New PC build -- what do you think?

V

Vermouth

Veteran XX
I've been contemplating a new build for awhile to replace my beloved old 2500K PC, and with Black Friday around the corner and newer tech here, I think it's about time.

Main uses for the system will be moderate gaming, video encoding, office productivity, maybe some streaming for fun.

Here's what I have in mind:

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X 3.7 GHz 8-Core Processor ($270)
Gigabyte X470 AORUS Gaming 5 WiFi AM4 ATX Motherboard ($155)
G.Skill Ripjaws V 16GB 2 x 8GB DDR4-3200 CL16 Dual Channel ($150)
Geforce GTX 1070 8GB (~$375)
SAMSUNG 970 EVO M.2 2280 250GB PCIe Gen3. X4, NVMe SSD ($90)
EVGA SuperNova 750 G1+ 80+ Gold Fully Modular Power Supply ($60)

That right there comes to ~$950.

Still looking at cases. I'll be migrating over 5 or 6 disk drives, consolidating from HTPC, so need an appropriate case for that.

Had been debating between the Ryzen 2700X or the i5 9600K. Slightly leaning toward the 2700X, as from most accounts, it appears to do slightly better in situations that utilize a lot of threads, streaming, etc (Ryzen can use 16, whereas 9600K only 8 -- I think it's an unresolved issue w/ Intel about that hack that happened to their hyperthreading tech earlier this year). What do you think?

I plan to use stock cooling, as most of the OC's I've seen for the 2700X have been not that impressive a boost, especially when considering the cost is an additional after-market cooler.

The RAM -- only going w/ 3200 as a few tech guys have said that AMDs "infinity fabric" works better if the RAM is capable of higher clock speeds. Also, most of the decent RAM I saw for the 16GB capacity is around that price anyway.

I'm not set in stone on GPU. I mainly would prefer to not spend more than $350-375, and am OK if that means sacrificing a little performance. I could go any of 1070, 1070ti, or 1080, just looking for a good price from a reputable manufacturer. Not interested in shelling out for the 2070/2080 at this time.


Well what do you think chaps? Anyone w/ a Ryzen processor that can attest to its quality (or lack thereof)? Thanks for any thoughts!
 
I can attest that ryzen processors are above par and have exceeded my expectations.

You'd be stupid to not go ryzen in 2019
 
Plasmatic said:
AMD :ugh:
Click to expand...

i've always built amd cpu builds, and never had issues. last year was the first time i decided to go intel (7700) and i've had nothing but problems and issues. i regret it profusely.

i will be going back to amd again in the future ggs
 
To many fag Intel fan boys in this forum...I have a New Ryzen system and it runs fine plays everything i toss at it without issue...OOOH Intel will get you 4 more frames....Big fucking deal and Intel will cost you $150-200 more just for 4 frames its not worth it at all. Wait till the first set of morons claim you are Broke and that's why you got a AMD.

Thats a nice system but look into the EVGA 1070Ti for a few bucks more.

The price for performance is the best part of it.

Intel: Motherboards only work for one CPU
AMD: Motherboards work for alle CPUs till 2020

AMD = future proof
Intel = socket change, time to buy a new mobo to go with any CPU upgrade

Also the "Ive had nothing but problems with AMD" pretty much means you suck at PC building lol

 
Last edited:
That processor only has 16 PCI-e lanes and your mobo isn't that hot either

Several boards I've seen, including Gigabyte's X470 Aorus Ultra Gaming, have two M.2 ports, but only one is compatible with both SATA and PCIe SSDs. With this board in particular, the issue is that this port is the one with the M.2 heatsink.

The second issue, and this is present on the same board, is that the SATA-compatible M.2 port is the only port that offers full PCIe 3.0 support. The second slot is limited to PCIe 2.0, which will see speeds limited to around 1,800MB/s, so it's a pretty pointless inclusion seeing as current M.2 SSDs are either PCIe 3.0 x4-based and offer speeds that will be bottlenecked by PCIe 2.0's maximum bandwidth, or are SATA-based and thus not compatible with that port anyway.

Is M.2 SSD support on AMD motherboards causing confusion? | bit-tech.net
Click to expand...

Beware of limiting your future paths of upgrading, consider a more capable mobo

Also consider an AIO cooler for any processor you get. Doesn't have to be a super massive radiator.
 
Last edited:
A lot of haters on the AMD :)

TBH, I've been scoffing at the idea of buying an AMD processor for the past 10 years at least. It's only in this past year that they've released hardware that appears to top Intel's offerings, based on a number of 3rd party benchmarks.

