Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst
1
2
3
LastLast
  1. #21
    Fluffy Kitten Nerph-'s Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    8,760
    Nice, okay thanks!

    Any reason why you want to go for 32GB ram with DDR5? Not an issue of course, I'm just the curious type

    Edit: I'm having trouble locating both m2 slots. I see one lower right (unless you're meant to put one above the other or something?).
    Last edited by Nerph-; 2023-05-21 at 08:01 PM.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Nerph- View Post
    ok so i think 7800x3d, 13700k or 13900k will be too expensive, so ive been looking at 7700X

    here is my first attempt at something:

    PCPartPicker Part List

    CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 7700X 4.5 GHz 8-Core Processor (€294.95 @ Megekko)
    CPU Cooler: be quiet! Pure Rock 2 Black CPU Cooler (€46.85 @ Megekko)
    Motherboard: Gigabyte B650 GAMING X AX ATX AM5 Motherboard (€196.95 @ Megekko)
    Memory: Kingston FURY Beast 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR5-6000 CL40 Memory (€79.00 @ Paradigit)
    Total: €617.75
    Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
    Generated by PCPartPicker 2023-05-21 20:53 CEST+0200
    Seems to be a good build. However for the sake of €30 I would upgrade to 32GB DDR5 - https://be.pcpartpicker.com/product/...2gx5m2d6000z36

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Goat7 View Post
    so dont.

    get an intel cpu 13700k or 13900k.

    the 7800x3d are catching on fire, literally. just youtube it.
    Thats how fake news are born. Its some ASUS mainboards that can explode your CPU but there is a new BIOS out already and you dont even void your warranty anymore by using the new one. Maybe just buy an MSI or Gigabyte board to be save.

  4. #24
    Fluffy Kitten Nerph-'s Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    8,760
    Quote Originally Posted by Pann View Post
    Seems to be a good build. However for the sake of €30 I would upgrade to 32GB DDR5 - https://be.pcpartpicker.com/product/...2gx5m2d6000z36
    Kagthul linked a build with a 13600k that apparently outperforms the 7700X and with 32GB ram. It was like 40 euros more, so if thats the case I'd probably go for that.

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Nerph- View Post
    Kagthul linked a build with a 13600k that apparently outperforms the 7700X and with 32GB ram. It was like 40 euros more, so if thats the case I'd probably go for that.
    The 13600K and 7700x are pretty much neck and neck in terms of gaming performance, there will certainly be no difference that can be noticed outside of benchmarks or FPS counters, if you are going to use it productivity then the 13600K is probably the one to go for. When the 7700x was first released it was significantly more expensive than the 13600K therefore Intel was a no brainer but now they are much closer in price.

    If having the option of an in-socket upgrade a few years down the line is attractive to you then AMD is the way to go, if not then go for the system that has the most desirable features (personally I think the MB for the AMD system is better in terms of features than the Intel board) and is available at the best price.

    But overall both systems will perform similarly and either would be a significant upgrade.

  6. #26
    Fluffy Kitten Nerph-'s Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    8,760
    Quote Originally Posted by Pann View Post
    The 13600K and 7700x are pretty much neck and neck in terms of gaming performance, there will certainly be no difference that can be noticed outside of benchmarks or FPS counters, if you are going to use it productivity then the 13600K is probably the one to go for. When the 7700x was first released it was significantly more expensive than the 13600K therefore Intel was a no brainer but now they are much closer in price.

    If having the option of an in-socket upgrade a few years down the line is attractive to you then AMD is the way to go, if not then go for the system that has the most desirable features (personally I think the MB for the AMD system is better in terms of features than the Intel board) and is available at the best price.

    But overall both systems will perform similarly and either would be a significant upgrade.
    Ok thanks for the detailed explanation.

    - - - Updated - - -

    I think I decided to go with the intel. I changed the motherboard to the Intel version of the one I'd used in the AMD build, but then I got a note saying I'd need a separate mounting bracket for the cpu cooler, so I've chosen a different one. Just wondering if I'd be better off with a different cooler... I'm open to doing AiO liquid cooling, etc. I doubt it'll be that important though as I'm not sure I plan to ever overclock, darn cpu will be fast enough haha.

