Potential New PC Build, Thoughts?

Some newbie driver
Posts: 7198
Joined: 12 Dec 2018 11:37

Re: Potential New PC Build, Thoughts?

#421 Post by Some newbie driver » 12 Apr 2021 11:55

A 5900X is a beast way more different than its 5600X. In your case I understand the AIO; for a 5600X an AIO is a waste of money and extra failure points IMHO.
User avatar
WerewolfCustoms
Posts: 1752
Joined: 17 Jul 2013 09:46
Location: Drammen, Norway
Contact:

Re: Potential New PC Build, Thoughts?

#422 Post by WerewolfCustoms » 12 Apr 2021 19:57

Temperatures you guys are stating (spikes to 80C or more) seem a bit high to me...

My 5800X has yet to reach 55C... cooled with a 240mm AIO from NZXT. Admittedly, I only use the PC for software development, mostly in Visual Studio.
Most of the time it idles at 32-35C. This one is actually in a pretty closed up case with only 4 120mm fans (including the 2 on the radiator).
On this rig, the GPU also never reaches the temperature that would spin up the fans on it. If they didn't spin up on boot, I would suspect they're broken. :lol:

My 3900X goes sometimes up to 70C while gaming. Again, cooled with a 240mm AIO - this one from Corsair.
Case does have good airflow and there's a total of 6 120mm fans (including the 2 radiator fans).

Both stock, without any overclocking. R7 has fan curves set to silent, and R9 are stock.
Maybe there's some spikes here and there, but I didn't really notice it. Most of the time my thermals raise and drop slowly.
I'll keep an eye on it now... you guys got me interested, LOL. :D

...

Maybe you all should check your thermal paste? For correct application method on AMD systems refer to Gamers Nexus video at 0:30 timestamp :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
It only takes them about 10 seconds to show the proper application method! Amazing! :ugeek:
/jk
User avatar
mackintosh
Posts: 3057
Joined: 03 Feb 2013 17:58
Location: Warsaw, Poland

Re: Potential New PC Build, Thoughts?

#423 Post by mackintosh » 12 Apr 2021 21:27

I said spikes, I didn't say that it's a normal operating temperature, and it's overclocked to boot. If you want to test your temps, run Cinebench or Prime95 on it for a couple of hours and see where you are with temps. That said, the 5800X will still run cooler than either the 5900X or the 5950X.
Some newbie driver
Posts: 7198
Joined: 12 Dec 2018 11:37

Re: Potential New PC Build, Thoughts?

#424 Post by Some newbie driver » 13 Apr 2021 20:24

@WerewolfCustoms you are talking of temperatures of a CPU cooled with big and good AIOs. What you see is not what Reignman can expect until he improves the cooler. Base working temps of any CPU with default air coolers is from 70 to beyond. Something that isn't a problem at all unless his work profile would be too demanding. If one does a Cinebench or Primer95 run the kind of what mackintosh says, get prepared to reach 100ºC and throttling using basic air coolers.

And that's completely apart of the paste he could use. That will give him a few degrees of difference, not several tens.

Regards
User avatar
Reignman
Posts: 605
Joined: 28 Mar 2020 22:27

Re: Potential New PC Build, Thoughts?

#425 Post by Reignman » 14 Apr 2021 00:25

@WerewolfCustoms haha a classic video from GN. FTR, I like to spread the paste out.

From my understanding/research, it's normal for AMD CPU's to run a little hotter. My 5600x rarely gets into the 70's playing games, but I believe games aren't supposed to be too CPU demanding. I do get into the 70's playing ATS, but I wonder if it's related to what type of trailer I'm pulling (triples/turnpikes), or maybe the city. KSP is the only game that ramps up my CPU fan a little bit, but the game does rely on the CPU a little more than others. Using chrome is where I see most of my temp spikes though.