From what I can see, the comparable Intel CPUs will get 1-5% increase on single-task use cases, whereas they lose by a fractional or substantial margin when it comes to multi-threaded tasks. The problem is, they're also charging about 30-50% more for a comparable cpu to AMD.

Please, justify it for me :)
 
HumDumpin said:
That processor only has 16 PCI-e lanes and your mobo isn't that hot either



Beware of limiting your future paths of upgrading, consider a more capable mobo

Also consider an AIO cooler for any processor you get. Doesn't have to be a super massive radiator.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the note and tips there!

I don't plan to make future modifications to the PC unless something breaks. I also only plan to use one M.2 drive. I had read that there were issues with using multiple drives and that taking up lanes, although from what I'm gathering, it looks like 1 vid card, 1 M.2, and a bunch of regular storage drives should be fine.

Could be wrong about that tho, will look into it. Not at all married to this motherboard. If you have a suggestion that's <$150, I'd love to hear it. A concern for me is I need at least 1 M.2, 6 SATA, and a bunch of rear USB ports (6+ is ideal).

Thanks!
 
On the intel side always always disable hyperthreading.

On the AMD side the ryzen series has some interesting problems. AMD is replacing the CPU's of Linux customers because of a horrible CPU bug. If you buy a ryzen you will want to make sure you get an updated version - some vendors are still selling the bad version.

Also with the ryzen there are "real mode" problems that will affect running the very old ms-dos era games.

AMD, like Intel is now using its customer base as beta testers.

(most games can't take advantage of the large number of cores so you can drop the cost there)
 
bugs_ said:
On the intel side always always disable hyperthreading.

On the AMD side the ryzen series has some interesting problems. AMD is replacing the CPU's of Linux customers because of a horrible CPU bug. If you buy a ryzen you will want to make sure you get an updated version - some vendors are still selling the bad version.

Also with the ryzen there are "real mode" problems that will affect running the very old ms-dos era games.

AMD, like Intel is now using its customer base as beta testers.

(most games can't take advantage of the large number of cores so you can drop the cost there)
Click to expand...

Cool, will def keep a lookout for an up-to-date version.

Probably my biggest concern with whatever CPU (even if I end up going w/ Intel) is its ability to multi-task, esp when it comes to shit like single-PC streaming and video editing/encoding. Willing to sacrifice a couple fps in games if the processor is stronger in those other areas.

But yikes, yeah, the last thing I want is some DOA bullshit or something I'll constantly have issues w/.
 
Vermouth said:
Thanks for the note and tips there!

I don't plan to make future modifications to the PC unless something breaks. I also only plan to use one M.2 drive. I had read that there were issues with using multiple drives and that taking up lanes, although from what I'm gathering, it looks like 1 vid card, 1 M.2, and a bunch of regular storage drives should be fine.
Click to expand...
That sounds about right.

The only other thing I'd consider is doing a careful calculation of your expected wattage, and get a better rated (platinum or something) PSU thats ~120% of your outer limits for power consumption.

If you go green with your NVIDIA gpu (which I would do) you'll be strapped with an additional ~300$ when considering a 1ms response monitor due to their proprietary G sync licensed technology.

If you go with AMD, freesync monitors are a lot more affordable.
 
Wouldn't it be more effective to build a proper NAS for all those HDD?

Your 750w power supply might be a bit under-powered for all those HDD, otherwise would be enough for the requirements of the system.



Intel is in the shit-house right now because they are gouging their customers by over-pricing their products relative to their features for the end-user. And I say that as an Intel users for the last 20 years. They're grown fat and complacent with the lack of competition in the market.
 
Hellsfury said:
Wouldn't it be more effective to build a proper NAS for all those HDD?

Your 750w power supply might be a bit under-powered for all those HDD, otherwise would be enough for the requirements of the system.



Intel is in the shit-house right now because they are gouging their customers by over-pricing their products relative to their features for the end-user. And I say that as an Intel users for the last 20 years. They're grown fat and complacent with the lack of competition in the market.
Click to expand...

NAS -- in an ideal world, yes. However, in pricing out the additional hardware for an enclosure and/or server PC, it just seemed to me to be most effective to store the drives in this computer. Frankly, I'm most concerned with them inhibiting air flow, but I'll play it as I go. Will def do some calculations on wattage to see where I stand, thanks for pointing that out (and HumDumpin for the same point)!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top