Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'PC' started by Iceman, Sep 24, 2013.
Around $500. I'm just wanting CPU/Motherboard and GPU. I see the RX 580
Agreed with geetard, the AMDs are the best way to go for mid-priced cards right now. nVidia's main appeal right now is for uber high end cards, and even then the AMDs are typically better-priced alternatives for everything except for the 2080Ti , 2080, and 2070.
Is that your budget for just the GPU or CPU/motherboard as well?
Depending on CPU/motherboard needs, the RX 5600 XT gets great reviews for 1080p gaming:
However, if you need to also get a CPU and motherboard for that budget, it might be a bit much.
Yeah, I was wondering as well... 500 bucks for the CPU/mobo and GPU? I assume you have the rest.
The 1660 currently has 20 dollars shaved off at Newegg including a 10-dollar mail in rebate if you want to go through that. It has 6GB VRAM though, compared to the 580's 8GB. So unless you play in ultra settings or in 2K/4K or do non-gaming work that require a high-resolution monitor then the extra 2GB won't matter. Generally, 4GB is enough for many games including recent AAA ones.
The 1660 is also more recent (2019 vs 2017), but either one is plenty good for 1080p gaming. Just make sure the GPU length fits inside your case.
As usual, if you don't need the build right now you could wait for AMD's new CPUs and GPUs later this year.
I was able to fit the 5600 XT under $500 but have to get an older CPU.
At that price point for the GPU, @LibidoLoca could also look for the 1660 Super or 1660 Ti. The Super being "price of regular 1660 but performance of 1660 Ti".
I may just splurge for a 2060 ti. I need to see what the Ryzen equivalent of a i5 would be.
If you are going to splurge, this match-up suggests the RX 5700 is a better deal than the RTX 2060. It is a better card, with better performance, and depending on where you look you can get it for the same price as the RTX 2060 after rebates and sales. Regular price, it is only $20 more than the RTX 2060 on NewEgg.
AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT vs. Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060: Which is the best mainstream GPU? | Tom's Hardware
"The difficulty in recommending the RTX 2060 over the RX 5600 XT is that at around $300, the 5600 XT is outclassed by the RX 5700. We can't say for certain how long the deals will last, but right now Newegg has the MSI RX 5700 Evoke OC on sale for $333, with a $30 promo code and a $30 mail-in rebate. That brings the price down to $273, or $303 if you don't do the rebate, so it's either cheaper or the same price as the RTX 2060, and it's faster. In other words, the RX 5700 is arguably the winner if you want to include it in this conversation (and you should)."
EDIT: Got you an RX 5700 build for $520 using the same Ryzen CPU and motherboard as recommended by Geetard:
There's no 2060 Ti (only regular and Super).
And which i5 do you want to compare with? My i5 6600k from 2015 is comparable to the 2017 R3 1300X in terms of core/thread count and base clock speed (4C/4T @ 3.5GHz).
The R5 3600 has 6C/12T at 3.6GHz base. The i5 equivalents in terms of cores/threads released earlier this year would be the 10400 (2.9GHz), the 10600 (3.3GHz) and the 10600k (4.1GHz). The i5 9900k from last year clocks at 3.7GHz but it has 6C/6T.
The 3600 is still cheaper than those i5 CPUs and comes with a stock cooler unlike the 9600k and 10600k so you'd have to spend a bit more for an aftermarket cooler.
You may get better framerates/performance in games with the i5 ones, but in multi-tasking workload and value/price the Ryzen is much better.
Sorry I misread the item description when searching for one. It listed a 1660 TI from MSI under 2060.
My main goal is to get 1440p 60fps for around $500-$600. I guess a Core i5 from 2017-2018 would suffice.
Well with $600, we can go with something like this:
9600K has 6C/6T and I added a cooler since the CPU doesn't come with one. Alternatively, you can switch the GPU for a 5600XT and still be under $600 (5700 is too much ).
Gigabyte Radeon RX 5600 XT 6 GB WINDFORCE OC Video Card
Gigabyte Radeon RX 5600 XT 6 GB GAMING OC Video Card
Also, the motherboard isn't capable of overclocking so you won't be able to OC that 9600k. I've picked that mobo because it is affordable while being good quality and to fit the budget. If you do plan to OC the CPU in a near future, then we'll have to find something else but expect more $$$.
There are other configurations to explore (maybe an i7 9700K to have 8 cores?). In the meantime, here are some benchmarks to give you some idea.
Ultra settings with i5 9400F (6C/6T @ 2.9GHz)
High/Very high settings with R5 2600 (6C/12T @ 3.4GHz)
Ultra settings with i7 8700K (6C/12T @ 3.7GHz)
So you got me intrigued in a Ryzen 5 3600/Radeon RX 5600 XT set up...
Lib, you may want to consider an RX 5700 given your desire for 1440p 60fps gaming. @geetard, correct me if I am wrong, but the benchmarks I saw suggested that the 5700 tends to be able to provide 60fps more consistently on Ultra settings at 1440p than the 5600 XT. I also wonder if the 5700's 8gb of memory might be more future proof than the 5600 XT's 6gb? I saw on NewEgg that you can get 5700s for only about $30 more than a RTX 2060 or 5600 XT, so that might be something to consider. Now sure how hard the budget limit is...
For sure 5700 has better performance than 5600 XT.
