How do you decide when it's time to build a new PC vs incrementally upgrading?

[Prelim]

same boat here, running a 2500K@4.6Ghz + 16Gb 1866Mhz + GTX 970 (it does the job since I only play at 1080p)

Thinking about upgrading just the GPU for a GTX 1660 this Xmas, and then upgrading the barebone (mobo+cpu+ram) to a 9600K or even i5-10500K next year!

[absyrd]

1660 ti is a beast, especially considering its power draw.

[Leslieann]

Inventory of 1660 cards of all variants will be limited until after New Years.
This was why there was no good GPU sales, they didn't need them, any expected GPU sales were cancelled before we even reached Black Friday and most inventory was gone before then.

It's not just us, world inventory of 1660 and 2060 is quite low (we wiped out Canada), with mostly single fan cards remaining. If you find one for a good price don't wait or you will probably miss it. Word is that Newegg or EVGA is expecting a shipment around the 15th or 16th but it won't last (keep checking both). Also beware inflated prices which may not come back down for a month or more for this reason, I was seeing insane prices for what was still available and even those sold. It's not as bad as the mining craze but it's still an issue as people were really expecting deals and everyone missed the boat for how much demand there would be.

That said, if you can find a good deal on a used 1070, preferably never used for mining, grab it, but don't pay more than $200, even for a prime example. I recommend the EVGA XC series which has better cooling than most. Basically you will get the same performance as a 1660 TI for about 2/3rds the price. This is what I ended up doing after missing out on a good 1660 Super. Mine is super low hours (it sat on a shelf most of it's life) and the added VRAM is better considering I have dual 1440p screens. Don't be afraid to beat up on 1070 owners by comparing price/performance to the 1660, if they want to sell they are going to have to come to grips with reality.

[noisyturtle]

The 1070 ti still blows the 1660 ti out of the water in terms of performance. At minimum +20-5% across the board in stress and rendering tests.

The price point is very attractive though. What a weird stop-gap card the 1660 series is 

[Leslieann]

The 1070 ti still blows the 1660 ti out of the water in terms of performance. At minimum +20-5% across the board in stress and rendering tests.

The price point is very attractive though. What a weird stop-gap card the 1660 series is 

TI for TI, yes but not if you do 1070 standard vs 1660 TI which is what most will compare due to similar price.
1660 isn't a stopgap, the only 10 series possibly still made is the 1060 and those under it. 1070 and above have long been discontinued and most are out of the supply chain as well.


Best bang for the buck:
$100 or less look for a used 580
Yes, these were often mining cards, but they are extremely cheap.
$130 new 570
$160 new 580
$200 look for used 1070
Mining cards can be had for less, haggle, use the 1660 as an excuse to lowball. These were used for mining but not the extent faster cards were as they didn't have as a good of a rate of return. Most probably lost money mining on these due to market changes. If no warranty for this much scares you when spending this much consider a 1660 Super, it's only a teeny bit slower.  I bought mine locally and saw and heard it run before I bought it for $200, had it been mined or a lower class model I would have paid less but I think I did okay.
$240 buy a 1660 Super or used 1070 TI
If you need low wattage get a 1660 Super, skip the standard 1660 ($10 difference!). The 1070 Ti is a better choice (more than 10% faster) but only if you can find a good one and that could be difficult, these were heavily used for mining when 1080's became scarce and there's no warranty. As always it comes down to your comfort buying used for this price, personally, if there's no heat issues I'd look for the perfect 1070 TI but continue saving for the 2060 (8% faster) and buy whichever happened first.
$300 buy a 2060
Unless you need low wattage for a small from factor, in which case get a 1660 TI, there's only about $10 difference in price.  You can find used GTX 1080s for this price range and they perform similar, however most are former mining cards and at this price, without a warranty, just say no. Gamers with good, low use cards are asking around $400. There isn't even an argument to be made for the extra ram for high res/refresh as it doesn't help here.
$400 buy a 2060 Super
Gamers are offering good used 1080's at this rate but the Super smokes the 1080 and comes with a warranty. Once again even the larger memory can't save it at this point, the Super is just that good.

1080's are simply a stupid investment at the moment as you can buy something off the shelf with a warranty that performs as good or better for the same amount. The same applies to new and used 1060's which are in a horrible predicament.

[absyrd]

I'm still scared of used GPUs even when people claim "light use". I just always assume they were mining.

[Leslieann]

I'm still scared of used GPUs even when people claim "light use". I just always assume they were mining.

So assume it was mined and price accordingly, if it wasn't you got an even better deal.

Modern GPUs rarely fail and should last years even under hard load, it's almost all solid state electronics and packed with thermal and voltage protection, if it worked yesterday it's probably going to work tomorrow, the one exception really is fans and those are cheap. There is one one trick I do for GPUs and that is to look at a sellers other listings and feedback, if they are clearing out lots of high end cards they were mining, if it's just the one, odds are they were just gaming with it and if they have a wide spread they're a recycler and it's difficult to say but they are the least likely to hassle you over a problem. It's not foolproof, but it does give you an edge. As for problems Ebay and Paypal almost always side with a buyer, so much so that bigger sellers don't even argue most of the time that there is a problem because they know they will lose.

[Sintpinty]

I'm still scared of used GPUs even when people claim "light use". I just always assume they were mining.

So assume it was mined and price accordingly, if it wasn't you got an even better deal.

Modern GPUs rarely fail and should last years even under hard load, it's almost all solid state electronics and packed with thermal and voltage protection, if it worked yesterday it's probably going to work tomorrow, the one exception really is fans and those are cheap. There is one one trick I do for GPUs and that is to look at a sellers other listings and feedback, if they are clearing out lots of high end cards they were mining, if it's just the one, odds are they were just gaming with it and if they have a wide spread they're a recycler and it's difficult to say but they are the least likely to hassle you over a problem. It's not foolproof, but it does give you an edge. As for problems Ebay and Paypal almost always side with a buyer, so much so that bigger sellers don't even argue most of the time that there is a problem because they know they will lose.

