XMP - Working?
XMP - Working?
This depends on M.2 drive you get. Best (and only for me) is Samsung. WD M.2 drives seem to be good as well. Not as great as Samsung drives, but good enough. All others fall short. Mainly in performance aspect but often on reliability aspect as well. Only thing going for other drives, are their cheaper price, compared to the best (Samsung). As far as heatsinks for M.2 goes; if M.2 drive doesn't come with heatsink off the bat - it doesn't need one. On the contrary, slapping heatsink on, can actually trap the heat within the drive, worsening considerably the cooling of a drive. Thus, "baking" the drive. My drives are as follows: OS drive - Samsung 970 Evo Plus 2TB (M.2 NVMe) data drive - Samsung 870 Evo 2TB (2.5" SATA) backup drive - Crucial MX500 1TB (2.5" SATA) old OS drive - Samsung 960 Evo 500GB (M.2 NVMe) Regarding 2.5" SATA SSDs, Samsung is best, while Crucial MX500 is cheaper alternative. MX500 does perform almost same as Samsung drive, until it isn't filled with data. If it's near full, performance drops. 960 Evo, at the time of it's purchase, was best cost-to-performance M.2 NVMe SSD. But as time moved forward, the 500 GB size got small to me, so, i bought the new best cost-to-performance ratio SSD, my 970 Evo Plus 2TB. 970 Evo Plus review: Now, there are faster M.2 NVMe drives out there, like 980 Pro and even 990 Pro, but those also cost accordingly. Oh, that thing. Yes, i've heard of it. Here, i confused it with actual feature, where you can easily roll back the latest BIOS update, to earlier version. Though, the naming of this thing is counter-intuitive, since "flash back" means going backwards. It should be named "flash forward" or even "fee flash", since you don't need any other hardware, except MoBo, to update BIOS. Or, you can use same site and order the GPU list by Value, link: https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/ This way, you can see which GPU offers the best price-to-performance ratio. At the time of me looking the Value list, RTX 4070 Ti is at #6 Better source would be reading the review, since in review, the hardware is put on to the test, comparing it to other hardware in a more methodical way. i5-13600K review: i5-13400 review: Essentially, almost since the dawn of time, Intel MoBo chipsets have been as follows; H - home B - business Z - enthusiast X - enterprise (Xeon) C, P, Q - server/enterprise (Xeons) And series tell how feature rich the chipset is. E.g 600-series; H610 - barebones B660 - good middle ground H670 - notch down from the top (and prior to 600-series, didn't offer CPU OC either) Z690 - top-of-the line, packed with loads of features (until 600-series, only chipset to offer CPU OC) Another example on 100-series (which i use). High-end naming scheme was a bit different, but idea is the same: H110 - barebones B150 - middle ground H170 - high-end, except CPU OC Z170 - high-end, with CPU OC DDR4 speed wise, 3200 Mhz is tops i'd go for. Any faster offers diminishing returns. A video to watch: View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_Yt4vSZKVk How about getting 64 GB of RAM instead? Since 32 GB is in a weird spot, too much for gaming but too little for proper 3D render. Every newer gen CPU, than what you currently have, is viable, in terms of better performance. Even 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th and 11th gen CPUs. š E.g yours vs i7-7700K: https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/In...1040vs3647 I, personally, do not like Ryzen. Not because it's AMD, but because what's in the CPU. Intel CPUs have really good single- and quad-core performance. AMD won't reach that high, so, they did the 2nd best thing - adding lots of cores. This is how Ryzen 1st gen was born. And this was also turning point for Intel, who started to add more cores for their CPUs as well, in response to AMD. The "CPU core race" started from Intel 8th gen CPUs. Spoiler: CPU core race (click here to read) Prior to that, Intel had nice CPU core count per iteration, namely: (up to, including 7th gen) Core i3 - 2 cores, 4 threads Core i5 - 4 cores, 4 threads Core i7 - 4 cores, 8 threads But 8th gen brought "CPU core race", and is as follows: Core i3 - 4 cores, 4 threads Core i5 - 6 cores, 6 threads Core i7 - 6 cores, 12 threads And latest Intel CPUs, have the P- and E-cores as well, confusing things even more. E.g 12th gen: Core i3 - 4 P-cores, 0 E-cores, 8 threads Core i5 - 6 P-cores, 0 E-cores, 12 threads ** ** exception is i5-12600K/KF - 6 P-cores, 4 E-cores, 16 threads Core i7 - 8 P-cores, 4 E-cores, 20 threads Core i9 - 8 P-cores, 8 E-cores, 24 threads Or 13th gen: Core i3 - haven't launched yet Core i5 - 6 P-cores, 8 E-cores, 20 threads ** ** exception is i5-13400/F/T - 6 P-cores, 4 E-cores, 16 threads Core i7 - 8 P-cores, 8 E-cores, 24 threads Core i9 - 8 P-cores, 16 E-cores, 32 threads But overall, going higher in SKU = better CPU. Naming scheme wise, between Intel and AMD, it is as follows: Ryzen 3 - Core i3 Ryzen 5 - Core i5 Ryzen 7 - Core i7 Ryzen 9 - Core i9 Another thing going on with Ryzen CPUs, and IMO, is bad, is that none of the Ryzen CPUs include iGPU in them. Unless you go with G-suffix APU. Intel CPUs have it another way around, almost all of them include iGPU, except the F-suffix CPUs. Having iGPU inside the CPU gives a good redundancy, where when your dedicated GPU happens to die, you can hook monitor to MoBo and continue using your PC. But with almost all Ryzen builds, PC doesn't work without dedicated GPU. And when you see 0 image on screen, it is far harder to tell if issue is with GPU or other hardware (CPU, MoBo, RAM). While with Intel, you can easily check if you get image from CPU's iGPU, determinating if your GPU is toast or not. Of course, then there is the issue of Ryzen CPUs being very capricious with RAM speed. With this, AMD plays catch-up with BIOS updates. For Ryzen, it is common that once new chipset launches, it is incapable of supporting faster RAM speeds than JEDEC standard (2667/2933 Mhz). Instead, users have to wait until AMD releases new BIOS update, that enables them to use e.g 3200 Mhz RAM or faster. Among other optimization features, which, IMO, should be available off the bat (as it is with Intel). For some reason AMD can not offer the same out of the box, high performance quality, as Intel does with their CPUs. These are the reasons why, i, personally, do not like nor suggest going with Ryzen.
My SSD has become a Samsung 250GB model; it hasnāt caused any problems before. Still, Iāve used Kingston in my laptop and my sisterās PC without issues. According to what Iāve read, the Samsung 980 outperforms the WD SN770, although neither uses DRAMāsomething I think is important for the operating system drive. The Samsung 970 EVO seems to have DRAM, but even then, benchmarks suggest WD is faster. Itās tough to judge based on real-world performance versus test results. The non-EVO and SN770 models are priced similarly, but the EVO version costs about $25 more.
When I look into reviews, people often mention heatsinks. I havenāt used an M.2 slot before for drives, but since itās an open board with chips, Iād like to add a heatsink. However, the thermal transfer tape feels too thickāmore like an insulator than a heat conductor. Iād prefer to use a paste instead.
In terms of RAM, 16GB should suffice for my needs, as Iām not doing anything complex. A 64GB would be excessive, and 32GB is more than what I currently have, with two extra slots if needed. Fusion360 isnāt suited for 3D rendering or animations; itās better for simple objects like 3D print parts or guitars for CNC work. The 3600 vs 3200 kits are similar, but the 3200 kit costs $7 less than the 3600. Not a big enough difference to worry about. Iād rather go with G.Skill, especially since they have larger sinks, though the CPU fan clearance is importantāso I prefer lower-profile options. In terms of brands, Corsair and G.Skill are my favorites; Iām not sure about others.
Regarding RAM links I watched: it seems the 3600 is likely the fastest option, and 32GB would be suitable for someone like me who plays a bit and creates basic content.
For CPUs, the i7-7700K is impressiveābenchmarks show it ranks well. Itās worth considering upgrading if newer CPUs arenāt viable upgrades. Your older Xeon is ranked similarly to your newer i5-6600K. Based on rankings, Iād probably go with the i7-9700K. Though new models are pricier, once they become outdated, prices stabilize. My ASUS 1060-6GB is listed at $1200 CAD new.
I always look for good value in gaming rigs and prefer Ryzen, but I never really understood CPU comparisons until now. Itās not that cheaper boards exist, just different performance levels. RAM is the most important part here.
PSU and GPU will be the next phase of this upgrade. The Corsair RM850x PSU seems like a solid choice. For the GPU, Iām still decidingāmaybe the 2070 Super was my original plan, but prices have stuck at high levels. Buying a new 2070 is as expensive as a 30xx card.
CPU-wise, Iād like an i5-13600k but need to check the 12th generation. For boards, I prefer ASUS, especially the Gigabyte UD series (good reviews, decent sinks, flashback bios), though the ASRock Phantom Gaming is the cheapest and meets my needs. The Corsair Vengeance kit is recommended for RAMālow profile, good heat sinking, and affordable.
