Help me build my PC: 2022 Catch-All

A point i forgot to mention,if you run a power supply with extra headroom, you are somewhat protected against the slow degradation of PSU power output. as it gets older it's max output will go down and the closer to max you run it the faster that's gonna come.
Also, higher output units will tend to be 80+ gold rated and then you are alot more protected from the magic smoke taking the rest of your computer with it.
i would not recommend buying a PSU that was rated less then 80+ gold.

You know what they say,

Those who overspec their supply, get to use it next time.

Those who underspec their PSU, get to buy two.

I'm looking for a new build, how does this look?

Processoren AMD Ryzen 7 5800X, 3,8 GHz (4,7 GHz Turbo Boost) socket AM4 processor
Geheugen 2x Corsair 16 GB DDR4-3200 Kit werkgeheugen
Behuizingen be quiet! PURE BASE 600 tower-behuizing
Besturingssystemen Microsoft Windows 11 Home software
Voedingen be quiet! Pure Power 11 FM 650W voeding
Moederborden ASUS ROG STRIX B550-F GAMING WI-FI II, socket AM4 moederbord
Processorkoelers Noctua NH-U12S REDUX cpu-koeler
Harde schijven & SSD's WD Black SN850 NVMe, 500 GB SSD

I would be bringing my 3060Ti from my current build, plus 3TB HDD and 2 NVMe drives of 1TB each. I would sell the current PC with an old 750Ti and a 500GB Nvme drive in it.

I intend to just run it without overclocking anything, except put the RAM at its max speed. I want it to be a bit future proof while still looking for price/performance balance.

It seems like 3600Mhz Memory doesn't really improve performance in a noticeable way with this CPU, is that correct?
The case I chose because it's cheap, silent, and has no LED lighting
I chose 650W based on an Anandtech article, that said one shouldn't oversize the PSU, and that this should be enough for a PC with one dedicated graphics card. And that oversizing impacts efficiency overall. I might go for 700W or 750W, not sure yet.

650W PSU seems lowish. Going to 700 or 750W isn't that outrageous of an "oversize". Plus, especially if you are going intel and to some extent Nvidia, the trend is to be more power grabbing or in the case of Nvidia, spiking power.

I do note that you aren't going intel but cases and PSUs are the easiest components to bring along to your next system. And AMD is definitely making gains with efficiency, but they are trending power hungry as well for next gen.

My current build has a 550W PSU, and if I leave it in the case I can sell it as a complete system, is the reasoning.

I will probably upsize the PSU though, I got a 3060Ti because it's the maximum my current PSU can support.

A high-end Intel Arc desktop GPU appears to have shown up in the SiSoftware benchmark results site, with performance results putting it in the neighborhood of the RTX 3070 ti.

Intel isn't manufacturing these GPUs at their own fab, but rather through TSMC. Since they're using TSMC's 6nm process, however, they might not be battling for fab capacity so much, with NVIDIA, AMD, and Apple hammering TSMC's 7nm and 5nm production capacities.

That has been leaked for some time now. Glad to see some seemingly concrete evidence.
I just hope its $400 or less. Or that a stripped down version competes with a 3060ti at $300 or less...

dejanzie wrote:

My current build has a 550W PSU, and if I leave it in the case I can sell it as a complete system, is the reasoning.

I will probably upsize the PSU though, I got a 3060Ti because it's the maximum my current PSU can support.

3060 Ti + Ryzen means the 650 is fine, but if you ever upgrade the gpu... Who knows what you'll need?!?

garion333 wrote:

3060 Ti + Ryzen means the 650 is fine, but if you ever upgrade the gpu... Who knows what you'll need?!?

Yeah, and while I love AnandTech and recommend them, I think that link about PSU and peak wattage overstates the "lower efficiency at lower load levels" issue.

It is true that a power supply's efficiency curve is going to be much lower at the very low % load end, but while a 75W workload is an 8.8% load on an 850W supply, it's still just an 11.5% load on a 650W supply. You're not moving into an entirely different section of the efficiency curve, you're still in the "low efficiency" zone on either supply. Unless you're comparing a 1000W supply to a 400W supply or something, you're not going to make idle workloads make very much difference in terms of efficiency. Buy the beefier supply that you can keep long term, it will save you more money than trying to chase specious efficiency gains.

*Legion* wrote:

A high-end Intel Arc desktop GPU appears to have shown up in the SiSoftware benchmark results site, with performance results putting it in the neighborhood of the RTX 3070 ti.

Intel isn't manufacturing these GPUs at their own fab, but rather through TSMC. Since they're using TSMC's 6nm process, however, they might not be battling for fab capacity so much, with NVIDIA, AMD, and Apple hammering TSMC's 7nm and 5nm production capacities.

I'd really like this to be a viable competitor, but no matter how great the silicon, it's going to be really hard for Intel to compete with nVidia's decades long advantage in drivers.

The big issue that has kept me in nVidia's camp since the TNT is that their stuff just works, and it works well and reliably.

polq37 wrote:
*Legion* wrote:

A high-end Intel Arc desktop GPU appears to have shown up in the SiSoftware benchmark results site, with performance results putting it in the neighborhood of the RTX 3070 ti.

Intel isn't manufacturing these GPUs at their own fab, but rather through TSMC. Since they're using TSMC's 6nm process, however, they might not be battling for fab capacity so much, with NVIDIA, AMD, and Apple hammering TSMC's 7nm and 5nm production capacities.

I'd really like this to be a viable competitor, but no matter how great the silicon, it's going to be really hard for Intel to compete with nVidia's decades long advantage in drivers.

The big issue that has kept me in nVidia's camp since the TNT is that their stuff just works, and it works well and reliably.

I agree, heck I'd say AMD is still trying to catch up to Nvidia on the driver side of things, except that Intel has been doing graphics stuff for a decent amount of time at this point. It's not like they're jumping in without having had some experience with drivers and the like.

polq37 wrote:

I'd really like this to be a viable competitor, but no matter how great the silicon, it's going to be really hard for Intel to compete with nVidia's decades long advantage in drivers.

The big issue that has kept me in nVidia's camp since the TNT is that their stuff just works, and it works well and reliably.

True, but it's not like this will be Intel's first graphics driver ever. They have been making graphics drivers for many many years, for their integrated GPUs. The performance of the silicon will change, but the fundamentals of the drivers don't change that much.

Yeah I went Nvidia back when I was playing City of Heroes still, a decade ago, and haven't looked back. One time I upgraded to Radeon something during the 6 or so years I played that off and on, and I was miserable the entire 2+ years until I could upgrade again and switch back to Nvidia.

Sure maybe it was Cryptic's fault or their engine. But Nvidia just worked and AMD gave me glitches, crashes, and poor performance every time I tried to play. Made me really hate one of my favorite games at times. It will take something really Earth shaking to get my to abandon Nvidia ever again

As someone in the Arstechnica forums said, any new vendor trying to enter the GPU market will have serious performance and stability issues with their drivers. But if there is any window of opportunity to bear those growing pains (which might take years to solve) it is now.

If Intel can get these into laptops with integrated GPU's, and start working on the drivers for the most common graphical software (AutoCAD, Photoshop, ...) and the most common games (Fortnite, Minecraft, ...) it might work out.

Updated my potential build:

Processoren AMD Ryzen 7 5800X, 3,8 GHz (4,7 GHz Turbo Boost) socket AM4 processor
Geheugen Corsair 32 GB DDR4-3200 Kit werkgeheugen
Behuizingen Sharkoon M25-V B21xH46,5xL45cm
Besturingssystemen Microsoft Windows 11 Home software
Voedingen Corsair RM850 2021
Moederborden ASUS ROG STRIX B550-F GAMING, socket AM4 moederbord
Processorkoelers Noctua NH-U12S REDUX cpu-koeler
Harde schijven & SSD's WD Black SN850 NVMe, 500 GB SSD

I changed the case, as my desktop is encased under my desk and 21cm is the maximum width. This one also leaves 5cm/2" room at the top for extra airflow.

And I upgraded the PSU from 650W to 850W based on your recommendations.

So, based on the new reviews, it looks like the 3050 is little more than a reissued 1660 on somewhat more modern silicon and the Radeon 6500 is an utter disaster.

Super inspiring.

Yeah, 1660 with me Ray Tracing/DLSS/etc oomph. Smart move from Nvidia, even if I don't like it personally because it too will probably be overpriced by the market.

I don't get it either on AMD's end.
Though it looks like AMD did the same with the 5500xt where there is a huge (~40%) gap between it and the 5600xt and then the 5700 and 5700xt are more successive incremental improvements.

NVIDIA has gone from releasing the 1080ti about 5 different times to releasing the 1070 about 4 different times now. DLSS helps the value proposition somewhat, but we're still looking at 1070 performance for about the same MSRP price the 1070 was in 2016.

The whole PC gaming industry is being kept afloat by 6-year-old Pascal cards whose owners are just praying won't die.

polq37 wrote:

Anyone have any suggestions for decent amps for computer/bookshelf speakers?

Answering my own question here: There's a $50 Dayton Audio amp that is just about perfect. Physically, it feels like a much more solid piece of equipment that the old Lepai or Kinter amps and it has a much, much clearer signal in the higher volume settings. In comparison, the Kinter amp that I panic bought as a replacement for the dead Lepai is almost total junk.

Maybe the very recent model Kinter, Lepai and Lepy amps (which all seem to be identical, but for their branding) are not as well made as similar models from 5 or 10 years ago.

Serious question - why would you want an amp for computer speakers? I have a pair of MAudio AV40s on my desk that I never turn up more than 50% as that is plenty loud for my whole upstairs. Is it for cleaner sound out of your PC or something?

LeapingGnome wrote:

Serious question - why would you want an amp for computer speakers? I have a pair of MAudio AV40s on my desk that I never turn up more than 50% as that is plenty loud for my whole upstairs. Is it for cleaner sound out of your PC or something?

Mainly because I wanted something better than standard computer speakers and most of the desktop computer speakers I've owned over the years were pretty junky. The sound was never that great and they tended to start buzzing after a year or two. Buying bookshelf speakers and a small amp gets me something a little better than the usual computer speakers and I can replace the weaker parts of the system if they break.

Those MAudio speakers look like they are just bookshelf speakers with a built in amplifier.

Loudness isn't the point. I rarely have the amp up past 10% power. It's about clean, clear sound and having something far better and more reliable than the Amazon Basics speakers for much less than the price of Klipsch ProMedia speakers.

Another advantage of having the amp box separate from the bookshelf speakers is that you can place the speakers where you like and still have the volume knob and headphone jacks in arms' reach.

Ah got it. Cheaper speakers + amp to make them sound better. Makes sense. I actually had a pair of cheap Logitechs and a then a set of the Amazon Basics but got tired of the buzzing or them picking up literal over-the-air radio channels when no sound was playing.

Yeah I converted my old shelf stereo to PC speakers a while ago. The tape deck and CD player died but the radio and speakers are still kicking after nearly 30 years. Been using them primarily with PC for a decade

Back in the mid '90s I splurged and spent ~$100 on a nice set of Cambridge Soundworks speakers. Seeing as how I'm still using them on my computer today, I'd say that "extravagance" was the best computer money I ever spent...

I got some powered bookshelf speakers (Mackie 4") about two years ago, and have been very happy with them. I think I'm done with "computer speakers" and will continue down the track of studio monitors or powered bookshelf speakers, as long as I have the desk space for them.

Vargen wrote:

Back in the mid '90s I splurged and spent ~$100 on a nice set of Cambridge Soundworks speakers. Seeing as how I'm still using them on my computer today, I'd say that "extravagance" was the best computer money I ever spent...

Me too, right until a few months ago when I replaced my monitor with an LG OLED TV. Now the TV speakers are plenty enough and the Cambridge has been retired.

Phishposer wrote:

I got some powered bookshelf speakers (Mackie 4") about two years ago, and have been very happy with them. I think I'm done with "computer speakers" and will continue down the track of studio monitors or powered bookshelf speakers, as long as I have the desk space for them.

One more reason for going this route: around the time my last set of "computer speakers" died I spent a while looking for decent replacements and eventually realized that I had completely lost trust in all of the manufacturers of reasonably priced "computer speakers." There were lots of options at different price points, but no way to reliably judge the quality or longevity of the gear. I had tried replacing good computer speakers with similar models and found that either the old models were no longer made or the newer generation stuff sounded buzzy and tinny.

In a lot categories, it feels like there was a drastic decline in manufactured equipment quality in the late 2010s.

These days, I often find myself trusting Korean made and manufactured gear more than any other quality signifier. It's a big change from the early 2000s.

Moggy wrote:
Vargen wrote:

Back in the mid '90s I splurged and spent ~$100 on a nice set of Cambridge Soundworks speakers. Seeing as how I'm still using them on my computer today, I'd say that "extravagance" was the best computer money I ever spent...

Me too, right until a few months ago when I replaced my monitor with an LG OLED TV. Now the TV speakers are plenty enough and the Cambridge has been retired.

I thought LG still had sh*t for TV speakers?