F5F Stay Refreshed Hardware Desktop Build AdviceNew AMD build ?

Build AdviceNew AMD build ?

Build AdviceNew AMD build ?

Pages (2): 1 2 Next
N
Ninjas_R_OP
Senior Member
743
05-27-2025, 09:57 PM
#1
Hi,
I'm just starting with AMD builds, having assembled Intel systems since the '90s. My most recent build was a K2 CPU. The new Intel processors won't be enough for me. The Ryzen 9 9900X seems suitable for my needs. I'm not a heavy gamer, but I do edit personal videos and music, handle databases, and perform program cross-compiling mostly for general tasks.

What I value most are quick SDD NMVE M2 access, fast boot times, rapid data loading, and efficient saves. I plan to set up a RAID 0 configuration. I already have a solid backup system in place, and I've been using RAID 0 on my main rig for years.

I'm looking for a motherboard that supports RAID 0 via PCIe 5, without affecting CPU or GPU bandwidth. I still use spin-rust with at least six SATA ports, though they don't need to be ultra-fast—they just need to work. These ports shouldn't interfere with the RAID setup, especially since I'll be transferring data between HDD and RAID drives.

I have no idea about AMD RAM, but I want something fast with XMP support. A 32GB configuration would be ideal; should it be 4x8GB sticks or two 16GB sticks?

Since I don't have RGB fans, I won't worry too much about aesthetics—except I don't like white-colored motherboards. I prefer Assus boards but am open to better options if they fit my requirements. I'll also need a new power supply for all this. What's the recommended wattage?

Everything will fit into the mid-tower case I already have. Any advice or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
N
Ninjas_R_OP
05-27-2025, 09:57 PM #1

Hi,
I'm just starting with AMD builds, having assembled Intel systems since the '90s. My most recent build was a K2 CPU. The new Intel processors won't be enough for me. The Ryzen 9 9900X seems suitable for my needs. I'm not a heavy gamer, but I do edit personal videos and music, handle databases, and perform program cross-compiling mostly for general tasks.

What I value most are quick SDD NMVE M2 access, fast boot times, rapid data loading, and efficient saves. I plan to set up a RAID 0 configuration. I already have a solid backup system in place, and I've been using RAID 0 on my main rig for years.

I'm looking for a motherboard that supports RAID 0 via PCIe 5, without affecting CPU or GPU bandwidth. I still use spin-rust with at least six SATA ports, though they don't need to be ultra-fast—they just need to work. These ports shouldn't interfere with the RAID setup, especially since I'll be transferring data between HDD and RAID drives.

I have no idea about AMD RAM, but I want something fast with XMP support. A 32GB configuration would be ideal; should it be 4x8GB sticks or two 16GB sticks?

Since I don't have RGB fans, I won't worry too much about aesthetics—except I don't like white-colored motherboards. I prefer Assus boards but am open to better options if they fit my requirements. I'll also need a new power supply for all this. What's the recommended wattage?

Everything will fit into the mid-tower case I already have. Any advice or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

L
Lupin0967
Member
96
05-27-2025, 09:57 PM
#2
Raid on a M.2 drive is a major no, though it sounds appealing but may actually reduce performance.
High quality 1K /1200 watt power supply.
A collection of 2X16gb or 2X 24gb units if you require more than 32GB.
A suitable CPU cooler; the CPU draws around 170watts under load.
L
Lupin0967
05-27-2025, 09:57 PM #2

Raid on a M.2 drive is a major no, though it sounds appealing but may actually reduce performance.
High quality 1K /1200 watt power supply.
A collection of 2X16gb or 2X 24gb units if you require more than 32GB.
A suitable CPU cooler; the CPU draws around 170watts under load.

L
LOCKIMBO13
Junior Member
22
05-27-2025, 09:57 PM
#3
Thank you for the clarification.
The approach would involve using two NVMe M.2 sticks in a stripped RAID 0 configuration, which is effective. I should have mentioned this earlier.
I wonder if the NVMe M.2 standard inherently limits performance when multiple drives are connected.
L
LOCKIMBO13
05-27-2025, 09:57 PM #3

Thank you for the clarification.
The approach would involve using two NVMe M.2 sticks in a stripped RAID 0 configuration, which is effective. I should have mentioned this earlier.
I wonder if the NVMe M.2 standard inherently limits performance when multiple drives are connected.

I
iboy1023
Junior Member
28
05-27-2025, 09:57 PM
#4
I understand you were mentioning the raid on two drives as a major no. It's useful for testing benchmarks, but it doesn't reflect actual real-world performance.
I
iboy1023
05-27-2025, 09:57 PM #4

I understand you were mentioning the raid on two drives as a major no. It's useful for testing benchmarks, but it doesn't reflect actual real-world performance.

