>Bought a GTX 1080ti >Bought a Ryzen 5 1600 >Bought

>Bought a Ryzen
you fucked up

>>62472358
Immediately got 3.8 on stock voltages, nice and cool. But seriously, you didn't need to make an entire thread for this.

>>62472358
Why not just wait till you can afford the cpu cooler before overclocking? Just run stock for now.

>>62472358
custom loop zoop everything
the sub 70Celcius temps under load will be amazing

Ryzen isn't really meant for overclocking.

the stock cooler is fine, unless you won the lottery you probably won't be pushing the clockspeed that high anyway.

>>62472358
you're gonna be CPU bottlenecked at anything less than 4k

>>62472464
> that's what they said about delidding intels

1080ti is bottlenecked @ under 4k. 1070 was the card you were looking for 1080p, 1440p

>>62472485
>>62472518
At 1440p 144hz? I was told by /g/ that a 1080ti is basically required to get optimal results for that resolution and refresh rate on most modern games.

>>62472472
What clockspeed should I realistically be expecting?

you might make 3.8. you won't get 4

>>62472526
probably 3.8
only youtubers and review sites seem to be getting 4.0-4.1 conveniently

I have a 1500x I keep OC at 3.8 with a stock cooler and it stays at like 60-65 °c sometimes 70 if it's a full load. You should be fine I would reckon

>>62472526
yeah a 1080ti is necessary for 144fps at that res, but ryzen won't keep up. you need an overclocked 7700k to pull that FPS in new games

>>62472526
>>62472539
3.8ghz is the standard OC, the silicone hits a wall after that point. i run my 1700x at 3.8ghz with 1.275v, it won't even boot with anything less than 1.4v @ 4ghz. reviewers crank it up short term for benchmarks, i doubt there's anyone running their chips at that voltage normally (unless you upgrade every year or something)

>>62472615
Well this sucks. I swear, there's always something when I build a new PC.
I was under the impression that the Ryzen 1600 was in the same league as the i5 7600k.
Now I'm wondering if I should send back my motherboard and CPU to pick up some different stuff, zzzz.
I can't say I want to but what's the point in getting a monstrous gpu and a solid monitor if my CPU is going to ruin everything.
Fuck sake.

>>62472875
>I was under the impression that the Ryzen 1600 was in the same league as the i5 7600k.
it is, look up some benchmarks.
there's no point buying an i5 now, the 7700k is still king of single-thread but that won't last and coffee lake looks like a joke.

If you're really unsatisfied return your CPU and wait for ryzen 2/intel to fix their shit.

>>62473015
Did I really go full retard on my CPU purchase though?
I've honestly always heard that the i7s and what not don't give any advantage in gaming over the i5s, so I'm pretty confused as to what CPU I was supposed to be getting. I thought at most the difference between an i5 and an i7 would be to tiny to even care about. I've checked a bit online now though and people do seem to be saying that it's pretty fucking weird to be pairing up a £200 CPU with a £700 GPU.

>If you're really unsatisfied return your CPU and wait for ryzen 2/intel to fix their shit.
Eh, unfortunately that isn't an option. I've pretty much bought everything to build a new PC already, the rest of my parts are coming in today and this PC I'm using now is gonna get passed over to my sister.

>>62472875
An i5 wouldn't really keep up either.

>>62473090
You didn't go full retard, you went mild retard. For a gaming setup with a 1080Ti you would probably prefer an i7, but the R5 1600 is a better choice than an i5 7600K. So you went with basically the second best option, losing a few FPS to save money while being competitive in multitasking with the i7.

A more balanced build would have been R5 1600 and a 1080,

>>62473090
I have a 1080 and 1600. It will depend on the game, but in overwatch at 1440p I can get 144 fps on at least high settings with a custom loop for cooling and max stable overclocks. You goofed up but only barely. You basically bought the 2nd to 3rd best CPU for the job. The better thing is to realize you have an AM4 board and cheap CPU and you can buy the Ryzen 2 which should be at 5GHz. The Ryzen will deliver higher lows and not stutter as much, so it will be an overall smoother experience at the slight loss of average fps.

Also the only reason why I have a ryzen is because I tried to delid my 3770k and delaminated the fiberglass when using the vice method.

My R7 1700 does 4.05Ghz at 1.35v. it's a good one.

>>62472875
1600 is faster than a 7600k in multi threaded apps, but it has much lower single-thread performance which is what you want in games

>>62473090
if you bought your shit for a 144hz monitor then yes you goofed. next time do your own research and don't listen to tards on a meme image board

best course of action for you would probably be to return all the ryzen parts (cpu, motherboard) and pick up coffee lake in 3 weeks. you can keep everything else as is

>>62473138
is that after running prime95 for a few hours?