    PCPartPicker Part List: https://be.pcpartpicker.com/list/ggdLtn

    CPU: Intel Core i5-13600K 3.5 GHz 14-Core Processor (€334.95 @ Megekko)
    CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 Black Edition 42 CFM CPU Cooler (€44.85 @ Megekko)
    Motherboard: Gigabyte B760 GAMING X AX ATX LGA1700 Motherboard (€182.95 @ Megekko)
    Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws S5 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR5-6000 CL30 Memory (€131.80 @ Azerty)
    Total: €694.55
    Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
    Generated by PCPartPicker 2023-05-21 23:51 CEST+0200

  7. #27
    The Cooler Master 212 is fine but nothing special, there are better value and better performing coolers out there but the problem will be finding one that is available and not being sold for higher than MSRP.

    If you have (lots of) time then Gamers Nexus have many videos on coolers - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...ch402w3ypcp1TQ

    It might be an idea to go for the Arctic E-Sprots duo which performs slightly better for a few Euro more - https://be.pcpartpicker.com/product/...er-acfre00061a

  8. #28
    Just update the bios if you want the x3d chip. Its been fixed.

    But at this point the difference between the two companies is fairly marginal. Just get the best one between the two on your budget and dont worry about it.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Exkrementor View Post
    Thats how fake news are born. Its some ASUS mainboards that can explode your CPU but there is a new BIOS out already and you dont even void your warranty anymore by using the new one. Maybe just buy an MSI or Gigabyte board to be save.
    to get this tilted this quickly, you must be an AMD fanboi. its not fake news, its real news, also asus are not the only boards with the 7800x3d catching on fire, yes this is what was thought at first, but we have learned that other boards are having the same issue. now plz go quietly back to ur safe place

    also u can see gigabyte amd boards that *updated bios* and you actually download it and install it and the voltage of the CPU does not change.

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by Goat7 View Post
    to get this tilted this quickly, you must be an AMD fanboi. its not fake news, its real news, also asus are not the only boards with the 7800x3d catching on fire, yes this is what was thought at first, but we have learned that other boards are having the same issue. now plz go quietly back to ur safe place

    also u can see gigabyte amd boards that *updated bios* and you actually download it and install it and the voltage of the CPU does not change.
    Haha, holy moly that answer. Tell me you have irl issues without telling me you have irl issues.

  11. #31
    The Unstoppable Force Gaidax's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    20,781
    Quote Originally Posted by Nerph- View Post
    I think I decided to go with the intel.
    If you go Intel, you can take advantage of using DDR4 and Z690 chipset on the cheap to reinvest it into higher grade CPU and better cooling solution.

    PCPartPicker Part List: https://be.pcpartpicker.com/list/V2gdsL

    CPU: Intel Core i7-13700K 3.4 GHz 16-Core Processor (€439.00 @ Megekko)
    CPU Cooler: be quiet! Pure Loop 360 Liquid CPU Cooler (€124.90 @ Megekko)
    Motherboard: Gigabyte Z690 UD DDR4 ATX LGA1700 Motherboard (€198.85 @ Megekko)
    Memory: Kingston FURY Renegade 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR4-3600 CL16 Memory (€82.85 @ Megekko)
    Total: €845.60
    Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
    Generated by PCPartPicker 2023-05-24 12:59 CEST+0200

    Z690 as a chipset is better than B760 in just about everything, the considerable performance increase from going I7 will more than offset the mild penalty of a cheaper DDR4.

    In addition, you get a much better cooling option to keep I7 thermals in check and prevent throttling - it is a power-hungry CPU that generates a lot of heat. you don't want to cool it with some shitty 40 eurobucks blower. You can opt to reduce it to 2x140mm or even 2x120 mm and save additional ~20-30 euros, while still being good for the job and bring you to a cozy 800 euros mark.

    Think about it - 100 more euros and you get a solid upgrade from I5 to I7.

    You may even be able to do some mild OC with that, why not.
    Last edited by Gaidax; 2023-05-24 at 11:06 AM.