I rendered a couple of videos recently but forget to monitor the temps. Running this same rendering software, it used to push my old core2 quad over 100 C until it would crash. I would have to use Process Explorer to pause the render every few minutes to let it cool off just to get a video finished. The program itself doesn't allow you to pause in the middle of rendering.
Some newbie driver wrote: 13 Apr 2021 20:24And that's completely apart of the paste he could use. That will give him a few degrees of difference, not several tens.
What paste is that? I used a brand new tube of Arctic Silver 5. It was a lot stickier than the paste I had been using with my old PC. It was difficult to spread across the CPU, so I don't know if I got a bad tube, or if that's normal. My 5600x hasn't melted yet, so I assume it's fine. As far as coolers go, I wasn't thinking of doing any crazy, like liquid cooling, instead I was thinking of getting one of those $40 coolers, like this one, which I believe you mentioned a few months ago.

[ external image ]

My case is well ventilated, cables out of the way, not a huge GPU blocking airflow, and I have 5 case fans, so I was expecting decent temps, and I think I hover right around 50 C idling. Not terrible, but maybe it could be better.

[ external image ]

I believe "CPU package" is the important one, or the internal temp. I see other people with a 5600x saying they're down in the low 30's at idle, so I assume they're using a 3rd party cooler. I expect the inside of the case to get a little warmer once I get a better GPU. This GTX 750 requires so little power (65W) it didn't even come with a power connector, so yeah, a 3060ti might generate a little more heat xD.
User avatar
mackintosh
Posts: 3057
Joined: 03 Feb 2013 17:58
Location: Warsaw, Poland

Re: Potential New PC Build, Thoughts?

#426 Post by mackintosh » 14 Apr 2021 07:53

Use AMD's Ryzen Master to monitor temps. Third party monitoring software can sometimes yield incorrect results. AS5 is fine, it's still a very good paste. You'd probably get a couple of degrees less with a paste like the Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut, but unless you're into serious overclocking those kind of pastes are overkill and simply not worth it. Yes, AS5 is sticky and difficult to spread manually.
User avatar
Reignman
Posts: 605
Joined: 28 Mar 2020 22:27

Re: Potential New PC Build, Thoughts?

#427 Post by Reignman » 15 Apr 2021 20:29

So I did some of my own personal "benchmarking" before and after slapping the 1650 Super into the rig. I know it's way better than the GTX 750, but sometimes it's just fun seeing some cold hard numbers to let you know how much better. And I have to admit, I didn't know it was this much better. Best $169 I've ever spent on a PC upgrade. I can't imagine what kind of numbers I'll see with a 3060 or 3060ti, if I ever get one. Best Buy shut me out again today and they only drop once every 2 weeks, and I've lost 24 Newegg shuffles in a row too. But I'm going to have to upgrade to 1440p sooner than I expected, if I get a 3060ti xD. I know, first world problems. Or maybe the 1650 Super is good enough for me lol. It probably is since I don't really play any graphically demanding games or AAA titles, as you can see at the bottom of my chart here.

[ external image ]

When I ran 3D Mark on the 750, I didn't know it automatically chose the test meant for integrated graphics. I didn't find that out until I was testing the 1650 Super because it automatically chose a different test for that card. I couldn't figure out why I was getting scores in the 5000 range with the 1650 Super lol. How could that card do so much worse than the 750? After I figured it out, I had to run the integrated graphics test on this card to get a fair comparison. It was that or stick the 750 back in, but I wasn't going to do that lol. All that matters is the numbers.

Heaven only tested directX 11, but I just wanted more numbers. So far everything points to the 1650 Super giving about 3x better performance than the 750. I wish I could have ran some of these tests on the 9800GT, but it only supported up to directX 10. I did get to run PassMark on the old rig, so I got some good numbers there, and yeah wow, that thing was bad. How did I tolerate it these past 5-6 years? My PassMark scores on the new rig have dropped slightly since last running the test a month ago. Other than graphics obviously.

And in the last section, I tested a few of the games I play on a regular basis. The medium settings on the 750 and 1650 are exactly the same, for a fair comparison. I tried to choose a more graphically demanding area of the game too. In ATS, Salt Lake City has always seemed to be a bad area for my FPS, where HWY 80 meets 15. But jeepers, just when I thought the 750 was giving me a visually pleasing experience (over the 9800GT), the 1650 Super blows it away. I can now play the game just fine on ultra settings. I didn't know chrome could be so shinny and reflective in a game lol. That caught me off guard when I was driving down the HWY and could actually see cars coming up beside me off my air filters. And seeing clouds reflected off my hood. I always had to have reflective quality low, which turns chrome to a flat grey color in the sunlight, as you can see in some of the videos I posted recently. Squinting into my side mirrors gives me less of a headache now too xD. 17 FPS at 720p only seemed like yesterday.

In KSP, launching a large rocket usually produces the lowest FPS, with the billowing exhaust fumes building up around the launchpad. Otherwise I'm getting close to 200 FPS anywhere else, even on ultra settings. First time I've been able to play the game on ultra settings, and wow. The game isn't really about the graphics, but wow anyway. Who knew a dull grey rock like the moon could look so nice? Compared to what I've been used to looking at anyway. There are some 3rd party mods that add visual enhancements, so now I can give those a shot too. And unfortunately Arkham Knight is capped at 90 FPS, but good to know I can reach that even on ultra settings. The game is close to 10 years old now, but I was never able to play it on the old rig because it requires dx11. I've played the previous 3 Arkham titles, so I had to wait awhile for this one xD.

As far as rendering/editing video, and working with large spreadsheets, as expected, the 1650 Super upgrade had no effect on performance. The 1650 should be able to capture smoother/better quality video however, so an indirect upgrade.

So far, this comparison I got from PassMark is looking about right.

[ external image ]
mackintosh wrote: 14 Apr 2021 07:53Use AMD's Ryzen Master to monitor temps.
Didn't even think of that lol, I'll give it a shot.
mackintosh wrote: 14 Apr 2021 07:53AS5 is fine, it's still a very good paste. You'd probably get a couple of degrees less with a paste like the Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut, but unless you're into serious overclocking those kind of pastes are overkill and simply not worth it. Yes, AS5 is sticky and difficult to spread manually.
Ok good to know, thanks. I tried to find out via google but I had no luck finding a straight answer. Things have been mostly running fine so even if it were some bad paste, it's doing an alright job so far lol. The thing that worried me the most was I had to put more paste on than I wanted to, to get good coverage because it wasn't spreading well. Then it was difficult getting the heat sink screwed back down because of it. And yeah I don't do any overclocking, plus I'm not that familiar with liquid metal paste so I didn't know if it were right for me.
User avatar
mackintosh
Posts: 3057
Joined: 03 Feb 2013 17:58
Location: Warsaw, Poland

Re: Potential New PC Build, Thoughts?

#428 Post by mackintosh » 15 Apr 2021 21:10

Kryonaut is a regular non-conductive paste, Conductonaut is the conductive, liquid metal one and it's meant to be used on delidded processors and GPUs. Any excess paste should be squeezed out, so as long as it's non-conductive don't worry about applying too much of it, it really doesn't make all that much difference anyway.

I forgot all about Heaven, haven't used that benchmark in years :lol: It's good for stability testing, as it really pushes the GPU to its maximum heat/power output, but being DX11 and really outdated, it isn't useful for much else these days. I suppose maybe for ETS2/ATS performance? :lol:

This is on the Extreme preset. Bit low for my system specs, probably because of background tasks.

[ external image ]
User avatar
Reignman
Posts: 605
Joined: 28 Mar 2020 22:27

Re: Potential New PC Build, Thoughts?

#429 Post by Reignman » 22 Apr 2021 05:42

mackintosh wrote: 15 Apr 2021 21:10This is on the Extreme preset. Bit low for my system specs, probably because of background tasks.
Nice! What are your specs? And are you overclocking?

When you're used to a 13yo 9800GT or even 750, the 1650 Super is amazing by comparison. I've literally never seen such smooth frame rates, with most settings cranked all the way up. I can't even imagine what a 3060ti is gonna do. I'm only on 1080p however, so I'm already watching for sales on 1440p monitors.
User avatar
mackintosh
Posts: 3057
Joined: 03 Feb 2013 17:58
Location: Warsaw, Poland

Re: Potential New PC Build, Thoughts?

#430 Post by mackintosh » 22 Apr 2021 09:20

5900X/2080Ti, PBO, 3600 on memory, standard XMP, so overclocking, but not really. You should get similar results on the 3600Ti, maybe even better as nvidia always optimises drivers for current gen.
Post Reply

Return to “Offtopic and other voices”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests