imo is really reaching. I agree that they won't be released till like March/April.
What do you do that you need a titan and soon to be 64 gigs of ram?
Its like being blindfolded and you are rowing down a river. Can be done with boy a girl at your side.
Yeah it is kind of lame but AMD is similar. You need a B450/350 or X370/470 to overclock but a A320 board will not overclock. Also notice that AMD is kind of copying intel on the board names. I even just screwed up writing this out. Orignally put in the Z370/470 and just noticed it before the post.
Intels is pretty screwed up right now. Technically its Z390 as the highend board for a i9-9900k, i7-9700k and i5-9600k but they dont have anything for a budget build yet. Yes, the B360, H310 and H370 will work but will need a bios update to work with a 9000 series chip. Then again i dont see why youd ever buy a cheap motherboard with the current 9000 chips anyways. You can also pair a 9000 chip with a X370 but that will also need a bios update. Anything with a Z can overclock a 9000K chip.
Since you never mentioned a 8000 series chip. All those CPUS can be paired with any of the motherboards i mentioned with the same situation with K chips should be paired with a Z motherboard if you want to overclock.
That’s really up to you. Yeah, I personally think overclocking is needed as its always free performance. Plus, it’s fun to do IMO. Will you notice a huge difference between a stock 2600 vs a 2600OC? You probably won’t notice a difference other than some benchmarks or having a FPS counter turned on all the time. AMD Ryzen CPU's have a pretty poor performance in overclocking. The days of getting a full ghz over a stock CPU seem to be gone. You should expect 4.2 ghz overclock. Basically saving you $50 instead of buying a 2600X. You will need a slightly better CPU cooler to go along with the higher temps. So, really you are saving like $20+/- vs the 2600X. The 2600X has like no headroom for overclocking if you were wondering.
The Ryzen 2600X has a base clock of 3.6ghz and a single core boost of 4.2ghz. An all core boost of 3.9-4.0 ghz depending on temperature. The max overclock of the 2600X is roughly around 4.2ghz on all cores.
The Ryzen 2600 has a base clock of 3.4ghz and a single core boost of 3.9ghz. An all core boost of 3.6-3.7 ghz depending on temperature. The max overclock of the 2600 is roughly around 4.2 ghz on all cores. This basically means you are getting a 0.5 ghz or 500 mhz overclock and 12.6% performance increase theoretically.
Both chips overclocked the 2600 is a better buy but you should expect higher volts to achieve that overclock. Stock settings with a solid 4.0ghz on all cores the 2600X and a better guarantee that you can hit a 4.2 ghz overclock.
The OP is specifically talking about a 8700k. For high refresh gaming the 8700k beats both with the appropriate GPU 1080-2080TI.
If you were to be buy a 1700X during the black friday week I'd say the 1700X all day. That chip was listed at $150 dollars but for $200 its not worth it and the 1700 is probably a better buy between the 1700X and 1700. The 1700 comes with a cooler and can easily be overclocked to 3.7ghz on all cores and should reach 3.9 on most.
Now between the 1700 and 2600 is probably going to be if you really need the extra cores/threads. The 2600 should overclock to 4.0-4.2 while the 1700 will max at 4.0. Gaming will be slightly better with the 2600 and you are saving $50 where you can throw that to a SSD, GPU or better power supply. If you have a build already created it would be best to supply it to better understand what you are trying to get at.
Like most ppl will say the 2600 does game slightly better but its not like its worlds better. You also have to account in your GPU. Plus you wont notice a difference in gaming until you factor in a GTX 1080 and up with both chips. anything less is a very similar experience.
What jimmyboyusa just sent you looks pretty good. You probably can find some other guides through reddit or youtube as well.
You should aim for nothing less than a 4.7ghz overclock. Anything less is technically worst than stock for programs that would only use 1-2 cores.
AMD Ryzen Master if you want to use a program. Personally, its just better in the BIOS. So IMO just learn the BIOS. Its not hard and pretty much impossible to screw things up.
With ryzen its pretty much just set the multiplyer to like 42 and up the volts to around 1.35 vots +/- and then run if stable. If its not then you raise it or lower. You pretty much want the highest overclock with the lowest volts. You'd use AIDA64 or Prime95 to run stress tests. You will still need ryzen master to monitor the temps of your CPU. Other programs like HWmonitor or Realtemp dont work that well with ryzen.
Overclock ram after you fine a stable CPU. If you bought faster ram like 3000 mhz you just want to set the XMP profile in the bios and be done with it. Tinkering with RAM isnt that fun and can be not worth all the investment. So IMO if you wanted faster RAM speeds its just best to buy faster RAM speeds. Ryzen 2000 with X470 should do around 3400-3600 mzh on ram.
Yeah GPU's can be overclocked. Just download MSI afterburner and pretty much up the core speed like 10 mhz until it crashes. Then lower the mhz back to you most stable overclock. Do the same thing to the RAM. You can then save your profile and set up a hotkey. I usually have my overclock to a hotkey where i can just turn the overclock on or off when im gaming. I never like my GPU overclocked for normal use but thats just me. Plenty of videos on youtube to point you in the right direction.
The link I sent you seemed decent. I dont agree with his fan profile as i feel like you shouldnt just max out the fan speed. Im more into setting up a fan profile which you can use afterburners default or make your own. I do know that the MSI armor isnt the best overclocker and the cooler isnt the best. So your miles may very. I dont own a RX model and im not sure how much of a boost you will actually see. With GTX 1000 series you'd see +/- 10fps depending in game so I might be the same. Dont expect anything amazing.
No problem, I tried to give you a simple answer. Most ppl I've seen have only gotten that chip to 4.2ghz if you were wondering. I own a 1700X so my answer is based off others.