  12. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Gaidax View Post
    If you go Intel, you can take advantage of using DDR4 and Z690 chipset on the cheap to reinvest it into higher grade CPU and better cooling solution.

    PCPartPicker Part List: https://be.pcpartpicker.com/list/V2gdsL

    CPU: Intel Core i7-13700K 3.4 GHz 16-Core Processor (€439.00 @ Megekko)
    CPU Cooler: be quiet! Pure Loop 360 Liquid CPU Cooler (€124.90 @ Megekko)
    Motherboard: Gigabyte Z690 UD DDR4 ATX LGA1700 Motherboard (€198.85 @ Megekko)
    Memory: Kingston FURY Renegade 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR4-3600 CL16 Memory (€82.85 @ Megekko)
    Total: €845.60
    Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
    Generated by PCPartPicker 2023-05-24 12:59 CEST+0200

    Z690 as a chipset is better than B760 in just about everything, the considerable performance increase from going I7 will more than offset the mild penalty of a cheaper DDR4.

    In addition, you get a much better cooling option to keep I7 thermals in check and prevent throttling - it is a power-hungry CPU that generates a lot of heat. you don't want to cool it with some shitty 40 eurobucks blower. You can opt to reduce it to 2x140mm or even 2x120 mm and save additional ~20-30 euros, while still being good for the job and bring you to a cozy 800 euros mark.

    Think about it - 100 more euros and you get a solid upgrade from I5 to I7.

    You may even be able to do some mild OC with that, why not.
    The performance gain going from 13600k to a 13700k, for 1440p gaming using a 2070, will be minimal, especially when using DDR4 as opposed to DDR5, and is not, in my opinion, worth the €150 premium.

    If the OP is going to spend over €800 they would be better off going for their proposed system and putting the savings towards a GPU upgrade.

  13. #33
    The Unstoppable Force Gaidax's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    20,781
    Of course, you can instead choose no compromises AMD build like this too:

    PCPartPicker Part List: https://be.pcpartpicker.com/list/872KY9

    CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D 4.2 GHz 8-Core Processor (€439.00 @ Megekko)
    CPU Cooler: EVGA CLC 280 113.5 CFM Liquid CPU Cooler (€97.85 @ Azerty)
    Motherboard: MSI MAG X670E TOMAHAWK WIFI ATX AM5 Motherboard (€306.95 @ Azerty)
    Memory: Kingston Fury Renegade RGB 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR5-6000 CL32 Memory (€158.89 @ Alternate Belgium)
    Total: €1002.69
    Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
    Generated by PCPartPicker 2023-05-24 13:17 CEST+0200

    1k Eurobucks, but you practically get top of the line gaming setup there is in existence right now. The only small compromise here is motherboard and even then, the more expensive models just offer luxury that you may like in future and don't really need now like more CPU power and PCI-E 5 SSDs.

    This is for all intents and purposes the best gaming setup you can have now, literally.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Pann View Post
    The performance gain going from 13600k to a 13700k, for 1440p gaming using a 2070, will be minimal, especially when using DDR4 as opposed to DDR5, and is not, in my opinion, worth the €150 premium.

    If the OP is going to spend over €800 they would be better off going for their proposed system and putting the savings towards a GPU upgrade.
    I learned my lesson the hard way, the problem is very simple, as years go by - games require more and more AND your background applications and whatever you run on your second monitor require more and more.

    These 2 extra physical cores are needed exactly both to have this PC last another year or two AND to make sure whatever you run in background and do in your second monitor while gaming is not hogging your game.

    You have to remember a simple fact that whatever reviewers do - is not what users do.

    We aren't running clean install OS with 0 background trash, services and windows defender and so on disabled while gaming. You will game AND have Chrome with 40+ tabs open 2nd screen, while some stream running and/or some bullshit you download on the side, while Windows randomly decides this is the best time to do some baxkground system maintenance or some other bullshit.

    So these extra 2 cores you get - will cover exactly that, on top of giving you a breather 2-3 years down the line when every game will max out 8 physical cores like Tomb Raider does now.

    These 2 extra cores will allow the OP to drag this setup another year or even 2 before having to reopen similar thread.

