Jump to content


Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

818 Excellent

About Jaws2002

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1362 profile views
  1. Hey CanadaOne did you check the prices at Canada Computers? They always had good prices. I built four pcs with parts from them, and i'm not counting mid term upgrades and parts. They used to beat everyone in prices. https://www.canadacomputers.com/welcome.php?referer=/&referer_type=SSL&sid=ii9nt5esv85qmv8av1mg0fs9v3
  2. Keep your money until mid next year when both AMD and Nvidia will bring new lineup. AMD said they are going to compete at enthusiast level, with cards rivaling 2080 super and maybe even 2080ti and Nvidia promissed that 3000 series will be more affordable than the current 2000 series. Competition brings progress and good prices.
  3. 2080 super is way more powerful than the 1080ti. And in games that use ray tracing even the 2070 is faster than 1080ti. Edit. Hm...i had the impression that 2080 super was way faster than 1080ti. But I just checked a few reviews and newer versions of 1080ti are really close to 2080 super. I guess I'm right to skip this overpriced 2000 series.
  4. 1080ti is about the minimum you can get away with at 1440p right now. I have an overclocked Gigabyte 1080ti that was blazing fast, in game, at 1440p, two years ago, but now if you keep the eye candy the frame rate drops quite a bit. The game is a lot more demanding now than a year ago. I'd skip the 1080ti and go to a higher 2000 series card, to have some overhead performance for any game improvements that may come. You also have to think about the hardware ray tracing introduced by the 2000 series. A lot more games are now coming with ray tracing and the 1080ti is very slow compared to the 2000 cards. 2080Super would be a good fast card now and that would also give you some head room in the future. My 1080ti is showing It's age and I would like to replace it, but I'll skip the 2000 series.I'll wait for June, next year when 3080ti is supposed to be released....according to the rumor mill.lol.
  5. If it shows up in Bios you may need to instal the drivers for the new SSD. What motherboard do you have? On some motherboards if you populate the last PCIE slot, it disables one SATA port. Something to keep in mind.
  6. I may have gone too far with this. If this is just a cable management issue, you can connect the new drive to the existing SATA cable and just swap the other end of the SATA cable in the motherboard, so your old drive is connected to the same port in the motherboard. Or you can just swap them like you wanted and change the boot sequence in bios.
  7. Looks like the supplier where my local computer store ordered my 3950x "messed up the order" and my CPU didn't ship....😒 I bet some a$$hole pulled it from the shipment and sold it on ebay. I guess I should have bought one on Newegg Canada, or Amazon Canada on Monday, when I saw them in stock. I wanted to help the local store and looks like I got the shaft. This chips are sold out everywhere and I doubt they'll show up again this year.
  8. You have to setup your boot sequence in bios, so Windows knows where to boot from. That would resolve the boot issue, but then your drive letters will change and programs that use that to communicate and operate, will have issues. It's best to let your current SSD attached to the SATA cable/port it is currently hooked to and hook the new SSD to the next SATA port on your motherboard. It also helps to check your motherboard manual for the SATA port numbers, and have the dvd/blue ray hooked to the first port, the OS drive to the second one and the new drive to the next in line. By default bios will use that as boot sequence. Here's a screenshot from the manual for my motherboard to understand what I mean:
  9. I would get the 9900k. With the massive influx of high core/high threads cpus by AMD, gaming companies may fix their old ways of using multicore CPUs. While the single core performance is very close between this two chip, the 9700k is single threaded and in multi threaded tasks, a 6 core/12 threads cpu will beat it. The trend goes towards multithreading and I'd rather be safe with double the threads of the 9900k. Edit...However, right now, that $100 difference between the two chips, will give you more bang for the buck in gaming, if you spend it on a more powerful Graphics card.
  10. I setup the game settings exactly as in the settings screenshot Cili provided. the only difference is gamma correction. Mine is 1.0. I dopn't think that setting changes anything about performance, it's just something you setup based on the monitor brightness. I adjusted all the settings like in the screenshot above, clicked on "high", restarted the game so the change takes effect, and then ran the benchmark. after that one, i just changed settings in game to the other presets, (ultra, balanced and low) and repeated the benchmark, with restarting the game in between so the settings take effect. I think we can do a few extra things to improve results compatibility. We should agree on identical settings in the Nvidia control panel, and all run the benchmark with the same settings. I usually run at 1440p, maybe i dropped some settings in there and maybe my results look better than they should. That's the maximum freq i see in the CPU boosting, in CPUZ. It fluctuates a lot and the maximum boost moves from core to core to keep the thermals balanced, so it's not something i see all the time. I don't run with "all core" overclock, because that limits the maximum single core boost. The base clock for this cpu is 3.8GHz. I ran a slight overclock. I think i just clicked on the "game mode" in the Ryzen master and restarted the computer and it applied a light overclock. The single core performance is pretty decent on this little bastard.
  11. Motherboard: Gigabyte X570 Aorus Master CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 3600x cpu freq: 4400.55MHz L3 cache: 2x16 MB Ram type: DDR4 Ram size 32 GB Ram speed: 3600MHz Ram latency: 16 GPU: 1080Ti STMark: 3040 Low: 2019-11-30 11:44:17 - Il-2 Frames: 28129 - Time: 180000ms - Avg: 156.272 - Min: 103 - Max: 252 Balanced: 2019-11-30 11:35:27 - Il-2 Frames: 25899 - Time: 180000ms - Avg: 143.883 - Min: 95 - Max: 237 High: 2019-11-30 11:00:41 - Il-2 Frames: 24850 - Time: 180000ms - Avg: 138.056 - Min: 92 - Max: 237 Ultra: 2019-11-30 11:17:50 - Il-2 Frames: 23608 - Time: 180000ms - Avg: 131.156 - Min: 89 - Max: 236
  12. Thank you for updating this benchmark. I tried to run it last week but the old track was not working and I gave up. I may have some time to play and test it tomorrow.
  13. I had the Ryzen for about ten days and didn't have a chance to play with the memory. Took a while to install everything and get used with this annoying Windows 10. 😂
  14. You are better off wit 3200mhz than 4000mhz. The deal with third gen Ryzen is that It's "infinity fabric" ( connections between chiplets and memory) can't handle more than around 1900Mhz depending on silicon. Up to that speed the memory runs at one to one ratio with the infinity fabric. You push the memory over that speed, the infinity fabric drops to half speed and you get a huge latency penalty. You have to push the memory at over 4500mhz just to make up for the latency lost due to the 2/1 memory to infinity fabric ratio. Even then the gains are small. 4000Mhz is a bad place to run the memory on Ryzen 3000. The sweet spot is between 3200 and the maximum speed your infinity fabric can handle before it drops to half rate. That's between 3600mhz and 3800mhz for most chips. If you have a 4000Mhz kit drop the speed to 3600-3800 and tighten the timings. I didn't have a chance to play with it yet and I don't think I'm experienced enough to enough get too much advantage. So I got a 32gb (2x16GB) Gskill Trident Z Neo 3600Mhz kit that runs pretty decent timings for 16gb sticks. 16-16-16-36. Probably when I get some free time over Christmas holidays I'll try to drop the latency and timings. If not. It runs great as it is with one click of the mouse. (Enable XMP) They say Zen3 will fix this Ryzen shortcoming.
  15. I just downloaded and reinstalled everything last week. It took a few hours, but it went without any problems. You have to understand the fact that DCS is HUGE. My DCS folder is over 130GB. My il-2 folder is only around 35GB. DCS is just another kind of beast. It's your connection that's making you weep.
  • Create New...