You should see space invaders

[NewbieOneKenobi]

Well, I think I may be joining the upgraders' ranks this Christmas. A z370 mobo + i5-9600K can be had for less than a 7700K (the equivalent of USD 300). Make it i5-9400 + z730 mobo, and it's going to cost the same as a 7600K (the equivalent of USD 200). So it makes little sense for me to upgrade within my z710 mobo's range, while I'm afraid the good prices on z730 + gen 9 could not last forever.

However, anything I'm going to play will probably do fine in 1440p with the 6600 and 1070ti.

[Leslieann]

Well, I think I may be joining the upgraders' ranks this Christmas. A z370 mobo + i5-9600K can be had for less than a 7700K (the equivalent of USD 300). Make it i5-9400 + z730 mobo, and it's going to cost the same as a 7600K (the equivalent of USD 200). So it makes little sense for me to upgrade within my z710 mobo's range, while I'm afraid the good prices on z730 + gen 9 could not last forever.

However, anything I'm going to play will probably do fine in 1440p with the 6600 and 1070ti.

If you can, wait until after 4th quarter profit results are posted unless you see a really good sale price.

Based on the numbers I've seen thrown around almost no one is building low-mid tier Intel and odds are they'll be doing price rollbacks after quarterly results come out. Only trouble is I'm not sure if they will do it for this quarter or next (they may wait to see a pattern, though it's pretty clear). Enthusiasts have all but shunned Intel mid and low end. Microcenter employees have said they estimated AMD selling 9 to 1 with only the Intel 9900k and up selling and Gamers Nexus reported the same for their Amazon Affiliate account but this time with verifiable numbers.

It's a good choice if the price is right.

[Larken]

There is one one trick I do for GPUs and that is to look at a sellers other listings and feedback, if they are clearing out lots of high end cards they were mining, if it's just the one, odds are they were just gaming with it and if they have a wide spread they're a recycler and it's difficult to say but they are the least likely to hassle you over a problem. It's not foolproof, but it does give you an edge.

Bought an rx 580 earlier this year, did the same thing. Seller was selling the one rx 580, still had warranty on it. Went down to collect it, found out on the spot that:

1. It was a former mining card.
2. Receipt for warranty was a photocopied one for 22 rx580s and the seller overstated the warranty period.
3. Turns out the seller bought the rx 580 from a miner previously, so it was a third hand card.

In the end I still got it (between the sunken travel time, the price was still borderline acceptable considering everything. But it definitely made it less of a great deal). I definitely wasn't happy about the lack of transparency on the seller's part. If it wasn't a Sapphire Nitro+ 8GB model, I would've passed on it.

Was not foolproof indeed.

Got home, stress tested the card to make sure it works, took it apart to clean out the dust+grime and applied new thermal paste. Slight corrosion on the heat pipes, which couldn't be helped.

On the bright side, the card has worked great over the last year. Got me back into gaming after a long hiatus due to obsolete hardware.

I'm looking to upgrade to a Ryzen 3600 or 3700x soon-ish. Pretty excited, coming from an FX-8320 that's served me well over the last decade.

[noisyturtle]

AMD selling 9 to 1 with only the Intel 9900k and up selling and Gamers Nexus reported the same for their Amazon Affiliate account but this time with verifiable numbers.

that doesn't sound right, one out of every 10 processors sold are IBM?

[NewbieOneKenobi]

Well, I think I may be joining the upgraders' ranks this Christmas. A z370 mobo + i5-9600K can be had for less than a 7700K (the equivalent of USD 300). Make it i5-9400 + z730 mobo, and it's going to cost the same as a 7600K (the equivalent of USD 200). So it makes little sense for me to upgrade within my z710 mobo's range, while I'm afraid the good prices on z730 + gen 9 could not last forever.

However, anything I'm going to play will probably do fine in 1440p with the 6600 and 1070ti.

If you can, wait until after 4th quarter profit results are posted unless you see a really good sale price.

Based on the numbers I've seen thrown around almost no one is building low-mid tier Intel and odds are they'll be doing price rollbacks after quarterly results come out. Only trouble is I'm not sure if they will do it for this quarter or next (they may wait to see a pattern, though it's pretty clear). Enthusiasts have all but shunned Intel mid and low end. Microcenter employees have said they estimated AMD selling 9 to 1 with only the Intel 9900k and up selling and Gamers Nexus reported the same for their Amazon Affiliate account but this time with verifiable numbers.

It's a good choice if the price is right.

Thank you. That also gets me some time to look at used 6–7th gens (for a quick BuyNow to later put my locked 6600 through a long bidding auction to recover most of the spend). No time to play games or do any overclocking before Christmas and probably all the way to New Year and slightly beyond.

[Leslieann]

Was not foolproof indeed.
Got home, stress tested the card to make sure it works, took it apart to clean out the dust+grime and applied new thermal paste. Slight corrosion on the heat pipes, which couldn't be helped.
On the bright side, the card has worked great over the last year. Got me back into gaming after a long hiatus due to obsolete hardware.
I'm looking to upgrade to a Ryzen 3600 or 3700x soon-ish. Pretty excited, coming from an FX-8320 that's served me well over the last decade.

That's a bummer, on the other hand, like you said, it still functioned.

The FX line wasn't as bad as people made them out to be but that's going to be a heck of an upgrade, be sure to get an NVME drive at the same time.

Thank you. That also gets me some time to look at used 6–7th gens (for a quick BuyNow to later put my locked 6600 through a long bidding auction to recover most of the spend). No time to play games or do any overclocking before Christmas and probably all the way to New Year and slightly beyond.

You're welcome, it's a bit of a gamble, but worst case I'd call it a draw waiting, best case, you get a nice price drop.

Keep your eye on Ryzen 2000 deals as well (Microcenter had that and mobo for well under $200) and if you are willing to consider used, there will be a LOT of used Intel and AMD stuff going up after Christmas with everyone getting new stuff. Used cpu and ram is usually pretty safe to buy, it's motherboards that tend to die first, however that's more of an age issue. So long as it's new-ish you should be fine, especially from an individual and not a recycler. Recyclers are actually the worst for boards as they rarely test or include I/O plates and who knows what it was used for, whereas an indivdual who built their own I5 or I7 probably spent the money on a decent PSU to protect it.

[NewbieOneKenobi]

You're welcome, it's a bit of a gamble, but worst case I'd call it a draw waiting, best case, you get a nice price drop.

Yeah. And I really need to work till Christmas Eve and probably beyond, so I'll wait for end-of-year invoices to come in, do the balance sheet, see how much I have to play with. Meanwhile I guess generation 10 could pop up?

Keep your eye on Ryzen 2000 deals as well (Microcenter had that and mobo for well under $200)

Nice Z370 boards can be had for under $100 where I live right now. No bells and whistles but solid gaming brands with at least one M.2 slot, SLI capacity and everything else I need (though I'd rather have two M.2 slots).

and if you are willing to consider used, there will be a LOT of used Intel and AMD stuff going up after Christmas with everyone getting new stuff.

Hopefully, yes. Just these last days since our last post or two 7700Ks have decreased by ~ one sixth. Hence maxing out on my CPU slot would currently be the best bang for the buck in terms of immediate power gain. If I see them drop further, I'll jump at it.

Used cpu and ram is usually pretty safe to buy, it's motherboards that tend to die first, however that's more of an age issue. So long as it's new-ish you should be fine, especially from an individual and not a recycler. Recyclers are actually the worst for boards as they rarely test or include I/O plates and who knows what it was used for, whereas an indivdual who built their own I5 or I7 probably spent the money on a decent PSU to protect it.

I have enough RAM, I think, but the locked i5-6600 is a bit too mid-range right now.

I'll see what they all have in store after Christmas, but I'll probably go with a z370 mobo and either i5-9400KF on a very good deal (I've seen some of those — generally costing the same with a mobo that a comparably powerful older i5/i7 costs without) or a 9600K on a good deal. Or Ryzen, but I'd probably look at series 3 only.  I'm in the good position that I only need to replace the mobo + CPU. The RAM is already 3000-ish DDR4, and the SSD is an NVM Samsung PCIE4 drive I got off some laptop seller whose client wanted a capacity upgrade back when those things were still a novelty.

I'm not really going to pay extra just to avoid a mobo swap and be stuck with an older chipset etc. Plus, I guess I'll recover more money if I also sell the mobo. Unlikely go for less than $50, and the CPU probably for $100-ish, so that's a 50% extra, and about the difference in price between 7700K and 9700K.

[Larken]

That's a bummer, on the other hand, like you said, it still functioned.

The FX line wasn't as bad as people made them out to be but that's going to be a heck of an upgrade, be sure to get an NVME drive at the same time.

Was an early adopter of the FX line. If I was in the US, I'd probably be eligible for compensation in the class action suit against AMD. Given my mileage on it, I shouldn't complain, but objectively it wasn't great even on release and never lived up to what AMD promised.

I would've gone Sandy Bridge (which was king back then) but I bought into the whole AM3+ thing (had a 1055t thuban prior to the FX upgrade). Between lacklustre gains in new chips that followed Sandy Bridge and how processor speeds wasn't much of a factor for most games until recently, I kept pushing off my overhaul. 3rd gen Ryzen is indeed going to be a heck of an upgrade.

Based on what I read, I'm not sold on the NVME drive. Seems like the consensus is that it only really benefits use cases where extremely large files are common (i.e. 4K video editing). Doesn't seem worthwhile to give up 2 sata ports for it (seems to be the case when using a NVME drive for the MSI Tomahawk Max); I'm one of those desktop dinosaurs who still has 6 hard drives in my case and am looking to add 4 more via a LSI 9211 (still trying to figure out if the cooling will work out though)

[Leslieann]

I'll see what they all have in store after Christmas

I always tell people buy the best they can when they're ready, prices are always in flux, especially this time of year and if you keep waiting for the next/better thing you will be in perpetual wait mode because something else is just around the corner.

I'm not sold on the NVME drive. Seems like the consensus is that it only really benefits use cases where extremely large files are common (i.e. 4K video editing). Doesn't seem worthwhile to give up 2 sata ports for it (seems to be the case when using a NVME drive for the MSI Tomahawk Max); I'm one of those desktop dinosaurs who still has 6 hard drives in my case and am looking to add 4 more via a LSI 9211 (still trying to figure out if the cooling will work out though)

You're right about the drive being best for large stuff, but large stuff is where things are heading.
The biggest benefit is room, which is why almost everything is switching to it. If you thought going from 3.5in to ssd saved space in a case, it's even better with NVME as you don't even need the drive cage at that point. Not that matters to you at the moment.

That said, with that many drives, I would give SERIOUS consideration to building yourself a home file server.
This frees up your desktop to be whatever you want (small box), offers a bit of extra security since it's not used for browsing and it can be a different OS entirely, and you can offload quite a lot onto it freeing your desktop. Not only can you offload work, but you can shut down or put your desktop to sleep (which is a power hog) while still accessing files from any other devices (great if you experiment with different OS). It can even save money on your power bill, even if you have to buy some parts to build it and it can be built in anything without regard for noise and looks since you can now move it to another spot or room entirely. This doesn't even cover all the benefits, I would be hard pressed to give mine up.

[Larken]

That said, with that many drives, I would give SERIOUS consideration to building yourself a home file server.
This frees up your desktop to be whatever you want (small box), offers a bit of extra security since it's not used for browsing and it can be a different OS entirely, and you can offload quite a lot onto it freeing your desktop. Not only can you offload work, but you can shut down or put your desktop to sleep (which is a power hog) while still accessing files from any other devices (great if you experiment with different OS). It can even save money on your power bill, even if you have to buy some parts to build it and it can be built in anything without regard for noise and looks since you can now move it to another spot or room entirely. This doesn't even cover all the benefits, I would be hard pressed to give mine up.

Yea, I've been thinking about building my own home file server eventually (just so I don't have to spend as much time doing cable management for my desktop each time I tinker with my desktop). Would you have any advice on how to go about it, OS/software wise? I know nothing about it yet, but FreeNAS/UnRaid seems to be the most popular, and I do have enough old parts to throw one together for pretty much nothing.

NVME is an interesting thought, but yea, it's not something I'd benefit from at the moment. Though with prices of NVME drives and 2.5" ssds being what they are right now, going NVME would be the better option if I was buying new and decide to shift the rest of my hard-drives off to a separate server. I'll probably wait a bit to see how the b550 chipsets turns out with regards to PCI-E 4.0 support for NVME drives to decide.

Thanks for the advice! Really enjoyed the discussion.

[Leslieann]

Thanks for the advice! Really enjoyed the discussion.

You're welcome.
A home file server can be as simple or crazy as you want, hardware and software-wise.

Ignore the hype.
Unraid has one massive issue, at least in my eyes... Well, two actually. It's not free and it only boots from a USB stick, who thought it was smart to boot a raid off crappy flash drive is beyond me. Also Freenas runs on BSD and it lacks a LOT of drivers. I've been planning to look into Openmediavault, it's one of the founders of Freenas who got annoyed with the problems of BSD and built a new version based on Debian. There is plugins for virtual machines, media center (to run a tv) as well as something similar to unraid.

If you have the parts, stop procrastinating and just start toying with it.
Start simple, Windows, there's far less security and permissions issues and most people understand it more. This does leave you a bit more open to infection and such but a good place to start and understand all you can do with it. Find out what features you need and want and then go from there.

[NewbieOneKenobi]

I'll see what they all have in store after Christmas

I always tell people buy the best they can when they're ready, prices are always in flux, especially this time of year and if you keep waiting for the next/better thing you will be in perpetual wait mode because something else is just around the corner.

Wonderful advice in all areas of life.

Thankfully, here in this country we have a nation-wide auction platform that is very reputable and very advanced — full-blown buyer protection plus a lot of cool functions such as the ability to track searches and get daily notifications when something new pops up in the category. So it doesn't cost me that much time or effort to keep tabs on a bunch of 7–9th-gen CPUs, but yes, I've experienced it very empirically that bargain-hunting is not worth it.

See, I'm a freelancer, like probably a large minority of other posters here. Jobs, or at least offers, inquiries, RFPs and all that jazz come like busses — sometimes there are none for an hour, sometimes six at once. When I get in PC upgrading mode, it interferes with my productivity and prevents me from being able to finish previous projects early and taking on new ones early, thereby making more money in the relevant month — usually obviously by more than the difference that exists between the prices of an i5 and an i7 within the same range or e.g. RTX 2060 vs RTX 2070 or whatever. Hence if it's time for an upgrade, it doesn't really pay to get submerged in the whole seeking-comparing-haggling mindset, it's better to just focus on making the money first, then spending it. I felt this when buying my last computer a couple of years ago, and to some extent also now, that is last week — wasted a bunch of hours scouting keyboards instead of focusing on my work and then buying the best.

It really is the most productive, gainful strategy to focus on the best, provided it doesn't cross the point of diminished returns by a very bad margin.

People tend to focus on not overspending, but that's more psychological distractionst than rationality. People also want the best bang for the buck, bu they fail to realize chasing it is not efficient — it's not the best bang for the buck when it comes to investing their time. For example when your lost wages due to the time invested in saving money via bargains are worth more than the savings (my own case when buying the last computer).

The difficult challenge here is to actually learn, then make the somewhat bold decisive step of nipping the whole analysis in the bud to lock on the top of the line as a target, the task being to get the money for it. Producing more money is often faster, easier, more efficient than making decisions about how to spend the limited resources one already has. This is probably abundance vs scarcity, which would explain why most people don't and won't get it — same reason why most of us aren't millionaires or even successful career people.

From a practical standpoint, overspending on a powerful CPU or GPU can truly be somewhat of a waste, but as long as one isn't lapsing into an episode of legal insanity, one should be fine. It's probably easier to live with 'yeah, well, I overspent a hundred bucks, let me just put some more ultra settings on for the sake of it' (or enjoy some other non-necessary perks) than 'crap, I skimped on a hundred bucks while already spending half a thousand, and now the whole experience is marred by the corners I cut, with my performance tangibly affected by the negligible savings'. It's easier for me, at least, to let go of the wasted bucks than the missing fps.

Plus, if you overspend a little up front you can avoid intermediate upgrades.

However, of course, overspending cuts into your budget for your next rig, so it's still smarter to not buy things that won't be needed, e.g. gaming features if never gaming, or server/workstation/rendering power while mostly just gaming and doing office work.

So I'm trying to apply this to my situation and right now consciously making the decision to just focus on my work and only keep tabs on the prices, stop overthinking. But easier said than done, of course.

[noisyturtle]

Well I just got a refurbished 3770k off eBay for $100 ($90 with the 10% off coupon)

The new cpu along with a 1070ti should keep my rig running current applications for at least another year. The gpu and cpu together already nearly double my performance so that's fine until I can save a few grand for a completely new rig. I COULD upgrade to 32gb ram for another lil 2-4% increase, but it's hardly worth dropping another $200 on )

This has turned out to be a pretty helpful thread, love this community 

[Larken]

Ignore the hype.
Unraid has one massive issue.....

Thanks, that was educational. I'll have to do more reading on OMV.

If you have the parts, stop procrastinating and just start toying with it.
Start simple, Windows, there's far less security and permissions issues and most people understand it more.

While I have parts for a separate system lying around, I don't have spare copies of Windows lying around, though I could probably just grab one off ebay. Inertia is present especially since the separate file server is a nice-to-have for me, and not a need-to-have right now. Definitely will take what you said into consideration.

[TacticalCoder]

Based on what I read, I'm not sold on the NVME drive. Seems like the consensus is that it only really benefits use cases where extremely large files are common (i.e. 4K video editing).