File: 627.png (753KB, 1008x672px) Image search: [Google]

753KB, 1008x672px

>>62472383
>
>>62472358
T. Intel shill

>>62473165
>he doesn't run an OC high enough to blue screen on prime95 after 30 seconds but low enough to play his games fine

Do you even want to go fast?

>>62473153
>1600 is faster than a 7600k in multi threaded apps, but it has much lower single-thread performance which is what you want in games
Based on release bios that didn't allow mem any higher than 2400. Now, 3600 can be used.

God I have a fucking headache. I hate building PCs so fucking much.

>>62473153
>if you bought your shit for a 144hz monitor then yes you goofed.
I did. The entire reason I bought my 1080ti was so to go with the 1440p 144hz monitor I just bought alongside it basically.

I literally don't know what the fuck to do now.

>>62473153
With the recent bios updates the 1600 is able to make better use of faster ram and with 3200 CL14 it wipes the floor with the 7600k at 1080p and 1440p. There's no need to delid and ryzen2 will use AM4 so no need to buy new mobo.

File: c4yyfk9fecmz.png (523KB, 2152x956px) Image search: [Google]

523KB, 2152x956px

>>62472358
1600 is great value and a smarter buy.
>50% cheaper than 7700k
>only 5-6% slower in 1080p
>only 2-3% slower in 1440p

>>62472875
>I was under the impression that the Ryzen 1600 was in the same league as the i5 7600k.
It's much better than the i5 in pretty much everything that isn't strictly single threaded, which includes any new games.

>>62473546
>>62473583
But can it actually allow me to run shit at 1440p 144hz or will it be a severe bottleneck?
Let's say I go on the assumption that not every game will allow me to run at that resolution with that refresh rate, will I at least be able to run the majority of games with those settings?
If I'll be able to do that, I'll happily keep it and upgrade when the zen 2 stuff comes out later on, I don't mind that at all, but if it's not gonna be able to handle the 144hz as well then that means I've just blown a hell of a lot of money on a top end GPU and an expensive as hell monitor without being able to reap the benefits from them.

>>62473593
>But can it actually allow me to run shit at 1440p 144hz or will it be a severe bottleneck?
Let's be clear. There does not exist a CPU that can run all games at consistent 144Hz. And in many cases a 1080ti isn't enough to drive them even if there was.

With that said, you can still get good results with a 1600. A 1600x is about 5-10% behind a 7700k in most games and you can reach those clocks with a 1600 stock cooler.

>>62473500
i have r51600 and first bought 2x4gb 2.4ghz ram but it was not stable so i exchanged it for 2.1ghz. I want to buy now another 2x4gb but am thinking about bigger speed. Is it smart to have half ram at different speed?

>>62473629
At 1440p the CPU isn't going to a significant bottleneck. See >>62473546

>>62473641
Depends if your mobo can support higher speeds and what bios you're running. A recent AGESA update allows applicable mobo's to use up to 4.6Ghz memory.

>>62473629
Honestly, that sounds fine to me.
I think the issue is, is that I have severely underestimated just how demanding 144hz is.
As long as my GPU and monitor aren't being rendered almost useless by the CPU, I can deal with that.
I had to skimp out on some parts of my PC after all, which is why I'm stuck with a stock cooler. For the time being anyway.
Hopefully it all works out without giving me too much of a headache. Every PC I've ever built always has that one thing that causes irritation. This one probably won't be any different but it would be nice if I was satisfied with it for once.

>>62473664
>At 1440p the CPU isn't going to a significant bottleneck
At 1440p 60hz maybe, but at 144hz it will

>>62473725
Not when even a 1080ti can't push enough pixels for it.

>>62472358
*segfaults*

>>62472358
yeah, it's fine if you don't OC it too aggressively, 3.8 under 1.4v should be fine

>>62473811
>1080ti
yeah, right, like it will ever happen to him

>tfw R7 1800X
>1080ti
>neither overclocked
>play almost every game at 1440p 165fps

>>62473811
So did Intel in that test my dude

>>62472358

I fell for the ryzen meme too because I trusted the r/amd shills. My ryzen has a lower single thread performance than a 6 year old 2500k and it stutters in gaymes. I guess I deserve it for being a newfag and not realizing everything here is a meme

>>62472512
Thats what they said for the 7700k

>>62472358
>can't even buy a cooler
>can't even google
>can't even choose between the 50 commercially available coolers

go buy a macbook you are obviously not fit to use more than 1 bit for thinking

>>62474152
I have no money left, you moron.

>>62474091
Wrong copypasta, shill. This is /g/

The coolers AMD is shipping with the Ryzen's are pretty close to overkill, unless you go suicide voltages they won't throttle you at all and they're pretty silent
But if you want even less noise then an aftermarket cooler is a good idea

>>62474251
Dis.

The chips run cooler anyway as they already have lower tdp, I was amazed when I took off my old mobo with the Phenom II and it's stock cooler, thing was tiny compared to the wraith and loud af.

The 1600 runs extremely quietly, at much lower temps, and doesn't afraid of anything.

Not shilling, just countering the jewtel shills.

>>62474251
>>62474306
I'll be happy with just 3.8ghz to be honest. I'm not looking to go overboard on the overclocking or anything.
I'm pleased to hear that the stock cooler is actually decent though, cutting down on an aftermarket cooler gave me just enough money to pick up my GTX 1080ti so I don't really have any complaints on that front....assuming the stock cooler is as good as you say of course.

>>62474375
It's about 34 to 38C where I live, yet the 1600 hovers @ 70 to 71C under full load @3.4 Ghz,

You don't need an aftermarket cooler, and even assuming you did, you'd be much better off getting a better component you won't be able to upgrade in the near future, then getting the cooler later when you get the money.

Skimp on the optional crap to get better higher tier important crap, then buy the optional crap later.

getting 3.8 is easy, you can even undervolt the stock voltage to get that

>>62472358
> Will the stock Ryzen cooler be adequate or not?
Yes.
> I do plan on overclocking.
No.

You can get a minimal clock speed increase to like 3.6 or sth with stock cooler but for anything more just get an aftermarket, they're pretty cheap.

>>62472358


Is it pronounce Risen?

>>62474635
No, it's pronounced "Rice-san".

>>62472358
>I plan on overclocking immediately
>I do not have adequate cooler to overclock
sums up /g/ desu

>>62472458

I get max 70° C on AiO. No need for a custom loop. Just get some good airflow going and you are fine. Ryzens just don't really get hot.

>>62473354
You should be using adaptive sync anyway. You're honestly a massive fucking retard for ordering parts and THEN asking for advice and doing research because you clearly didn't do shit beforehand. Go be mad at yourself and not "building PCs"

>>62472424
>i never Stress tested

File: IBT high.png (291KB, 1465x889px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 1465x889px

>>62475164

>70c
>AIO
>impressive

Yeah, nah - big air coolers get lower temps while being quieter.

>>62473183
>my System runs stable
>Fatal Rounding error: number is 342.79, meant to be 0.4

>>62475456
Nigga, I fucking ASKED here multiple times in multiple threads and was told to go for the Ryzen 1600.
And yes I did research it, some people say it's fine others say it's not, there's not much more I can do. I dedicated a solid month beforehand to figuring out what to buy.
Building PCs is dog shit.

>>62472358
>Can't even buy a cooler now for my CPU
You're a moron and fucked up with this one, but otherwise you're okay. It's true that you probably would squeeze out a few more FPS in most games at 144Hz by going Intel, but the difference isn't that big and you couldn't have afforded a 7700K anyway. Buying an i5 for a high end rig is no option with its meager 4C/4T.
With a bit of luck a decent aftermarket cooler would let you push your 1600 to 3.9GHz, maybe even 4.0. With stock probably 3.6-3.7. At 144Hz that probably directly translates to more frames so whether that's worth it is up to you.

>>62475592
You are an actual retard if after a month you hadn't figured out what the fuck you're doing. It doesn't take long, you should be able to do it in a few hours even if you're not very knowledgeable about the newer product lines.

>>62475592
>I dedicated a solid month beforehand to figuring out what to buy

Return everything and buy a console you dumbass

>>62472875
make no mistake, you have a good cpu

>>62472383
>>62472464
>>62473811
>>62474091
|
|>
|
|3
|
|

>>62475660
>You're a moron and fucked up with this one, but otherwise you're okay.
I was skeptical about that too, but everybody was (and still is according to this thread) claiming that the stock cooler is fine for the most part. Maybe not for overclocking but still, by sacrificing getting an aftermarket cooler for the time being I enabled myself to pick up a 1080ti instead of a regular 1080. Seems like a decent trade off for something can easily upgrade in 2 weeks when I get paid again.
>At 144Hz that probably directly translates to more frames so whether that's worth it is up to you.
I may just keep my CPU at stock until I get a proper cooler then rather than fucking around with it too much.

>>62475696
Lel get the fuck outta my thread you triggered bellend.

