Building a gaming PC

+
Ouch. It will, in fact it bottlenecks 1070 Ti right now as you read this message. You have to find a way to fit i7 9700(k)f or i7 8700(k) into your existing motherboard (it's possible). RTX gpus are huge suckers for multithreaded cpus with DXR enabled.

Well, I can switch the CPU too, no biggie.
 
No. Today, used 1080 ti in newer titles crawls back to performance level of new 5700 XT. And in older titles, framerate exceeds 48-75hz freesync limit anyway. While costing well above 400$, up to and beyond 500$ in fact, on ebay. You know what also costs around 460-500$? RTX 2070 Super.

This 1080 ti meme should be put to rest already.

You're right, when i looked last before xmas there were quite a few sold at mid $300. All recent sold has gone up considerably. At that price, yes, get a 2070 super for sure.
 
Pretty sure you need Z3XX boards for Intel 8th and 9th gen CPUs. If you're looking for an upgrade, a new ryzen 3000 build is probably the best way to go.
 
If you are not planning to store huge amounts of archive data (like photos, music) then I would suggest to drop the SSD+HDD combo and go with single 1TB SSD instead.

Thanks for the tip, i have a hdd from my current pc, if i need to store something that should be sufficient.

How much you paying for the PSU? Its not a bad PSU but around $100 id suggest a Seasonic Focus instead. More $, a Seasonic Prime. (Focus is good enough, if you have more $ put it elsewhere)

Echo what Dockter Fleck said above. Ditch the hybrid drive and get a 1tb SSD. If you need mass media storage, also get a HDD.
O/S and software on SSDs, media storage on HDDs. 500gb fills up way too fast. If you fill up your 1tb (liking to have quite a few games installed), chuck another 1 or 2tb SSD in the system. It doesnt have to be NVME

Mobo, get the features you need. Dont need to spend crazy bucks.
Check out Newegg, B&H photo and other online retailers. If youre not aware, www.pcpartpicker.com is a decent pricecrawler.

Its a decent system. Assuming one has decent cpu, by far the most impact is the monitor and the GPU to drive it.
Why i recommend non-curved 32" 1440p 16:9 monitors. Even for your grandma running a recipe spreadsheet. 21:9 too narrow, also hefty price premium and requires more GPU power to run. 3440x1440 (21:9) VS 2560 x 1440 (16:9).

32" 16:9 will blow your socks off coming from a minuscule 24". They start at $219 for a 75hz AOC model at best buy.
Id also get a used 1080ti from ebay for around the same price as a 5700. Waaaay better.

The Seasonic Focus GX650 is cheaper than the FSP, so i switch my build to that one, the Prime cost 50% more in my country. I don't doubt that an upgrade to 32" monitor would worth it, but it's a little too big for my taste. I will definetly consider it in the future. Thanks for the reply.
 
I don't really recommend Intel rn. I bought my 9900K when it launched back in 2018, but now since Ryzen 3000 released there is very little sense to go with an Intel build.
 
God damn it, @metalmaniac21 , now when I started to investigate my current config I decided that I need a new mobo+CPU combo :oops:

I'm still undecided: should I go for i9-9900KS or Ryzen 9 3900X. I have bad experience with AMD CPU's, but it was ages ago and perhaps now they are better. I know that this Intel supports DDR4-2666, but I would prefer to use my current 32 GB DDR4-2133, to not increase costs too much. Also, I hope that my Dark Power Pro P11 650W will be able to pick up the i9 (or Ryzen 9) load.
 
I don't really recommend Intel rn. I bought my 9900K when it launched back in 2018, but now since Ryzen 3000 released there is very little sense to go with an Intel build.
Well if you want to absolut best performance (right now) in just games and no compromises. Sadly you still have to go blue/green.

Besides that. the 3900x is the same price as the 9900KS and not faster in games.
 
I'm still undecided: should I go for i9-9900KS or Ryzen 9 3900X. I have bad experience with AMD CPU's, but it was ages ago and perhaps now they are better. I know that this Intel supports DDR4-2666, but I would prefer to use my current 32 GB DDR4-2133, to not increase costs too much. Also, I hope that my Dark Power Pro P11 650W will be able to pick up the i9 (or Ryzen 9) load.
2133mhz DDR4 RAM is a little pathetic these times, you have to overclock it somehow, doesn't matter if you choose 9900KF (I don't recommend to pay Intel for binning and buying KS at all) or R9 3900X. But R9 is more efficient per watt so I'd go for AMD with this PSU.
 
R9 3900X has higher clocks, more L3 cache (less RAM dependency, yay) and easier to cool, though. Also works better with RPCS3, the best and only Playstation 3 emulator. Though I'd rather take 3700X and spend the difference in price on cooler and Crucial Ballistix DDR4 somethingsomethingAES 3000Mhz RAM kit. Why? Because Infinity Fabric is a bottleneck on it's own and it's speed tied to RAM 1:1. And said RAM sticks can go up to 3800mhz while keeping the 1:1 ratio, IFs maximum.
 
Last edited:
To wait for B550 I'd suggest if you actually wanna go for AMD. As for i9, there's a way to fit this new CPU into your old existing motherboard but it's tricky.
 
Can you list these developers? Or at least name a few most notable ones? Because if you can't get big companies like EA, Ubisoft, Capcom, Namco& Bethesda on board, Linux will never become a viable gaming platform for the majority of people.

Check Steam and GOG, see Linux releases, sort by date.
 
So basically no major ones. Like I thought.

First of all false, and secondly what difference does it make for defining the market viability, and what exactly is "major"? If you mean legacy publishers, I already explained above why they don't release for Linux commonly, read the explanation. Non legacy developers do, even big ones. And they make profit on it. Just recently I was testing X4: Foundations for example. Quite a huge game. It has its own engine, and is actively developed with Linux version.

You seem to be stuck in the mentality, that what legacy publishers do, defines the industry. That's not true. It doesn't define it, and market is surely bigger than what they think it should be. If you are comfortable in your Windows usage + legacy publisher products and aren't familiar with anything else, that's all fine, but it doesn't mean that's all that exists or that's the whole gaming market. Don't extrapolate your lack of familiarity, to make sweeping judgments like "the whole market is this way" or "nothing else is viable". That's very uneducated approach (though admittedly, it's quite common among a portion of Windows gamers, who for some reason are antagonistic to Linux gaming).
 
Last edited:
It's your money but motherboards with south bridges cooled by pinwheels usually don't last long and X570 in particular only differs from X470 with PCI-E 4.0 support which will be supported for GPU and m.2 ssd in B550 just fine.

The main issue is: B550 is not available yet
 
Top Bottom