WD SN770 supports PCI-E 4.0, whereas the 970 Evo Plus and 980 models use PCI-E 3.0. The 980 Pro and 990 Pro also operate on PCI-E 4.0. Practically speaking, the bandwidth increase from PCI-E 4.0 to 3.0 isn't significant; it becomes apparent mainly in controlled tests. 980 versus 970 Evo Plus: https://ssd.userbenchmark.com/Compa...0-...6vsm693540 I own a 980 1TB drive as the operating system in my Haswell build. The most noticeable performance boost would come from switching from a 2.5" SATA SSD (~500 MB/s) to a PCI-E 3.0 M.2 NVMe SSD (~3500 MB/s). In real life, after upgrading my OS drive from 2.5" SATA to M.2 NVMe, I only felt a slight improvementāabout 1-2 seconds faster boot time. Other tasks like file transfers, gaming, and loading times remained nearly identical. According to the review, the WS SN770 is a standard PCI-E 4.0 device. Link: Steve from GamersNexus provided a detailed discussion on M.2 drive heatsinks in a later interview. At 06:15, you can watch here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzSIfxHppPY&t=375s He mentioned that stickers on Samsung drives resemble "heatsink stickers." Typically, thermal pads are used in high-end GPUs and laptops to ensure even heat distribution. However, when thermal paste was applied earlier, not all components made contact with the heatsink. On M.2 drives, a thermal pad can help secure the heatsink, though it may lose effectiveness over time. In general, thermal paste offers superior heat transfer compared to pads, which are thicker and less efficient. The higher the thickness, the worse the performance. If the price gap between 3200 and 3600 MHz is minimal, it's worth choosing a faster option. You can still run at lower speeds (e.g., 3200/3000 MHz) if stability issues arise. However, I have some concerns about that video. I didnāt watch the whole thing, but I found some misleading advice. Specifically, the segment discussing 1R and 2R RAM ranks was questionable. While the claim about dual-rank RAM is accurate, his recommendation to buy four single sticks and force them into a dual-rank setup isnāt ideal. Itās often ineffectiveāsingle sticks rarely work well together. When RAM modules are manufactured, theyāre tested together. If they fit, theyāre grouped into sets: 8 sticks in one set, then split into pairs. If the pair works, it goes into a set of four; if not, itās divided again. Only then are compatible pairs sold as two sticks each. Sticks that donāt work well together are sold individually. For more details, see: https://forums. Upgrading to a 9th generation CPU would be beneficial, but its performance doesnāt match the latest models, so opting for the newest generation offers better value. Choosing the same generation CPU is sensible only if you prefer the same motherboard and are willing to pay a premium for rare or outdated chips. For example, my wifeās build uses a Haswell processor with an i5-4590. Iāve considered upgrading to an i7-4770K, but it would cost around ā¬400. With that budget, I could upgrade both the CPU and motherboard, gaining much more performance than the older i7 would provide. The downside is that Iād need to replace the motherboard and RAM, plus install a new operating systemāsomething Iām not keen on doing (nor does she want to start from scratch). This would only be feasible if the build includes a Ryzen chip with a G-series APU. While AMD APUs are better for graphics than Intel GPUs, they lack a dedicated GPU, resulting in lower CPU performance. From a motherboard perspective, itās worth noting that if you havenāt read the full guide, this article is a good reference:
Based on the assessment, the SN770 appears to be average. The final comments highlight its responsiveness and efficiency, making it competitive despite not fully utilizing the PCIe 4.0 connection.
Exploring further, I considered saving on the CPU by opting for the i5-12600k instead of the i5-13400. Both options are around the same price, with a $5 difference. The faster i5-12600k could be a better choice.
Board is available now with a $30 discount, bringing the upgrade cost down to approximately $575 CAD. Using 3600 DDR and CAS18 instead of CAS16 saves $20.
https://ca.pcpartpicker.com/user/THRobin...ved/zrqdqs
The summary highlights that RAM heatsinks are mainly for appearance. Prices rise when availability drops, especially with older models; demand also plays a role. For instance, the Celeron G550 is newer than the i7-4770K but offers much less power and isn't popular anymore. In contrast, more durable CPUs like the i7-2700K match the performance of older models and remain in demand, pushing their prices higher. Older Xeons can still work if you find compatible modules.
When it comes to fans, mini-ITX options varyāsome have few headers while others provide many. Even with limited headers, a hub can expand capacity to 6ā10 fans.
I prefer ATX systems for variety, though I appreciate the flexibility of mini-ITX. Choosing a motherboard often means focusing on price rather than brand. If you skip that step, consider these alternatives: read reviews carefully, dive deep into research, or compare options based on your needs.
Iāll go through the second option in more detail and explain how I selected my Skylake build module.
Please note these are my personal preferences and might not suit everyone.
Brand preference is strongāMSI is my top choice.
Chipset matters because my CPU was an i5-6600K, while the latest Intel line was 100-series. I chose between H110, B150, H170 or Z170. Since only the Z170 chipset supports CPU OC for my K-series CPU, thatās my decision. (See MSI Z170 chipset details.)
Price is important within the MSI range. There are affordable options up to Godlike, but I avoided the cheapest ones and the ultra-premium models. I opted for a mid-range choice.
Design matters; at the time, MSI offered black & white and black & red themes. I went with the black & red theme.
Reviews help clarify choices. After narrowing it down, I checked user feedback to guide my final pick.
In this case, I selected the MSI Z170A Gaming M5 over the Z170A Gaming M7 because the latter was significantly pricier without substantial added value.
For a 13th-gen Core i5 build today, Iād recommend the MSI MAG Z790 Tomahawk WIFI DDR4 for its balance of features and performance.
Details on specs: https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/MAG-Z790...cification
If youāre considering a purchase, the review link provides a solid overview.
Yes, I own the complete ATX build and have always preferred ATX components. However, I recently purchased an mATX for my sister to run an i3 processor (6th generation, swapped CPU and faster than mine) because she had an older DuoCore boardāno Core2Duo at all. It took a long time to get up and running.
After reviewing it, I confirmed it met my requirements. It includes a slot for a graphics card and possibly additional slots if needed. My current system has six slots (if I recall correctly), which seems excessive for a home setup. In the past (486DX/66 days), we used video cards, modem cards, SCSI drives, sound cards, etc.ānow onboard audio and Ethernet are standard, while SCSI is largely obsolete unless the Ethernet card fails. USB ports are present but not frequently used anymore. For aesthetics, I opt for a black case with metal sides. If it supports RGB, Iād like it to be adjustable in BIOS so the light doesnāt interfere with the fans.
In terms of graphics, Iām considering H670/Z690 or H770/Z790 models. These seem appropriate since they match my preferred GPU and power configuration. I suspect it makes sense to choose a GPU based on its lane countāthough the NVIDIA site doesnāt list lanes clearly. Itās unclear whether a PCIe4 card would fit in a PCIe3 slot, which is about all I need.
Tomahawk was suggested before, specifically the B660 version. In Canada, that board costs around $350, which is about $200 more than an ASRock Z690 or Asus H670.
From a CPU perspective, thereās little difference except the 12th core is faster, so I might look for cheaper options. The iGPU choice between 770 and 730 could help with encoding speed, though benchmarks are scarce.
Overall, if I find a board that doesnāt require flashback (like an ASUS model) and I upgrade to the 12th generation, it wonāt be a big deal. Iāve always favored ASUS products. The ASUS PRIME H670-Plus came out affordable and met my basic needs (plus 2.5 Gb/s Ethernet if I upgrade), without the RGB features.
That said, the ASRock Z690 with flashback option for either 12th or 13th generation slots, M2 ports, and a full set of fan headers looks appealing. The CPU configuration remains uncertainālikely one fan and a watercooler header, possibly more than a Y splitter.
Use the TechPowerUP GPU database for detailed insights. For example, the RTX 2070 shows the PCI-E revision and lane count, along with extensive specifications and even partner model information. This helps identify aftermarket options with optimal clock speeds, dimensions, and available ports. As discussed, the MSI MAG Z790 Tomahawk WIFI DDR4 MoBo suits my requirements well. If budget matters, Iād prefer a more affordable setup instead of spending ā¬198.40 on a case or ā¬206.80 on a high-end PSU. However, with other premium components already in place, Iām content with quality gear rather than settling for low-quality alternatives. You should consult the PC hardware reference to determine whether the water cooler header should be 12V 3A or another configuration.
So... the RTX3070 uses PCIe 16 (Gen4), and brands like ASRock support PCIe 16 Gen5, which should comfortably handle it without throttling. I think Iāll end up with an RTX 2070 Super, but it will be future-proofed at least.
For my requirements... the ASRock model is sufficientāno extra features I donāt need, no WiFi, no harsh lighting, just basic heat sinks, plenty of USB and fan ports, compatible with both 12th and 13th generation systems, and no worries about speed throttling because the PCIe 16 is a 5th generation standard.
No need to settle for a cheaper MATX version.
Curious to know, you mentioned:
"Sure, it has loads of PCI-E slots and other stuff, but I like to keep my options open, just in case, in the future, I decide to step up."
What would you actually use all those slots for?
Still unsure about the difference between a budget and high-end board from a technical standpoint.
[Link](https://ca.pcpartpicker.com/products/com...XL,2ZgFf7/)
For example, both Z790, four SATA ports, four USB headers, 2.5GB/s Ethernet, five PCIe slots... in terms of connectivity options, you donāt get more or less for a $350 CAD price difference. Better to have some nice RGB lighting and heatsinks. š
I get that there might be differences between cheaper parts, but $250 versus $600āwhat makes the upgrade worth it in a home setup?
Side-by-side, the Gigabyte UD I originally considered looks better than the MSI Tomahawk.
[Link](https://ca.pcpartpicker.com/products/com...P6,8GH7YJ/)
Just a quick question: what made the MSI stand out over the Gigabyte despite the MSI being $100 more? (In Canada, of course.) It looks good, but since you said M.2 heatsinks are useless, it seems the price jump on MSI is mainly for the aluminum ones. š
š Numerous devices are compatible with PCI-E slots; capture cards for streaming, sound cards for audiophiles, extra GPUs (SLI is no longer relevant, but a second GPU can help ease the load on 3D tasks), various control cards like RGB, and multiple ports such as SATA, M.2, additional fan headers, and USB connectors are available. Right now, the most useful upgrade seems to be more M.2 slots, given that my current motherboard only has two, both already occupied. Interestingly, having two M.2 slots on an older board is quite unusual, considering M.2 drives weren't common back then. My board also includes a single USB-C port at the back, which wasn't available previously. Back then, USB-C devices didn't exist. Despite its age, my motherboard offers many features now considered standard. However, it does feature a SATA-E port. In 2015, there was speculation that SATA-E would supersede SATA, prompting MSI to add it, but it never materialized and is now obsolete. Another notable feature on my board is the TMP header, which isn't widely supported by Windows 11 due to CPU limitations from earlier generations. Comparison of AsRock and Asus motherboards: https://versus.com/en/asrock-z790-pg-lig...90-plus-d4 Also, just because Asus is more expensive in some regions doesn't automatically mean it's premium. Both models are roughly the same price difference, around ā¬10. AsRock on Amazon.de: https://www.amazon.de/dp/B0BJF21VQJ Asus on Amazon.de: https://www.amazon.de/dp/B09JVZ8L5G From a technical standpoint, they're essentially comparable as mid-range motherboards. My personal taste varies. What matters most is individual preference. As mentioned earlier, brand loyalty plays a role. Right now, I own two MSI motherboards (Skylake and Haswell), three MSI GPUs (also Skylake and Haswell plus my old GTX 1060), and a MSI monitor. So far, everything has worked well with MSI products, and their design is generally appealing. However, I once owned a Gigabyte case (GZ-G2 Plus) which was a prebuilt Haswell model. It was a poor-quality case, so I upgraded to a Corsair 750D Airflow Edition. Additionally, Gigabyte has had some controversial updates to their motherboard versions. Article reference: https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/gigaby...o-far.html Their power supplies also had issues. Models like the Gigabyte GP-P750GM and GP-P850GM were problematic. Follow-up videos: View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aACtT_rzToI Another follow-up: View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JmPUr-BeEM And a third video that clearly highlights the problems: View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xts3pvbcFos After public concern, Gigabyte eventually recalled those faulty units. Article on recall: In conclusion, I don't trust Gigabyte as a brand and am hesitant to use their products, even if they're provided for free. That's why I prefer other brands. Spoiler: My preferences are: CPU ā Intel; Motherboard ā MSI (or Asus); RAM ā Kingston (possibly G.Skill); GPU ā Nvidia (by MSI); SSD ā Samsung; HDD ā Western Digital or Hitachi; PC case ā Corsair, Phanteks, Be Quiet!; Fans ā Corsair (ML Pro LED), NZXT, Arctic Cooling, Noctua, Delta Industrial; PSU ā Seasonic or Super Flower; Monitor ā MSI or AOC; Peripherals ā Corsair, Kingston, Logitech, etc.; Eyecandy ā CableMod, NZXT LEDs, DemciFlex for dust; Smartphone ā Samsung.