AMD made the Ryzen 2000X series chips kind of pointless to overclock. The 2700X stock will single core boost to 4.3ghz and all core boost to plus minus 4.0ghz. Meaning the only way to make a positive overclock is to have all 8 cores at 4.3ghz and thats a lottery chip. Even a 4.2ghz overclock will technically be a positive overclock but the single core clock will be less than stock. Long story is to just keep the 2700X stock and enjoy the computer.
.1-.2 ghz overclock isnt going to be worth all the extra volts and or heat for a slightly better benchmark score. The Ryzen 7 1000 series were worth overclocking a little more as you can give them a extra 0.6-0.3 ghz overclock. That all depends on if you bought a 1700-1800X.
Nice cable managment!!
All you really should do with upgrading a CPU is just make sure you set your bios to default settings. You really dont want to run whatever overclock setting you had for the 8600K to a 8700k as stability might be an issue. Other than that its pretty much pull old chip out and replace with new. Make sure windows/bios sees all the new threads and thats it.
If you were going from a 8600k to either a 9700k/9900k you'd need to upgrade the bios. But since you are staying with the 8000 series you dont need to worry about that.
Im' not sure why you are looking into a mico ATX build? AMD doesnt offer that great of an option on motherboards. I upgaded the motherboard from a B450 to a mitx X470 that includes a good sound card and WIFI. So, at the end you are pretty much breaking even on your original selection. I dropped the RX 560 and upgaded you to a RX 580 8GB card. Changed out your memory selection to 16gb 3200 memory. Corsair Vengeance seems to work really well with Ryzen and should hit the 3200 Mhz overclock.
The CPU choice is up to you. Personally, I wouldnt look at Ryzen 1700X due to the fact that it was $150 2 weeks ago. Now its kind of pointless when the Ryzen 2700 is about the same price after you include the cooler to a 1700X build. I picked the Ryzen 2600 currently because thats the deal at the momment but if you want the 8 cores. Add $100 and buy the 2700.
Windows 10 is best to look on youtube via "tech deals" or joker productions" and they will point you in the right direction.
Nice build. Why the 1600X and Kraken? Could have saved on those 2 parts and bought an X470 and 2700/2700X. Unless this is an older build that has been upgraded over time?
Only thing I'd recomend is swaping out that GPU for EVGA BQ 600 W 80+ bronze. Its only like $20 dollars more and well worth it. Unless you already own that PSU?
No, you don't need a better board if you aren't overclocking but it may come in handy with future AMD CPU's that will be relased for the same chipset. Ryzen 7 2700X doesn't really overclock much more than the stock settings anyways. It's probably best to leave it stock.
But, really does it matter in gaming? PCI 2.0 vs 3.0 might still be pointless other than the 2600K/2700k is like the best gaming CPU you can buy with 2.0. Last time I looked into the difference they said PCI 2.0 still wasn’t fully utilized to its fullest potential. Given it was back when the GTX titan (original) was first released. I'd assume holding onto the old X370/X470 boards will make very little difference with pairing it with a PCI 4.0 GPU.
Positive that AMD might be the first to released a PCI 4.0. AM3 rocked PCI 2.0 up until 2017 when ryzen was released. If I remember correclty the FX series chips only supported 2.0 but boards were released with 3.0?
Nice build and congrats on winning a CPU! Should really look into upgrading that monitor next. You dont want to hold back your computers true potential.
The cooler for the Ryzen 2700X is good. You don't need to buy a better cooler as your temps won't be the issue. Voltages are the limit of your overclock. Expect 4.2-4.3 stock speeds with the stock cooler.
How come this build looks like you stole the photos? Best luck next time.
I'm still rocking the i7-3770K at 4.4ghz. It really is a awsome CPU in its day and still today. You really dont need much more than that. I just decided to upgrade to a Ryzen 1700X because the price was too good to pass up. Hopefully that chip lives up to the 3770K.
$60 dollars? Im not sure you will find anything within that price range except maybe a used GTX 660/TI or R9-270/X. These cards should run fortnite fine but Pubg and Bo4 is going to be tough. Basically low settings on bo4 uses about 4 gigs of vram and uses 10 gigs of onboard ram. That game is pretty power hungry for PC specs.
I gave up....best do the same. Tech deals just did a video on the 2600 running Aida 64 with everything stock and the temp was 75C and frequency was 3.7Ghz min. Gaming it was steady at 3.8ghz. $30 dollars just gets you a better CPU. We could argue all day if its worth $30 dollars. Some could argue that these are overpriced and you could find some Xeon for $20 and run pratically the same.
The 2600 runs at 3.7-3.8ghz on all cores straight out of the box. To get the 1600 to match 2600 3.8ghz needs 4.0ghz and a lot of volts, plus some luck. IMO it’s not worth looking at the 1600 unless you get a pretty good deal with motherboard and CPU combo. Total savings of like $60 plus.
Why wouldn't you look at savings for full builds vs individual parts? You obviously need MB, CPU and RAM for bare minimum components to move over from an older system. So IMO I think it’s worth looking at all the components vs just individual price.
New, it's hard to not recomend the RX 580 8GB for $150. Used, I'd look on ebay for a GTX 1070 8GB for around $220-250. All other budget cards i feel like are overpriced.
I guess if a $30 dollar savings is a better value when the 2600 stock is faster than a overclocked 1600 no matter what. Thats not saying much if you are building a new system. Whats that like like a 4% price increase on a $700 build? For only gaming the 2600 is better than the 1700/1700X. It really depends on the user if they will need the 8C/16T CPU, It can never hurt.