    - - - Updated - - -

    And I'd just add - it's even MORE important for that Intel setup - because this is it, it's a dead end socket. You aren't going to upgrade that CPU without having to re-buy the whole thing.

    If it was AMD AM5, I'd say - fair enough, because you'd just plop a beefier CPU 2-3 years down the road same socket and you're good to go. But LGA1700? This shit is donezo, bruddah.

    Which is, by the way, OP - something you'd want to consider.
    Last edited by Gaidax; 2023-05-24 at 11:33 AM.

  14. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by Gaidax View Post
    I learned my lesson the hard way, the problem is very simple, as years go by - games require more and more AND your background applications and whatever you run on your second monitor require more and more.

    These 2 extra physical cores are needed exactly both to have this PC last another year or two AND to make sure whatever you run in background and do in your second monitor while gaming is not hogging your game.

    You have to remember a simple fact that whatever reviewers do - is not what users do.

    We aren't running clean install OS with 0 background trash, services and windows defender and so on disabled while gaming. You will game AND have Chrome with 40+ tabs open 2nd screen, while some stream running and/or some bullshit you download on the side, while Windows randomly decides this is the best time to do some baxkground system maintenance or some other bullshit.

    So these extra 2 cores you get - will cover exactly that, on top of giving you a breather 2-3 years down the line when every game will max out 8 physical cores like Tomb Raider does now.

    These 2 extra cores will allow the OP to drag this setup another year or even 2 before having to reopen similar thread.
    The OP is gaming at 1440p on a 2070 they will in almost all situations be GPU bound you are suggesting systems that are at least 25% more expensive which will in the majority situations offer no noticeable benefit over what they suggested. If the OP intends to spend their time benchmarking and watching frame time graphs then the two systems you've suggested would be better performers but if they want to use their system for gaming they will be throwing their money away.

    The fact that six core Ryzens perform similarly in gaming to their 12 or 16 core siblings (the gains from higher cored chips is from their higher clock speeds) should be enough evidence to disprove that more cores are needed for gaming.

  15. #35
    The Unstoppable Force Gaidax's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    20,781
    Quote Originally Posted by Pann View Post
    The OP is gaming at 1440p on a 2070 they will in almost all situations be GPU bound you are suggesting systems that are at least 25% more expensive which will in the majority situations offer no noticeable benefit over what they suggested. If the OP intends to spend their time benchmarking and watching frame time graphs then the two systems you've suggested would be better performers but if they want to use their system for gaming they will be throwing their money away.

    The fact that six core Ryzens perform similarly in gaming to their 12 or 16 core siblings (the gains from higher cored chips is from their higher clock speeds) should be enough evidence to disprove that more cores are needed for gaming.
    Again... for now

    In a year the OP will slap a discount 4080 there and suddenly his I5 will start chocking up simply because 6 P-cores driving 4080 with 2k24/25 games will be a sad joke.

    You literally are me ~4 years ago, I also was "pfft 2 more cores, who needs it". And here I am - dropping a good $2.5k on a new AMD rig now, instead of next year when brand new Intel socket and next gen CPUs come. Times change.

    You build a rig for 5 years forward not for today and a year from now. In this case, these 100 euros will make this rig last easy extra year if not more. Because 2 more P-cores is 33% more performance-oriented compute right up, people spend hundreds of $$ to get frikkin' 5% more - here it's 100 ~euros for 33% more.
    Last edited by Gaidax; 2023-05-24 at 11:58 AM.

  16. #36
    Fluffy Kitten Nerph-'s Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    8,760
    Thanks for the posts Gaidax and Pann, I haven't ordered anything yet and by the looks of it I have some decisions to make 13600k with DDR5, 13700k with DDR4 or an AMD cpu.

    All 3 of them are going to be quite a big upgrade when it comes to what I currently have. Right now I'm using a 9600k (with DDR4-2666 ram), so going from 6c/6t to 14c/20t (13600k) or more, I get the feeling it'll be quite a boost.

    While the LGA1700 is done, I don't think I'll be upgrading CPU again for at least 4-5 years. It's of course more convenient to only need to replace the CPU, but I guess that's the deal you make if you go with Intel (most of the time).

    Either way I'm not going to rush purchase anything, so keep the opinions coming!

    Thanks again!

  17. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Gaidax View Post
    Again... for now

    In a year the OP will slap a discount 4080 there and suddenly his I5 will start chocking up simply because 6 P-cores driving 4080 with 2k24/25 games will be a sad joke.

    You literally are me ~4 years ago, I also was "pfft 2 more cores, who needs it". And here I am - dropping a good $2.5k on a new AMD rig now, instead of next year when brand new Intel socket and next gen CPUs come. Times change.

    You build a rig for 5 years forward not for today and a year from now. In this case, these 150 euros will make this rig last easy extra year if not more.
    IPC and clock speed are the main requirements for gaming performance not core count. Rather than relying on hypotheticals it is better to offer advice based on what the OP has asked and to be honest suggesting that 4080 will not be able to perform due to two fewer P-cores is nonsense.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Nerph- View Post
    Thanks for the posts Gaidax and Pann, I haven't ordered anything yet and by the looks of it I have some decisions to make 13600k with DDR5, 13700k with DDR4 or an AMD cpu.

    All 3 of them are going to be quite a big upgrade when it comes to what I currently have. Right now I'm using a 9600k (with DDR4-2666 ram), so going from 6c/6t to 14c/20t (13600k) or more, I get the feeling it'll be quite a boost.

    While the LGA1700 is done, I don't think I'll be upgrading CPU again for at least 4-5 years. It's of course more convenient to only need to replace the CPU, but I guess that's the deal you make if you go with Intel (most of the time).

    Either way I'm not going to rush purchase anything, so keep the opinions coming!

    Thanks again!
    The 13700K is a better chip than the 13600K and does perform better in games but this is not due to core count and is a result of the 13700K's higher clock speed (5.3GHz vs 5.1GHz) and slightly more cache. However this only results in a FPS gain of roughly 6 or 7% (if I remember correctly) of which you will lose roughly half (3%) by going for DDR4 over DDR5 and not to mention that these figures are from testing at 1080p with a high end modern GPU, with a 2070 at 1440p I suspect that there will be no difference between the 13600k and 13700k.

    Although you plan to keep your PC for a few years it is worth taking into account that DDR released in 2014 and it is only in the last year so that DDR5 has replaced it so it is entirely possible that you would be able to use a DDR5 kit that you buy today in your new PC in 5 years time. Also some recent titles benefit from fast memory (Spiderman springs to mind) whether this is a trend that continues remains to be seen but if I was to guess I would say that games are unlikely to want less memory bandwidth in future.

    Whatever you choose - 13600k, 13700k, 7700x or 7800x3d - it will be a substantial upgrade however I do not think that sacrificing DDR5 for DDR4 in order to get a 13700k is a worthwhile trade off for gaming and especially not for an extra 20%.

    If you are prepared to go to your full €1,000 budget then you would better off going for the 13600k system you linked, selling your 2070 and then buying a 6950xt - https://be.pcpartpicker.com/product/...6950xt-pg-16go - than putting it all towards a better CPU. (I'm not sure what 2070s are going for now so you might be a bit short).

  18. #38
    Fluffy Kitten Nerph-'s Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    8,760
    Quote Originally Posted by Pann View Post
    IPC and clock speed are the main requirements for gaming performance not core count. Rather than relying on hypotheticals it is better to offer advice based on what the OP has asked and to be honest suggesting that 4080 will not be able to perform due to two fewer P-cores is nonsense.

    - - - Updated - - -



    The 13700K is a better chip than the 13600K and does perform better in games but this is not due to core count and is a result of the 13700K's higher clock speed (5.3GHz vs 5.1GHz) and slightly more cache. However this only results in a FPS gain of roughly 6 or 7% (if I remember correctly) of which you will lose roughly half (3%) by going for DDR4 over DDR5 and not to mention that these figures are from testing at 1080p with a high end modern GPU, with a 2070 at 1440p I suspect that there will be no difference between the 13600k and 13700k.

    Although you plan to keep your PC for a few years it is worth taking into account that DDR released in 2014 and it is only in the last year so that DDR5 has replaced it so it is entirely possible that you would be able to use a DDR5 kit that you buy today in your new PC in 5 years time. Also some recent titles benefit from fast memory (Spiderman springs to mind) whether this is a trend that continues remains to be seen but if I was to guess I would say that games are unlikely to want less memory bandwidth in future.

    Whatever you choose - 13600k, 13700k, 7700x or 7800x3d - it will be a substantial upgrade however I do not think that sacrificing DDR5 for DDR4 in order to get a 13700k is a worthwhile trade off for gaming and especially not for an extra 20%.

    If you are prepared to go to your full €1,000 budget then you would better off going for the 13600k system you linked, selling your 2070 and then buying a 6950xt - https://be.pcpartpicker.com/product/...6950xt-pg-16go - than putting it all towards a better CPU. (I'm not sure what 2070s are going for now so you might be a bit short).
    Thanks for the detailed explanation. I think I'll probably go for the 13600k after all, with DDR5. In an ideal world I'd have gone for the 13700k with DDR5 memory, or the 7800X3D, but I just cannot afford it right now. I could wait another few months and see what happens, but I'm honestly not sure if that is really going to help. It feels technology advances so quickly, that in a few more months I'll then be told to "wait a few more for the next gen" or something else. I think I should just look at what I can afford now, and go for it.

    As for the GPU you linked, that actually looks pretty decent. What would you say will make a bigger difference: CPU + RAM upgrade, or GPU upgrade? If the GPU would make more of a difference, maybe I should go down that route first?

  19. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by Nerph- View Post
    Thanks for the detailed explanation. I think I'll probably go for the 13600k after all, with DDR5. In an ideal world I'd have gone for the 13700k with DDR5 memory, or the 7800X3D, but I just cannot afford it right now. I could wait another few months and see what happens, but I'm honestly not sure if that is really going to help. It feels technology advances so quickly, that in a few more months I'll then be told to "wait a few more for the next gen" or something else. I think I should just look at what I can afford now, and go for it.

    As for the GPU you linked, that actually looks pretty decent. What would you say will make a bigger difference: CPU + RAM upgrade, or GPU upgrade? If the GPU would make more of a difference, maybe I should go down that route first?
    No matter what you buy there will always be something better coming along a few months later.

    That's a really difficult question which I don't really know the answer to. On paper the 6950xt is around 60% faster than the 2070 at 1440p but it will be bottle-necked by the 9600K and to be honest I couldn't tell you how much performance you will lose. I would guess that your current system with a 6950xt would offer better FPS than a 13600k system with a 2070 but I really don't know for sure and I am happy to corrected if someone knows better.

    If upgrading your whole system over time is an option I would get the 6950xt now (as it is very well priced atm) and then a few months down the line upgrade the CPU, MB and RAM.

  20. #40
    Fluffy Kitten Nerph-'s Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    8,760
    Quote Originally Posted by Pann View Post
    No matter what you buy there will always be something better coming along a few months later.

    That's a really difficult question which I don't really know the answer to. On paper the 6950xt is around 60% faster than the 2070 at 1440p but it will be bottle-necked by the 9600K and to be honest I couldn't tell you how much performance you will lose. I would guess that your current system with a 6950xt would offer better FPS than a 13600k system with a 2070 but I really don't know for sure and I am happy to corrected if someone knows better.

    If upgrading your whole system over time is an option I would get the 6950xt now (as it is very well priced atm) and then a few months down the line upgrade the CPU, MB and RAM.
    In all honesty I don't know a lot about AMD cards. I'm going to google a bit to find out more about them and what the pros and cons are of AMD cards compared to nvidia.

    My monitor is g-sync compatible but I believe it has freesync too, so I assume swapping to an AMD card wont cause an issue? (AORUS AD27QD).

    Edit: Megekko retailer website states the minimum PSU for the 6950XT is 900W. I currently have a Corsair RM750x, so 750W PSU.
    Last edited by Nerph-; 2023-05-24 at 07:42 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •