The motherboard is really what ties everything together, any problems in it can cause problems down the road for the graphics card, CPU, or memory. Motherboard manufacturers also (IMO) have a trend of making boards that just barely do what they need to do, be it VRMs that are just adequate enough (assuming they have airflow), messy/terrible/slow-updated BIOSes, and other issues. You generally mitigate this issue the more expensive you go.
Most B450->X470 boards on the mid/low end are really the same board, maybe a couple extra components, but primarily the BIOS is the major difference. If you don't plan on overclocking, just ensure the board has PBO/XFR, and go with the cheaper board.
I remember back in 2011, boards were ugly, but even in the middle-end of hardware, you could get REALLY solid boards with REALLY solid BIOSes. That's what I've disliked so much about how board partners have handled AM4 so far, the only boards particularly worthy of praise are literally the highest-end, and only from Asus (Crosshair Hero VI and VII) ((Also technically the X399 boards Gigabyte make are quite good)); I wish ASRock would get their shit together and make a good BIOS (because their boards are very good for the price).
I bought this board, which has a proper heatsink, and is still kicking at 100% today, for $175.
What's wrong with them? I haven't had any real problems with my X470 Gaming K4's BIOS, other than the manual overclocking options being total garbage and basically nonworking
Thanks, mate, I will check out the video tomorrow, I am fucking blitzed at this moment.
At least on my B350 Pro4 (which, to be fair, is SUPER budget) - most of the options have no comment at all, and you can dive into menus that recurse into menus accessible elsewhere, and settings that overwrite (but don't rest other options?) other settings.
Like, accessing the memory overclock stuff, or changing AMD CPB settings, or even what the motherboard was using for voltage regulation, was super weird and painful.
And that's the stuff I remember, I don't access the board on the regular, since it's stuck in a datacenter, and I don't make it a habit of just checking in on it for shits 'n gigs.
But that's a stark difference to my current X99 bios, where everything is super accessible, well documented, and nothing is "jank", same with my friend's X370 Crosshair Hero VI, which similarly has a very nice BIOS where stuff is well laid out, and makes sense, and is well documented.
Trying to overclock a 4790k on a UEFI Gigabyte board which had a corrupted main bios was one of the most irritating things I've ever done, on top of that the overclock ended up being just 100mhz over the stock turbo clocks on a H100i... None of the fields were documented on what they did, it was confusing on how to even select the voltages or clocks you wanted since every single field was a straight up text box where you could actually type in "ALL OF IT" for voltages, multipliers and clocks all the way up and down the page then save it.
My old board that I'm still using today with a $25 xeon, used it for the last 8 years. Ripped the gigabyte logos off for more VRM cooling. After having multiple EVGA 680i's die on me, around 2010 it was just a haven of overclocking and modding. There's the whole 771>775 mod where you can short some pins, trim a tab and put 771 Xeons into a 775. LGA1366/LGA1156 still allowed you to overclock, multiplier locked cpus with the base clock for really amazing performance. X58 boards often looked really awful too, orange PCI slots on a baby blue PCB. Stuff that would look at home on Pentium 4 boards very often. The early AM3 boards often had these absolutely awful Gigabyte color schemes too.
AMD seems to have had a problem with really poor VRM, I remember some of the Gigabyte AM3 boards were known for exploding VRM and they almost never had heatsinks despite having the mounting holes right there for the higher end model vrm heatsinks to clip right on.
http://s017.radikal.ru/i401/1211/3d/586a1bed727e.jpg
My predictions on the thermals on 9th gen Intel:
Wait until we know the thermal situation of the i9-9900K - especially when overclocking. If its any worse than the i7-8700K (Which it will be, since its Intel and 8 cores) you're (very, very likely) going to need to go custom-loop if you want to hit a 4.7GHz+ OC.
Just because the TIM is better doesn't mean the die produces less heat, if you're powering two extra cores, you're gonna generate that extra heat.
Just look at the i7-7820X delidded to compare, people can't cool those @ 5GHz on any existing AiO, they require custom loops.
Looks like that ended up being pretty much the case:
https://youtu.be/_I--zROoRws?t=466
@7:45
@AtomicSans, thanks again.
I wanted to ask: what do you guys think about the motherboard having BT and Wi-Fi? That's one of the reasons why I'm considering the B450 Carbon Pro. I don't remember the last time I needed BT on a PC, but it's nice to have, I guess... or are these things better when stand-alone?
Also, which X470 would you recommend? I've read about the ASUS Prime X470-Pro and people had some major issues with it. I'd like a motherboard with an extensive UEFI. The ROG STRIX X470-F GAMING seems like a good choice.
Also, I screwed up, I checked the GPU in another website. I'm considering a VGA PCIE16 GTX1070 8GB GDDR5/GTX 1070 GAMING X 8G MSI instead, any comments on that (afaik it's more for overclockers)? Don't know if it's mandatory to mention, but I'd like my parts to be quiet and cool.
Arctic MX-4.
Personally I have a hard time seeing a use case for desktop Wi-Fi. If you're gaming on it, Wi-Fi is simply not adequate. And it's a pretty significant price bump. I'm not sure what use Bluetooth would have, either. Wireless PC peripherals always come with their own dongles, and Bluetooth mice are fucking terrible.
Make sure to take user reviews with a grain of salt. People are much more likely to complain about problems than leave a review that says "it does everything I expected of it, no issues, five stars." That said, that ROG Strix is a great board, I believe it shares a BIOS with the Crosshair VIII Hero, one of the best around. Personally have an ASRock X470 Gaming K4 like I mentioned above, it's a good board with an occasionally confusing BIOS. I think it's a decent budget option.
Can you please provide a link to the GPU you're looking at buying? I don't care what language it's in, I just want to see what cooler it actually has. MSI's naming scheme really confuses me.
A final note, you should check and see if the AMD Vega 56 is price-competitive with the GTX 1070 in your region. If it is, the Vega 56 might be a better choice for you.
The link to GPU: Vaizdo Plokštė
Also, I don't want anything to do with AMD GPUs. Always had problems with them (drivers specifically). But maybe times have changed, I don't know.
Okay, that GPU is a pretty good choice.
And AMD GPUs are perfectly fine now. Their drivers are arguably more stable than Nvidia's by this point and come with lots of free goodies like Freesync. They've been great for a few years now.
Thanks again, but I'll probably stick with the 1070 for now. Maybe someday I'll look into AMD GPUs :-)
So yeah, now to double-check everything with the X470 motherboard and then it's time to order. Oh boy.
That day AMD might be out of the GPU game.
Oh well.
This is the worst time to be a PC builder that I've ever experienced. Fucking everything is expensive as shit
RAM is really the only thing expensive right now, graphics cards are back down, you can get a 6-core CPU for $150USD, overall things are settling down.
In the U.S, yes, everything's still just as expensive here, though
Yeah, speaking from experience, RAM is going to be the lowest value-per-dollar item in your build no matter what number you go with. Pricing collusion has a lot to do with that.
GPUs, SSDs, decent monitors, mechanical keyboards and precise mice, all that is cheaper now than it's been in years, which often evens the cost of your build back out.
Everything is more expensive in Europe though, FWIW.
I mean graphics cards "being back now" doesn't really mean anything when all that means is that RX 580s are back down to launch prices. Considering it's been 2.5 years since the RX 480 launched, that's pretty shit. As Rixxz2 points out, it's also really not the case over here.
I agree that calling it's maybe hyperbole to call it "the worst time", but I would say that building a sorta high-end build is more expensive than it has been a while, relatively speaking. Back when I bought my 6950 it was probably equivalent to a GTX 1070 at about the time the GTX 1080 Ti came out (relative performance-speaking), yet even when adjusted for inflation I'm pretty it was only around 60% of the price. Probably less than what an RX 480 cost at launch. I got a very cheap model, granted. On top of that RAM prices are completely outrageous. So CPU wise, it's better than it's been since probably 2011, but in other areas it's really still pretty lukewarm.
US I would pay ~ $906 after sales tax. That's a 21% price difference.
And that's totally understandable, Europe has higher taxes than the US.
But my health insurance also costs ~$400/MO, and medication I'm currently on costs $210/MO on top of that.
So I know the Ryzen 2000 series (and motherboards) is more forgiving when it comes to RAM, but is there still a big master list of dies you should stick to? I'm looking into doing a build for a friend, and I would say that anything above 2933MHz or so would be acceptable, as the build is fairly price sensitive.
Would it be worth upgrading to the 9700k if I have a 4790k?
Yeah I've been looking at both this and B450M Pro 4's compatibility lists, and I've sorta settled on a G.Skill kit.
One is this: F4-3200C16D-16GTZB (on ASRock's QVL, but listed at 2933MHz instead of 3200MHz for some reason)
And the other is this: CMU16GX4M2C3000C15 (on the Tomahawk's QVL)
Price wise it sorta equalises the prices of both boards - the ASRock board is cheaper, but the G.Skill RAM is more expensive than the Corsair kit, so it kinda works out. Makes more sense to get the Tomahawk in that case, I suppose.
Mostly games, sometimes video rendering. A lot of audio production. Dunno if hyper threading is even important with that
It's CL16 ram, which means it's very likely Hinyx memory chips, which are known to have a hard time hitting 3200 on Ryzen. That's why it's QVL'd to only 2933.
This is the reason why I'm super particular when I recommend RAM for the Ryzen platform, the fine details really matter for this type of thing.
Money not an issue. But I don't want to spend twice the money for the i9 if the performance increase is negligible.
Audio production as in pro tools using a moderate amount of plugins.
I had to cross reference with what’s available on the danish sites, so even findng that kit took probably half an hour of searching. But what I meant is that it was listed as a 2933MHz kit, not just validated at that lower speed (as far as my sleepy head could tell). Either way, seems like the tomahawk combo makes more sense. Thanks for the help guys.
Thanks to everyone (especially AtomicSans) for your advice and support. Keep on doing so, you guys are a treasure.
Do you guys have keyboard recommendations (looking for "flat" ones, not interested in mechanical)? What do you look for in keyboards in general?
My CL16 Hynix Trident Z kit hits 3200 no problem
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
PC Building V5 "needs extra thermal paste"