Also, the card can be flashed with the 5700 XT's BIOS to give the non-XT a performance boost. I guess it depends if @LibidoLoca is willing to spend the extra $30. Worth the investment IMO.
Flashing The Radeon RX 5700 With the RX 5700XT VBIOS For More Performance
Yeah, I totally agree on that, which is why I mentioned it in case that might change @LibidoLoca's thinking. But if that is pushing the budget too far, I totally get it. We already gently nudged Lib up from $500 to $600. I just thought the extra $30 might add some extra life to the system and save money in the future by pushing back another upgrade.
You monsters are trying to make me spend nearly $800.
But you will thank us later!
Age of Empires 3: Definitive Edition rated in Brazil — release could be imminent
So I started having some issues with stuck and dead pixels on my old Asus PB328Q, which I loved, and decided to upgrade to my first 144hz monitor with an LG 32GK850G-B. I'm really impressed so far and enjoying G-Sync. It doesn't have HDR (which seems practically impossible to find on a large scale 2k monitor), but the excellent blacks and contrast make for a great runner-up. I'm really impressed with the panel uniformity, colours, black levels, and response rate. I guess I have to go forward with an upgrade to an RTX 2070 or 2080 Super now to make best use of the G-Sync... Just need to work on my sales pitch to my wife justifying the expense...
I also bought a new monitor recently, BenQ ex3203r, 2k 144Hz (it's a VA panel for I don't game much) and it has HDR but it's DisplayHDR 400 (not the best HDR available).
Let me tell you, it's close to useless, Windows doesn't handle HDR very well, the fonts are not sharp, Windows menus are way too bright, it's not confortable to activate HDR outside of gaming.
Of course I found workaround for the Windows/HDR display issue (registry tweeks) but I went back to standard display.
So, have no regret about your non HDR on your monitor.
Thanks! I knew I made the right choice when the clerk at Canada Computers said I bought his wish list monitor when I did the curbside pickup. Yeah, I think that BenQ was one of the ones I looked at. Most of the reviews I read suggested that the 2K ones with HDR didn't have the best implementation of it and they weren't great all-rounders. (Working from home for the foreseeable future, I needed something with good office functionality as well.) Decent HDR seemed to be more common in the 4K screens and it appears that it will be awhile before GPUs can comfortably run new games at that res anyways.
If I was a gamer playing heavy games, I think would have bought an IPS HDR monitor especially if the plan was to upgrade to an RTX 2070/2080 but I mostly watch movies and TV show, so went VA panel.
Gaming wise the sweet spot is apparently 1080p, 100+ FPS, 4k gaming is too expensive and useless (from what I read/saw on the LTT youtube channel).
I also tried a movie (Alien Prometheus) in HDR, it was nice but it takes too much space (50Go min for a movie).
What I like on the BenQ is the brightness and color auto adjustment based on external luminosity and it has no RGB or colored stand.
Also, the BenQ is not G-Sync but Freesync and I had to change the minimal refresh rate of the monitor to make G-Sync works (nothing drastic just set the min refresh rate to 34hz instead of 24hzbut I had to do research on Internet to find the fix).
FYI since you're a fellow Canadian:
Work From Home Tax Relief – $500 Non-Taxable Reimbursement For Personal Computer Equipment - Coronavirus (COVID-19) - Canada
Check with your boss/supervisor if your employer is willing to give this exemption. Here in Quebec, it doesn't just include IT furniture but also office stuff (standing desk, chair...). I so wanted to get a new IPS monitor but my poor back was begging me for a new ergonomic chair.
I would say 1440p is the sweet spot unless you play competitively in games like CS:GO and Overwatch. In that case, 1080p at 144Hz/240Hz is great. But I suppose it depends if you're more of a "frame rates" or a "graphics fidelity" type of gamer.
4K gaming is definitely a bit overkill considering the price you would have to invest (GPU) and you'll be sacrificing frame rates. 4K is great for work though (I do programming), so the additional pixels are definitely worth it in such scenario.
I'll have to try an ultra-wide monitor one day for gaming... The 21:9 ratio looks gorgeous for some games.
I typically play single-player games with story and cinematics, so I was looking for something in the middle-ground. For hardcore, multiplayer stuff, yeah, much of the requirements seem to point to 1080p, TFT or IPS panels, and crazy high framerates for split-second response. IPS are great for brightness and colours, but they are more expensive for large panels and their uniformity/blacks aren't as good as VAs. VAs are kind of a happy middle ground. They are more cost effective for larger panels than IPS, have better colours and contrast than TFTs, but not as good colours as IPS, with decent, but not amazing refresh rates.
The brightness and colour auto-adjustment on your BenQ sounds great. It would be useful feature in my office because it unfortunately faces southeast, so the room can be annoying bright during the morning when I am working and I always have to manually change my screen brightness for gaming in the evening because I have crank it during the day.
I will probably jump to HDR and 4K at the same time when I build my next rig in a couple years.
Thanks for the link. Unfortunately, the reimbursement doesn't apply to me.
As I mentioned to Xavier, I definitely agree with you that 1440p seems to be the sweet spot right now for me at least. As a single-player gamer, high fidelity graphics and immersion are definitely more important to me than crazy framerates. But that fidelity itself is a trade-off - do you sacrifice graphics settings for resolution? It seems to me you get more longevity from a GPU at max settings at 1440p than 4K right now.