The day I read about NVMe M.2 drive is when I knew it was time to upgrade. So four years ago I bought a mobo with an integrated M.2 NVMe slot and a Samsung 950 Pro PCIe 3.0 x4 lanes SSD.

Single biggest boost I ever experienced (I'm a software dev and I don't game at all).

A few months ago, after nearly four years of daily using that first NVMe drive, I upgraded to another NVMe drive: a M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 lanes 500 GB Samsung 970 Evo Plus, for my main/OS drive. Sweet begeezus that thing is fast.

And these are cheap consumer drives (I think I paid my 970 Evo Plus 80 EUR VAT excluded), not crazy expensive Optane SSDs or anything like that.

[Leslieann]

Thanks, that was educational. I'll have to do more reading on OMV.

While I have parts for a separate system lying around, I don't have spare copies of Windows lying around, though I could probably just grab one off ebay. Inertia is present especially since the separate file server is a nice-to-have for me, and not a need-to-have right now. Definitely will take what you said into consideration.

You're welcome.

It didn't start out as a necessity for me either but it quickly became apparent I should have done it sooner, I think you will find the same thing. It's not good having one system doing everything because the system you use is always under constant threat and load. Not the place you want all your data stored.

As for Windows, it is perfectly legal to download and use Win10 isos from Microsoft and use them for 30 days, it's even okay to use them beyond that. It won't offer full customizing but will still work. If you want to feel better, grab a key from Ebay for a few bucks.  Ms will even give you a legit license if you upgrade to it from a real or fake win7 or 8 license.

[Leslieann]

The day I read about NVMe M.2 drive is when I knew it was time to upgrade. So four years ago I bought a mobo with an integrated M.2 NVMe slot and a Samsung 950 Pro PCIe 3.0 x4 lanes SSD.
Single biggest boost I ever experienced (I'm a software dev and I don't game at all).
A few months ago, after nearly four years of daily using that first NVMe drive, I upgraded to another NVMe drive: a M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 lanes 500 GB Samsung 970 Evo Plus, for my main/OS drive. Sweet begeezus that thing is fast.
And these are cheap consumer drives (I think I paid my 970 Evo Plus 80 EUR VAT excluded), not crazy expensive Optane SSDs or anything like that.

NVME is simply a protocol, more precisely the removal of one. Sata requires translating the chipset to sata then from sata to memory controller to memory chip, then everything goes back in reverse. NVME removes the sata layer and sata speed limits but the memory controller and memory chips are often the limiting factor. 90% of NVME drives use the same memory controllers and memory chips as the sata drives do, they get around this limitation by stacking controllers and memory chips, this is why the faster ones cost more, they're basically using multiple ssds in raid.

All this is to say NVME is only faster if built to be faster, most are not. Most are simply the same controller and chips slapped onto a new pcb minus the sata controller, yes, they are actually charging more for less. The R&D was almost nothing, the PCB cost was almost nothing, they simply cost more because they knew people would pay it.


At any rate, most systems aren't capable of really even pushing a 950 much less a 970 except specific load cases, your use is one of them. I also suspect you have a system capable of it as well considering you stay up on top of the fast stuff.

As for Optane, it's benefits are oddly specific and limited, and for the cost, just buy a fast ssd.

[NewbieOneKenobi]

Well I just got a refurbished 3770k off eBay for $100 ($90 with the 10% off coupon)

The new cpu along with a 1070ti should keep my rig running current applications for at least another year. The gpu and cpu together already nearly double my performance so that's fine until I can save a few grand for a completely new rig. I COULD upgrade to 32gb ram for another lil 2-4% increase, but it's hardly worth dropping another $200 on )

This has turned out to be a pretty helpful thread, love this community 

Congrats!

Myself I've decided to stop looking and focus on working. My clients are flooding me this week, so I'm working 16-hour days and contemplating energy drinks + sleepless nights to cope with the load, just not gonna start too early to avoid detrimental effects kicking in too early. I'm probably going to be forced to start declining any new projects till Christmas. Hence I've decided I'm done scouting and researching, just gonna keep pinging 7700K's, 8600–87000Ks and 9600–9700K's for bargains. Basically any hour or two lost scouting/researching would be costing me the same as a one-step CPU increment, so I might as well focus on work and get myself the better CPU right away, or just focus on work, cash in on the invoices and see then if I want to economize to save some money or change my guilty pleasure of choice and buy something else instead.

It's really a tough challenge not looking at reviews, benchmarks, etc., combatting procrastination. One thing to find in benchmarks is the varying behaviour of older i7's with more cores vs newer i5's with better single-core performance. Solution: no 7600K compromise, only 7700K if slotting out on my current mobo, and will keep checking 8700K/9700K prices too or just grab a 9600K, since it has six cores anyway, so can't lag behind an old 4-core 8-thread i7 much.

I had half a mind to getting the 7700K when I signed on three new urgent projects today (sleepless nights coming), but the good deals are gone in the meantime, so whatever — I need to force myself to stop thinking about this to avoid sinking into a procrastination black hole and taking too much time off work. Besides, at 37 it's high time I started to learn earning before spending (sigh… bachelor's financial management…).

Edit: I've started looking more seriously at Ryzen 3600X, but then I've just realized I already have an aftermarket cooler for socket 1151 (adapted from LGA775, har har), and 3600x goes about head to head in both performance and price with 9600K, also same number of cores, so I guess I'm gonna stick with Intel.

[absyrd]

Damnit. 5500 reviews underwhelming.

[tp4tissue]

Damnit. 5500 reviews underwhelming.

U wan dat, 5700xt

[Leslieann]

Damnit. 5500 reviews underwhelming.

Were you expecting a 2080 killer?
It slots precisely where it should against Nvidia based on price.

[NewbieOneKenobi]

Don't know what the prices are where you are, but in my neck of the woods I sometimes see great prices on 1080 and especially 1070ti, so unless you need RTX that can be the way to go, perhaps with some OC, especially for the 1070ti. In some cases blower versions are cheaper by such a large margin that you can buy a great aftermarket cooler within the difference.

[absyrd]

Damnit. 5500 reviews underwhelming.

U wan dat, 5700xt

Yes.

Damnit. 5500 reviews underwhelming.

Were you expecting a 2080 killer?
It slots precisely where it should against Nvidia based on price.

I was expecting a lower price. I was expecting a bit of a jump in performance. I guess the memory is expensive?

[Larken]

Edit: I've started looking more seriously at Ryzen 3600X, but then I've just realized I already have an aftermarket cooler for socket 1151 (adapted from LGA775, har har), and 3600x goes about head to head in both performance and price with 9600K, also same number of cores, so I guess I'm gonna stick with Intel.

Having been considering the Ryzen for a while now, I'll save you some time and potential grief. If you go for Ryzen, skip the 3600x and go for either 3600 or 3700x. 3600x is a really poor buy, as is the 3800x (if you have workloads that require more cores than what the 3700x can provide, just go for a 3900x or a 3950x)

[tp4tissue]

Edit: I've started looking more seriously at Ryzen 3600X, but then I've just realized I already have an aftermarket cooler for socket 1151 (adapted from LGA775, har har), and 3600x goes about head to head in both performance and price with 9600K, also same number of cores, so I guess I'm gonna stick with Intel.

Having been considering the Ryzen for a while now, I'll save you some time and potential grief. If you go for Ryzen, skip the 3600x and go for either 3600 or 3700x. 3600x is a really poor buy, as is the 3800x (if you have workloads that require more cores than what the 3700x can provide, just go for a 3900x or a 3950x)

If just playing games, 3600x is fine.

It's also fine for blender, cads , because it's cheaper and faster to buy cloud time.

You have to have something very specific and local to use more than 8 cores. Like a minecraft server.

[NewbieOneKenobi]

Thanks. Well, what I use is MS Office with sometimes humongous and badly optimized files, Firefox, which is capable of eating through any amount of recourses, with anywhere from two to three gazillion tabs, and above all Trados — a badly optimized CAT suite that's based on XML and involves the real-time use of humongous terminology databases (a.k.a. Multiterm, e.g. the entire IATE database) and translation memories. Those files are sometimes huge, and when you convert like 10 pages' worth of memoQ (another translation suite) into a macro-heavy .docx format, it's enough to make my i5-6600 cry (along with its 16 GB RAM). When you stay within the native software, it's much better (these things somehow still all worked 15 years ago, people still did 500-page files back on Core 2 Duo and before), but it can get laggy, especially with those large terminology databases that get pinged anew every new sentence for all expressions contained in that sentence. This makes gamings rigss cry in my and other translators' experience. But I don't really know if more cores would help or just better single-core performance. I suspect the latter. Otherwise it's just games for me.

The irony of my software is that all of the things I do can still be done on a 2005 rig, it's not like you won't be able to do them (except for the macro-heavy Office files viewed in Office — that's gonna clog any Whateverisbestnowlake(, but they're still going to be a pain almost no matter what sort of ridiculous power you have in your rig.

Games-wise I thought just getting 9600K was the best solution… until I saw benchmarks from games actually optimized to actually use more cores/i7 functions, which sometimes put those 7700s and 8700s very firmly in the lead. Allegedly 3600x is supposed to be almost on par with 8700K in those games.

However, I think I'll spare myself the headache and just stick with Intel, which I'm more familiar with. Generation 10 is expected to come with a new socket, so I hope gen 11 will still it in the same socket, os might as well skip 1151 and wait for that, getting 10600K or 10700K the moment it comes out.

[Leslieann]

"Intel is better for games"

This is something Youtubers and others REALLY, REALLY need to stop saying or at least explain it better.
Intel may be faster, but both are so ridiculously far and above what you actually need for a good experience and future proofing that it's completely irrelevant. They only say Intel is better for games because it helps differentiate the two, in the real world the only way to even spot the difference is with a benchmark.


As for a 9600 vs 8700k, in most instances even your current cpu really isn't that much slower, I had a 6700k before my 8700k, there was a speed jump, but most of that was going from a 500MB transfer rate sata ssd to a 3500MB nvme drive. The 6700 was plenty fast, but the best way to explain it is this... While you can get most of the same performance in games as I do, given equal ssd, ram and gpu (we're ignoring the nvme drive for the moment), I get that performance gain while also streaming video and running a virtual machine in the background. The ssd added the speed, the extra cores added the ability to do more at the same time. I'd advocate upgrading, but mostly for the NVME drive and less for the core count.

By the way, Firefox gets laggy at 9gb of ram on windows, doesn't matter how much more ram or cpu you have this will happen, by 15gigs it's pretty much unusable. While I haven't tested on Windows Chrome is probably similar as it gets laggy about the same time as Firefox on Linux. Browsers and how the OS handles them are the problem and no amount of hardware will fix that. I documented some of my browser/memory experimentation here.

[tp4tissue]

I still think , for a JUST GAME pc, 9900KS is a decent choice,  even though it's a dead socket.

Esports titles respond very well to Intel, and since these are the games most people actually play, intel's still leading.

The main advantage being , there's no guessing game for overclocking, it's all very well worked out, along with compatible OC ram.


For Ryzen, there's some grinding for ram compatibility, and while OC isn't a problem, there's more tweaking involved for very little gain.

For Upgrades, Ryzen is the only way to go. 5ghz is on the horizon, but maybe 2 more iterations away.

[Leslieann]

I still think , for a JUST GAME pc, 9900KS is a decent choice,  even though it's a dead socket.

AM4 is also a dead socket.

[NewbieOneKenobi]

"Intel is better for games"

This is something Youtubers and others REALLY, REALLY need to stop saying or at least explain it better.
Intel may be faster, but both are so ridiculously far and above what you actually need for a good experience and future proofing that it's completely irrelevant. They only say Intel is better for games because it helps differentiate the two, in the real world the only way to even spot the difference is with a benchmark.


As for a 9600 vs 8700k, in most instances even your current cpu really isn't that much slower, I had a 6700k before my 8700k, there was a speed jump, but most of that was going from a 500MB transfer rate sata ssd to a 3500MB nvme drive. The 6700 was plenty fast, but the best way to explain it is this... While you can get most of the same performance in games as I do, given equal ssd, ram and gpu (we're ignoring the nvme drive for the moment), I get that performance gain while also streaming video and running a virtual machine in the background. The ssd added the speed, the extra cores added the ability to do more at the same time. I'd advocate upgrading, but mostly for the NVME drive and less for the core count.

By the way, Firefox gets laggy at 9gb of ram on windows, doesn't matter how much more ram or cpu you have this will happen, by 15gigs it's pretty much unusable. While I haven't tested on Windows Chrome is probably similar as it gets laggy about the same time as Firefox on Linux. Browsers and how the OS handles them are the problem and no amount of hardware will fix that. I documented some of my browser/memory experimentation here.

Yeah, I get good performance in games, though not exactly all ultra @ 1440p @ 60 fps. I have a 32'' 1440p monitor, so sometimes I fake 4K by scaling, and things do look vastly better, though fluidity is lacking. In some cases even high fps feels a bit choppy, like the performance, which is technically there, is putting a big strain on the system and making it chafe under the load. Plus, the usual gripe of having a good mobo but a non-K processor (stupid choice on my part some years ago). I question the need for a $300–400 platform upgrade, while upgrading within s1151 feels like paying half that for only a small gain.

I guess I can always finish whatever games I can already top out, first, and only then go for a platform upgrade. Or just swap the CPU if there's a bargain in the meantime.

One thing I've noticed about used 6–8000 CPUs is they tend to cost the same with the mobo as without, so that's also something to consider.

But meanwhile I'm drowned in work anyway. So perhaps I'll just have to rein the upgradeitis in.

[tp4tissue]

1440p is still the go to game resolution, but then we're stuck with a non-4K monitor for Movies/Shows.

1440p on a 4K monitor looks really awful, because the scaling algorithm blemishes/ tones down the highlight/ texture detail of the games.

This was also a problem with 1080p on 4K, but it's alot better now with Integer scaling available on newer cards.

AMD is next lvl enabling integer all the way down to 7xxx series.

200+ fps is a sweet spot for gaming fluidity. nothing can really hold that on latest titles @ 4K

[NewbieOneKenobi]

I have a 1440p monitor that can do 75 fps, but my 1070ti on this i5-6600 won't do that unless perhaps in older titles, with lowered settings, and so on. Will see when I get around to finishing some of the older games I have.

But lately I've been playing The Witcher 3, and using virtual 4K resolution significantly improves the experience, except the framerate goes down to like 30 on a mix of high and ultra settings. I suppose I could work out a satisfactory compromise if I had more knowledge about how the various settings work, basically what can be turned off for a noticeable performance gain without a noticeable detriment to image quality.

I suppose Kingdom Come is going to be more demanding.

I have a ton of different things I should or at least more usefully could spend money on, but I guess I've been caught by ugradeitis.

[tp4tissue]

I have a 1440p monitor that can do 75 fps, but my 1070ti on this i5-6600 won't do that unless perhaps in older titles, with lowered settings, and so on. Will see when I get around to finishing some of the older games I have.

But lately I've been playing The Witcher 3, and using virtual 4K resolution significantly improves the experience, except the framerate goes down to like 30 on a mix of high and ultra settings. I suppose I could work out a satisfactory compromise if I had more knowledge about how the various settings work, basically what can be turned off for a noticeable performance gain without a noticeable detriment to image quality.

I suppose Kingdom Come is going to be more demanding.

I have a ton of different things I should or at least more usefully could spend money on, but I guess I've been caught by ugradeitis.

Witcher is not an fps. so, fast doesn't make a huge difference.

But 240hz VAs are out there now.   Just waiting on one with ULMB.

I'd honestly prefer a thicker monitor w/ higher contrast ratio, but they don't seem to be making'um.

Current samsung curved VA contrast goes upwards of 3800:1,  TVs are pushing 6000-7000 now.

[NewbieOneKenobi]

Witcher is not an fps. so, fast doesn't make a huge difference.

No fps for me, though some of the RPGs I play have relatively fast action that's sometimes cast in the first-person perspective. Plus rallies and racers.

But 240hz VAs are out there now.   Just waiting on one with ULMB.

First time I hear, but sounds like my dream.

I'd honestly prefer a thicker monitor w/ higher contrast ratio, but they don't seem to be making'um.

Somebody still makes CRT monitors in India, from what I've heard. But those are for industrial applications.

Current samsung curved VA contrast goes upwards of 3800:1,  TVs are pushing 6000-7000 now.

Delicious. My VA from several years ago tops out around 1000, which is nominally worse than my IPS from last year. I'm not sure I've even looked at anything above 1000 or 1200 yet.

A while ago I bought a 32'' IPS from AOC because I wanted a 1440p monitor and my old Dell 30'' suffered terminal damage. It's crisp enough so I can use 100% scaling in Windows and the 1000-ish contrast does show, though in a different way than the nominally slightly inferior value does on my VA. I'd probably ideally prefer a VA with extended colour range and HDR and yes, as little blur as possible. Next time maybe. And I'll probably go down to 27''. Possibly curved but not sure.

But for something like 200-ish refresh rates I'd need to clone my GPU. Possibly twice.

[yui]

basically what can be turned off for a noticeable performance gain without a noticeable detriment to image quality.

if you use 4k you should be able to disable or strongly reduce anti-aliasing, this thing hogs performances (might be my old hardware and not be as true of newer cards) and depending on if you like them or not chromatic aberrations and motion blur (and other "cinematic" enhancements) could be disabled and depending on their implementation increase performances by a fair margin. the only way to really know for sure is to experiment because different graphics cards, games and driver revisions can have different results when it comes to some effects (like PhysX on Amd cards running on the CPU if at all)

[NewbieOneKenobi]

basically what can be turned off for a noticeable performance gain without a noticeable detriment to image quality.

if you use 4k you should be able to disable or strongly reduce anti-aliasing, this thing hogs performances (might be my old hardware and not be as true of newer cards) and depending on if you like them or not chromatic aberrations and motion blur (and other "cinematic" enhancements) could be disabled and depending on their implementation increase performances by a fair margin. the only way to really know for sure is to experiment because different graphics cards, games and driver revisions can have different results when it comes to some effects (like PhysX on Amd cards running on the CPU if at all)

Thank you. I guess I should also get around to OC'ing the card already. It's a 1070ti from Colorful that has a beefed-up power section to 8+8 as opposed to the normal 8+6.

[yui]

If i remember correctly those cards can overclock enough to surpass the stock 1080 so yeah might be a good idea if you have sufficient cooling in your case, and are not slowed down by an other part of your build

[NewbieOneKenobi]

If i remember correctly those cards can overclock enough to surpass the stock 1080 so yeah might be a good idea if you have sufficient cooling in your case, and are not slowed down by an other part of your build

If i remember correctly those cards can overclock enough to surpass the stock 1080 so yeah might be a good idea if you have sufficient cooling in your case, and are not slowed down by an other part of your build

The i5-6600 CPU is a bit of a bottleneck for 1070ti from what I've seen in some online tool… It really sucks I bought a non-K CPU with a strong OC/gaming mobo plus already had a strong CPU cooler. Can't really OC much even through BCLK. Anyway, I should have enough airflow in the case and room for more fans to get a serious OC going — just never get around to it.

At this point I could get a K CPU for this mobo, but given the prices of used 6700/7600/7700K, it makes more sense to swap the mobo as well.

I think I could buy a 6600K for $125 and sell my 6600 for $100-something, for a net $25 expenditure, which from my current standpoint would be very reasonable, but I'd rather go more steps up. The problem? 7600K is like $75 more expensive than 6600K and is actually like $20 more expensive than 8600K. So basically you're supposed to pay a heavy premium for not having to buy a new mobo. The price of an old 6700K is about the same as of a new 9600K.

[tp4tissue]

You need OC for Esports titles which run at 200 to 500fps.  Those are the only applications that could be said to take advantage of higher frequency.

For example Doom 2016, it's locked to 200fps, and a 1070ti will dip below 150fps quite frequently. There's really no reason to pay extra for an OC cpu for a GPU bound game.

Whereas, CSGO, vanilla will get you 200-400fps , overclocked will get you 300-600fps,  That's a huge difference worth paying for.

[noisyturtle]

I just spent the last... you know what, I'm embarrassed to even say how long, but I spent that obscene amount of time attempting to install this new cpu. Got it in there once, only to realize 'You dummy, you forgot to update the bios!'. So I take it back out, clean it off, reinstall my old 2500k, then proceed to tear my skin off trying to flash the new bios version. Now I'd never had to do this on my current rig, so little did I know a "REALLY GREAT FEATURE" called Fast Boot had been automatically enabled. Now I dunno if you're familiar with Fast Boot, but it's this wonderful thing ASUS mobo's have that disables all your usb devices until AFTER Windows has launched. "Wait a sec" you say wisely spying the glaring flaw "then how are you supposed to access the bios when all the usb devices have been disabled?" And by gum, you'd be absolutely right! You freaking can't! And because it's a bios setting you cannot have the sliver of human decency and convenience to be able to change that while in Windows. Oh what fun, oh what joy I had today trying to figure that complete bull**** out! A waste of an entire day, and what's more I wound up being too frustrated and tired after finally getting my bios updated to even attempt reinstalling the 3770k.

I already can predict this will end tomorrow with the DRAM led still lighting up with no post when using the new cpu, and me defenestration my computer right out the third story of the building.

[yui]

I guess that if you unplug your boot drive you should be able to access bios, maybe, or keep an old ps2 keyboard handy.

[Leslieann]

I just spent the last... you know what, I'm embarrassed to even say how long, but I spent that obscene amount of time attempting to install this new cpu. Got it in there once, only to realize 'You dummy, you forgot to update the bios!'. So I take it back out, clean it off, reinstall my old 2500k, then proceed to tear my skin off trying to flash the new bios version. Now I'd never had to do this on my current rig, so little did I know a "REALLY GREAT FEATURE" called Fast Boot had been automatically enabled. Now I dunno if you're familiar with Fast Boot, but it's this wonderful thing ASUS mobo's have that disables all your usb devices until AFTER Windows has launched. "Wait a sec" you say wisely spying the glaring flaw "then how are you supposed to access the bios when all the usb devices have been disabled?" And by gum, you'd be absolutely right! You freaking can't! And because it's a bios setting you cannot have the sliver of human decency and convenience to be able to change that while in Windows. Oh what fun, oh what joy I had today trying to figure that complete bull**** out! A waste of an entire day, and what's more I wound up being too frustrated and tired after finally getting my bios updated to even attempt reinstalling the 3770k.

I already can predict this will end tomorrow with the DRAM led still lighting up with no post when using the new cpu, and me defenestration my computer right out the third story of the building.

Been there done that, I have answers.
Hold shift when hitting restart it will give you an option to enter EFI. As mentioned you can also use a PS2 keyboard, pull the drive or my favorite, clear the cmos/reset bios. Newer boards have the ability to fast boot while leaving the keyboard/mouse enabled. Yeah, that was a dumb way to do it and they should have seen it coming.

Good luck.

One thing to beware of on this era of boards where we switched over to EFI is that some GPUs are not fully compatible.
I replaced a very good psu, almost the GPU before reverting to a different mobo I had which worked before finding out it was a gpu/efi/bios compatibility issue (I had updated the biso since the last time I used that board/gpu combo). So if you can't get a gpu signal after, don't panic. It may not be easily fixed to where everything works, but don't freak out thinking something went bad.