V
VWtra
Junior Member
38
05-27-2025, 09:57 PM
#5
Do you have any resources that elaborate on this further?
I am participating in raid 0 on my main rig, which I upgraded about seven years ago. That’s why I’m considering an upgrade.
At that time, I tried speed testing with Windows 10 installed on a single-drive NVMe M.2 128GB drive for roughly a week. Then I set up the raid 0 using two drives and noticed a significant boost in performance during regular tasks. Boot times, program launches, and data saves all improved noticeably. I’ve maintained the raid 0 setup over the years.
Have things changed much since then?
V
VWtra
05-27-2025, 09:57 PM #5

Do you have any resources that elaborate on this further?
I am participating in raid 0 on my main rig, which I upgraded about seven years ago. That’s why I’m considering an upgrade.
At that time, I tried speed testing with Windows 10 installed on a single-drive NVMe M.2 128GB drive for roughly a week. Then I set up the raid 0 using two drives and noticed a significant boost in performance during regular tasks. Boot times, program launches, and data saves all improved noticeably. I’ve maintained the raid 0 setup over the years.
Have things changed much since then?

A
adamgowen
Junior Member
8
05-27-2025, 09:57 PM
#6
NVME SSDs are incredibly quick these days. the gap between the slowest and fastest models is barely noticeable. The slowest NVMe can outperform RAID0 SATA and even PCIe v3.0 SSDs by five to ten times, without any issues related to RAID0. Installing an NVMe v5.0 with 1-2 TB will make your old RAID seem almost like a snail's mount.
A
adamgowen
05-27-2025, 09:57 PM #6

NVME SSDs are incredibly quick these days. the gap between the slowest and fastest models is barely noticeable. The slowest NVMe can outperform RAID0 SATA and even PCIe v3.0 SSDs by five to ten times, without any issues related to RAID0. Installing an NVMe v5.0 with 1-2 TB will make your old RAID seem almost like a snail's mount.

R
RainbowFish5
Member
122
05-27-2025, 09:57 PM
#7
I think you meant to clarify your setup again. You're planning a raid using two 1TB PCIe 5.0 nm SSDs, not SATA M.2 drives. Are there any x870e boards that support this configuration? These chipsets are quite recent, and I'm interested in the UBS 4.0 future extending feature.
R
RainbowFish5
05-27-2025, 09:57 PM #7

I think you meant to clarify your setup again. You're planning a raid using two 1TB PCIe 5.0 nm SSDs, not SATA M.2 drives. Are there any x870e boards that support this configuration? These chipsets are quite recent, and I'm interested in the UBS 4.0 future extending feature.

N
noamichael
Member
96
05-27-2025, 09:57 PM
#8
The focus should be on Raid 0, as M.2 NVME storage offers no real advantage. It provides no added value. Opt for a single high-performance Gen5 drive instead, even though in practical use it doesn't outperform a more affordable 4.0 drive. Using a Raid 0 configuration is essentially wasting money. A single 2TB Gen5 drive is more cost-effective than two 1TB drives of the same type.
N
noamichael
05-27-2025, 09:57 PM #8

The focus should be on Raid 0, as M.2 NVME storage offers no real advantage. It provides no added value. Opt for a single high-performance Gen5 drive instead, even though in practical use it doesn't outperform a more affordable 4.0 drive. Using a Raid 0 configuration is essentially wasting money. A single 2TB Gen5 drive is more cost-effective than two 1TB drives of the same type.

F
flameboy101
Member
173
05-27-2025, 09:57 PM
#9
Unless you're running a business that absolutely requires 100% uptime on your data there's absolutely NO reason for RAID. Also throw in the fact that Raid 0 violates the whole idea of RAID. That of "Redundancy". If a single drive in a level 0 array fails then the ENTIRE array fails with NO recovery possible from the remanents. This happens far more often than you may want to believe. You might want to actually listen to people here that have been involved in these things for many decades (yeah, I'm tryin' to make some of you old timers feel like the fossils you are
😆
)
F
flameboy101
05-27-2025, 09:57 PM #9

Unless you're running a business that absolutely requires 100% uptime on your data there's absolutely NO reason for RAID. Also throw in the fact that Raid 0 violates the whole idea of RAID. That of "Redundancy". If a single drive in a level 0 array fails then the ENTIRE array fails with NO recovery possible from the remanents. This happens far more often than you may want to believe. You might want to actually listen to people here that have been involved in these things for many decades (yeah, I'm tryin' to make some of you old timers feel like the fossils you are
😆
)

M
mcDavoz
Senior Member
544
05-27-2025, 09:57 PM
#10
RAID 0 combined with NVMe technology.
This review is quite outdated, yet it hasn't been challenged by newer data.
The benchmark results are impressive, but real-world performance isn't as strong.
tl-dr: It could even be slightly slower than using separate drives.
M
mcDavoz
05-27-2025, 09:57 PM #10

RAID 0 combined with NVMe technology.
This review is quite outdated, yet it hasn't been challenged by newer data.
The benchmark results are impressive, but real-world performance isn't as strong.
tl-dr: It could even be slightly slower than using separate drives.

Pages (2): 1 2 Next