1. #1

    Thinking about replacing my PC

    Good morning!

    I would like to replace my PC.
    He is about 6 Years old now.

    So i want you guys to ask for help:

    Here are my current specs

    Intel I7 4th Generation 3,2GhZ
    Gigabyte Z97-HD3 Board
    16 GB generic Kinston RAM
    500Watt Enermax Power Supply

    At the start of the year i replaced my GT960 with a RTX2060 - for Anthem
    It wasnt really helpfull in FPS - i think because of my "bad" memory performance - but i dont know exactly.


    As for now i want to keep my RTX2060 and create a solid build around it.

    I just need CPU - Motherboard and RAM

    For the CPU i tend to AMDs Ryzen 3600 - it should be the best value CPU over all (?) and hopefully faster then my current I7

    But what Mainboard to take here?
    Of course a X570 would be great but they are still rather expensive - is it worth it to take it?
    Pherhaps it will - in case i will upgrade to a PCIe 4.0 M3 SSD in the future?

    Or should i get a cheaper B450 Board - but i dont want to regret it in a year or two.

    I heard you should get some specific RAM for the AMD Ryzen CPU in terms of MhZ?


    I am not on a strict Budget, i just want to get some Hardware that makes sense and will last at a good amount of years while not costing a fortune :-)
    i dont want to Overclock :-)


    I am looking forward to your suggestions and your point of view.

    Thank u very much

  2. #2
    Get MSI Tomahawk B450 MAX. Has no issues with the 3000 series chips and the bios comes pre-updated out of the box. It's really great value and could support upgrades in the future as well. You probably won't miss any of the X570 features. As for CPU you're right on the money about Ryzen 5 3600, and as for ram, just get some 3200-3600Mhz ram from this list of supported ones: https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/supp...support-mem-19

  3. #3
    Mine only lasted for 5 years and has been broken. Maybe a whole new laptop could be a better option

  4. #4
    Field Marshal Rivex's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Location
    Berkshire, UK
    Posts
    71
    https://pcpartpicker.com/list/kDxN6R

    Under $600 (as you already got a 2060)

    I agree with the MSI Tomahawk B450 MAX shout.

    I only added a m.2 SSD as you didnt mention if you had other SSDs.

    No need for a 3rd party cooler the Wrathe is good enough!

  5. #5
    Please wait Temp name's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Under construction
    Posts
    11,576
    For motherboard: B450 is the best plan. X570 is just too expensive for what you get. There'll be no reason to get a PCIe gen4 SSD for consumers. Hell, there's barely a reason to get PCIe gen3 SSDs. For specific models, the Tomahawk MAX is pretty good.

    Ryzen likes fast RAM. 3600 is roughly the sweet spot in price/performance atm. You can, for a price hike, get 3800, but you won't really get much performance out of it. 16gb is a decent amount, there's literally no reason to go higher if you don't do work on it, and even if you do, it might not matter.

    In total, something roughly like so:
    PCPartPicker Part List

    CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 3600 3.6 GHz 6-Core Processor ($189.99 @ B&H)
    Motherboard: MSI B450 TOMAHAWK MAX ATX AM4 Motherboard ($114.99 @ B&H)
    Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws V 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3600 Memory ($69.99 @ Newegg)
    Storage: Intel 660p Series 1.02 TB M.2-2280 NVME Solid State Drive ($117.95 @ Amazon)
    Case: Phanteks Eclipse P400A ATX Mid Tower Case ($74.98 @ Amazon)
    Power Supply: SeaSonic FOCUS Plus Gold 550 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply ($97.99 @ SuperBiiz)
    Total: $665.89
    Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
    Generated by PCPartPicker 2019-12-06 04:40 EST-0500

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Mordog View Post
    I just need CPU - Motherboard and RAM
    • Ryzen 3600
    • MSI B450 Tomahawk Max
    • Cheapest pair of C16 3200MHz 16GB DDR4 (2*8GB), C stands for CAS-latency in product description.

    Can't go wrong with those, built about 30 systems thus far with Tomahawk and its previous version (non-MAX). You'll be able to run games at 1080 maxed / 144 FPS or 1440p medium / 144 FPS with an RTX2060.

    What I would suggest is upgrading your PSU eventually as well to some solid quality 80+ Gold 450W-550W unit. PSUs are the only components that are likely cause harm to other components near their end of life and if your Enermax 500W is anywhere as old as your Intel build, its time will come shortly.
    Last edited by Gouca; 2019-12-06 at 09:45 AM.
    <Security> of Frostmane EU

  7. #7
    Thank u very much for your input guys!!!

    i will take that all in consideration.


    I will go with the suggsested Tomahawk or with Gigabyte B450 AORUS PRO as it provides 2x M.2 Slots, so i could get rid of my 3,5" HDD and would get a cleaner looking PC without much cabels in it.

    Again, Thank you very much for your input.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Gouca View Post
    • Ryzen 3600
    • MSI B450 Tomahawk Max
    • Cheapest pair of C16 3200MHz 16GB DDR4 (2*8GB), C stands for CAS-latency in product description.

    Can't go wrong with those, built about 30 systems thus far with Tomahawk and its previous version (non-MAX). You'll be able to run games at 1080 maxed / 144 FPS or 1440p medium / 144 FPS with an RTX2060.

    What I would suggest is upgrading your PSU eventually as well to some solid quality 80+ Gold 450W-550W unit. PSUs are the only components that are likely cause harm to other components near their end of life and if your Enermax 500W is anywhere as old as your Intel build, its time will come shortly.

    I wonder what games you are talking bout, cause the 2060 will not run any demanding game at 144FPS maxed out
    I can't even do that with my 2070 Super.
    But it's a good GPU for 1080P 60FPS (the RTX 2060).

  9. #9
    Moderator chazus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    16,666
    For what it's worth, I had a 3570K and needed to upgrade my CPU specifically (to a 3600 as well) for Anthem as well. It just is .. I dunno.. poorly designed for CPU, or something. I couldn't run it, and skype, at the same time.
    Gaming: Dual Intel Pentium III Coppermine @ 1400mhz + Blue Orb | Asus CUV266-D | GeForce 2 Ti + ZF700-Cu | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 | Whistler Build 2267
    Media: Dual Intel Drake Xeon @ 600mhz | Intel Marlinspike MS440GX | Matrox G440 | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 @ 166mhz | Windows 2000 Pro

    IT'S ALWAYS BEEN WANKERSHIM | Did you mean: Fhqwhgads
    "Three days on a tree. Hardly enough time for a prelude. When it came to visiting agony, the Romans were hobbyists." -Mab

  10. #10
    I just replaced my I5-3570K too, with a Ryzen 3900x.
    4 cores just don't cut it anymore.
    Even 6 are not enough in some modern games.
    8 is the minimum for a gaming rig these days and with the upcoming PS5 and next Xbox with Ryzen CPUs, it will only get worse.

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Daywalk3r View Post
    I just replaced my I5-3570K too, with a Ryzen 3900x.
    4 cores just don't cut it anymore.
    Even 6 are not enough in some modern games.
    8 is the minimum for a gaming rig these days and with the upcoming PS5 and next Xbox with Ryzen CPUs, it will only get worse.
    This cracks me up every time. So you are saying that 8 cores are minimum in games now? even though games doesn't even fully take advantage of 6 cores?. Hell even 4 cores is not being fully used in most games and you are saying that 8 cores is minimum i gaming rigs now a days?

    What the hell are you smoking boy? If you are buying a new CPU today, then yes go for a 6 cores CPU, but if you don't have the money for that, then a 4 core CPU will still be more then fine for gaming. The new PS5 and X-Box will not magically make all games use 6 core+. Yes many new games will start to take fully advantage of 6 cores. But 8 cores is not gonna happen for a long time. If we are lucky we will maybe see 4-5 titles next year using more then 6 cores, but will still run more then fine on 4+ core systems

    My brother is still rocking a i7 7700k@5GHz with a gtx 1080 ti and the new call of duty: modern warfare is running just fine whitout a 8 core CPU in 1440p
    Intel core i9 9900k: Gigabyte z390 Aorus Master: PNY RTX 2080 XLR8 OC Twin 8GB: CORSAIR RMx 750W: Thermaltake Floe Riing RGB 360 TT Premium: CORSAIR Dominator Platinum RGB 32GB 3200MHz: Samsung 960 EVO 250GB NVMe: fiio e10k: lian li pc-o11 dynamic: Acer Predator xb271hu

  12. #12
    Scarab Lord Triggered Fridgekin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nova Scotia, Canada
    Posts
    4,859
    Quote Originally Posted by pansertjald View Post
    This cracks me up every time. So you are saying that 8 cores are minimum in games now?
    This is why I don't frequent these subforums that much anymore.
    Last edited by Triggered Fridgekin; 2019-12-06 at 09:42 PM.
    A soldier will fight long and hard for a bit of colored ribbon.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by chazus View Post
    For what it's worth, I had a 3570K and needed to upgrade my CPU specifically (to a 3600 as well) for Anthem as well. It just is .. I dunno.. poorly designed for CPU, or something.
    It was just a dumpster fire all the way around from day 1. Seriously, go read up on the development disaster that was Anthem. Im surprised the game ran AT ALL.

    I couldn't run it, and skype, at the same time.
    Also has more to do with both Skype and Anthem being poorly coded trash. Skype is a massive resource pig. Literally any other VOIP program would be better. Most of them use a fraction of the resources Skype does.

    I mean, im not saying you shouldn't have upgraded, but its not because quad-core is suddenly bad. Its because the two applications in specific you were trying to run are garbage fires.

    Quote Originally Posted by Daywalk3r View Post
    I wonder what games you are talking bout, cause the 2060 will not run any demanding game at 144FPS maxed out
    I can't even do that with my 2070 Super.
    You might want to return your SUPER card then, as something is clearly wrong. My 1080Ti (only marginally faster than your 2070 SUPER) has no issues with 1440p/Ultra/144fps in AAA titles. And i have it undervolted (.85v) and clock-capped via the voltage curve at 1750mhz.

    If your 2070 SUPER cant max out game at 1080p/144fps, you've got a problem somewhere.

    The 2060 is fully capable of high/max settings and 100+fps at 1080p.

    But it's a good GPU for 1080P 60FPS (the RTX 2060).
    An RX 580 will do 1080p/60 comfortably... a 2060 is significantly faster than an RX 580.

    Quote Originally Posted by Daywalk3r View Post
    I just replaced my I5-3570K too, with a Ryzen 3900x.
    4 cores just don't cut it anymore.
    Yeah, man, getting "only" 100fps with a quad core chip in Triple-A titles is just completely unbearable.

    Even 6 are not enough in some modern games.
    You go ahead and list up those games that dont get acceptable framerates with a six-core CPU that somehow DO get acceptable framerates with an 8-core chip.

    8 is the minimum for a gaming rig these days and with the upcoming PS5 and next Xbox with Ryzen CPUs, it will only get worse.
    Oh, this old gem.

    PS4 and Xbone have had 8-core x86-64 CPUs since 2013. For those following along at home, thats going on 7 years now (and actually longer as the dev hardware was out there at least two years prior to that).

    If 8 cores was going to provide some kind of massive performance uplift, it would already have done so.

    If 8 cores was going to matter, a game like Assassins Creed Odyssey (running on 8 slow, weak Jaguar cores on Bone/PS4) should SCREAM on a Ryzen 7 3700X, that has 8 screaming fast cores with 55% higher IPC.

    And yet...

    It doesn't. Devs have had just shy of a solid DECADE with 8-core CPUs to code/engineer for more performance.. and they haven't. Some things just cant be parallelized that well.

    A quad core is still perfectly capable for a low-end gaming rig. (Sub 600$) It will still produce acceptable framerates in AAA games paired with something like an RX 580 or 1660/SUPER/Ti, and it will continue to do so for the reasonable life of the machine (3-4 years).

    A six-core is enough to basically ensure you have no CPU bottlenecks, particularly at higher than 1080p resolutions.

    An 8-core CPU might provide "more" performance than a six core CPU, but its 100% going to be 'pointless performance' - the difference between 200fps and 250fps. Its meaningless.
    Last edited by Kagthul; 2019-12-07 at 02:09 AM.

  14. #14
    The Lightbringer Heathy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Wales
    Posts
    3,984
    next gen consoles will release as potatos the same way the ps4 and xbone did, the day they released they were potatos compared to an i5. if the ps5 is anything close to a ryzen 5 2400g and it doesn't catch fire ill be amazed.

    thats an apu with what is about roughly a 1050.

    iirc the only thing that was really special about the ps4 was the ddr5 shared ram. it still has a clock speed thats 3 times slower than an a8 6600k.

    ps4 clock speed, 1.66ghz, a8 6600k can be over clocked to 5ghz. lel. and that cpu was not special at all. only that it was one of the best first apus. i played mod dayz on an a8. i have an a10 7870k aswell that will play gta 5 without a gpu at a reasonable frame rate maybe not 1080 but it'll push 60 fps at 720p.

    i can play star citizen on my current i5 that also came out in 2013 4th gen haswell. is it super awesome solid 60 fps, not in stations no, in space its fine, on planets its fine. game still needs optimisation and i still need a dedicated ssd for the game, but i can play it, dog fight, do what tiny amount of gameplay loop exists in the game without much issues. on my cpu that is the same age as a ps4. i play escape from tarkov, not immune to the buffering hitches that everyone seems to get, but i get anywhere from 40-60 fps in tarkov playable for me.

    i believe the consoles are always going to be held back by being form factor, they suffer from the same problem as laptops. thermodynamics. you physically cannot keep cramming more and more heat generating electronics into smaller and smaller packages, physics doesn't work that way. unless you want to start fires.
    Last edited by Heathy; 2019-12-07 at 03:11 AM.

  15. #15
    Moderator chazus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    16,666
    Quote Originally Posted by Kagthul View Post
    It was just a dumpster fire all the way around from day 1. Seriously, go read up on the development disaster that was Anthem. Im surprised the game ran AT ALL.
    Oh, yeah, I know. I followed the dev path the entire way through. Though, I hear there is possibility they may be doing something similar to FFXIV... just doing a complete overhaul of the game.

    Also has more to do with both Skype and Anthem being poorly coded trash. Skype is a massive resource pig. Literally any other VOIP program would be better. Most of them use a fraction of the resources Skype does.
    I mean, im not saying you shouldn't have upgraded, but its not because quad-core is suddenly bad. Its because the two applications in specific you were trying to run are garbage fires.
    Oh, yeah, I know. Both Anthem and Skype are CPU hogs. It was really more an IPC issue than cores, and the Ryzen 3600 has like 50% more IPC on a single thread, and like 300% more on multi >.<.

    It was more a case of "My system doesnt have the power to do the thing I want" and when 'not play anthem or use skype' wasn't an option.. Upgrade it was. It was a good opportunity to slap in a 1TB NVME at the same time.
    Gaming: Dual Intel Pentium III Coppermine @ 1400mhz + Blue Orb | Asus CUV266-D | GeForce 2 Ti + ZF700-Cu | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 | Whistler Build 2267
    Media: Dual Intel Drake Xeon @ 600mhz | Intel Marlinspike MS440GX | Matrox G440 | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 @ 166mhz | Windows 2000 Pro

    IT'S ALWAYS BEEN WANKERSHIM | Did you mean: Fhqwhgads
    "Three days on a tree. Hardly enough time for a prelude. When it came to visiting agony, the Romans were hobbyists." -Mab

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Heathy View Post
    next gen consoles will release as potatos the same way the ps4 and xbone did, the day they released they were potatos compared to an i5. if the ps5 is anything close to a ryzen 5 2400g and it doesn't catch fire ill be amazed.

    thats an apu with what is about roughly a 1050.
    We already know they aren't that.

    They are 8-core, 16-thread Zen 2 CPUs with a custom Navi GPU chip (something around a 5700 or 5700 XT in raw power, but theyll be able to squeeze a bit more performance than that out of it due to it being a console and not a PC).

    But it will still be... around a mid-range gaming rig at the time of launch with a slightly more robust CPU (a mid-range CPU at that time will still likely be a 6-core, 12-thread Ryzen chip).

    i believe the consoles are always going to be held back by being form factor, they suffer from the same problem as laptops. thermodynamics. you physically cannot keep cramming more and more heat generating electronics into smaller and smaller packages, physics doesn't work that way. unless you want to start fires.
    Form factor isn't an issue.

    There are mITX cases that are smaller than both the Bone and PS4, and you can put an 8-core CPU and a GTX 2080 in them. An example is the Silverstone RAVEN RVZ-03. Its smaller than the original launch Xbone. You can put a full fat rig into it no problems.

    My own case (Evolv Shift) is only marginally bigger than a console and i've got a 1080Ti in it.
    Last edited by Kagthul; 2019-12-07 at 03:50 AM.

  17. #17
    The Lightbringer Heathy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Wales
    Posts
    3,984
    thats the difference between buying top brand parts and creating a high quality custom build with good airflow, vs the mass produced crap that could potentially brick after a 12hr gaming session.

Posting Permissions

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