>>62475722
No thanks, I've build like 4 PCs now. It's shit and I hate it, but it's necessary.
Also I'm loving this whole "wow do more research" and then when you get blown the fuck out you revert to "wow you take too long to decide".

>>62475744
I'm sticking with it. Worse comes to worse I'll just upgrade to zen 2 in the future when it comes out.
I've not used a non intel CPU before so I'm curios to see how this one performs.

>>62474446
Retard.
t. 3.7ghz 5 1600 with a stock cooler, 33c idle, 65c stress, 55c gayms.
>>62472358
Should have gone with 1600x if you planned to push it to 4ghz. Binning is NOT a meme. Also, there are plenty am4 coolers out already. As a quick thought, noctua d-15 and u12 for air, corsair h110i, fractal celsius s24 and s36 for aio, custom loops - all of the recent ones. Still, you made a great choice to not give your money to fucking intel. Their cpus are a joke.

File: 1447059778516.jpg (164KB, 578x712px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 578x712px

Guys I bought a gtx 1080 ti and a ryzen 1700.
I plan to run games on 1440p , 144hz and Ultra settings.

Should I overclock my ryzen? I have a water cooling system Corsair Hydro Series H100i v2

>>62476295
is this satire?

>>62476119
>Also, there are plenty am4 coolers out already
I think I fucked up my wording, I know I can get a cooler for it, I'm just broke now since I had to sacrifice the cooler I was originally planning on getting (which was actually the Noctua one you just mentioned) to pick up the 1080ti over the 1080. Quite a few people said it would be a better decision to stick with the stock cooler, at least for the short term to make that purchase instead. Sounded pretty logical to me so I went that route.
>Still, you made a great choice to not give your money to fucking intel. Their cpus are a joke.
I've always used intel CPUs thus far. To be honest, I just go for whatever is the hottest new thing and it seems like Ryzen is in right now and a lot of people recommended it, so I'm looking forward to seeing how I like it.

>>62476390
>Quite a few people said it would be a better decision to stick with the stock cooler
They were right. It handles R5 1600 well up to 1.35 Volts. You'll be able to get 3.7 with it just as I did for sure, if not 3.8, considering I pretty much lost the silicon lottery and now regretting I didn't buy a 1600x. Also I should mention there's no point to swap the stock cooler for middle of the pack aftermarket one. Save up and go for best, be it air or liquid. I'm going to buy a D15 myself.

>this entire thread
For real, if you are troling, just stop already.

The 1600 won't be a bottleneck, it will have worse results than a new unlocked and overclocked intel CPU in older games, but it will be much better in anything else, also, by slower, I mean like >>62473546 said.

You will be able to render shit much faster, you could even post in any local facebook group or whatever to render normie videos because they will mostly have shitty dual core laptops but they still want to be that guy who lives from youtube.

What you "lose" in CPU perfomance, you win it on the GPU perfomance. If you get an i7-7700k, that it's much expensiver, you will also have to get an aftermarket expensive cooler and a delid combo (delid tool, liquid metal and a good silicone), which will end in literally the double or more, and so, you would have to go to a weaker GPU like the 1080 or 1070.


I was building a PC for a friend and decided to go with the 1700 and 1080ti because what it loses from the CPU, it wins from the GPU, and around the same money than a i7-7700k+cooler+delid combo.

>>62474164
Do you have an old cooler? The am3 clip on ones work with am4

>>62472358
Why not buy a 1070 and use the money on a dh-15 or even an evo + better mobo.

>>62476591
>and a delid combo
I think for the vast majority of the people a 1600 is the right choice but come on now, delidding a 7700K is far from necessary. You do it if you're going for like 5+ ghz and in that case the difference won't just be "5-6%".

>>62476382
No. What's your fucking problem?

>>62477121
you seem to have a few more problems than me lad

>>62477261
Care to explain to me then?

>idiots actually believe a 7700k and 1080ti are required for 1440p 144

>>62472358
>>Bought a GTX 1080ti
>>Bought a Ryzen 5 1600
could have at least gotten the 1700.

now you're just a retard

File: 1080_1080.png (68KB, 1290x1768px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 1290x1768px

>>62473546
Delid dis, 7700k was supposed to be a trillion times betterer

>>62477643
I don't understand that bullshit chart. What does it even say?

>>62478930
The i7 is 5% faster for 65% more money

>>62478990
Thank god I went for the ryzen 1700 instead of the 7700k. For once /g/ was right.

File: Gold-pressed latinum mining.png (144KB, 1439x946px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 1439x946px

>>62479008

Push that fucker as far as you can go. My own 1700 can do 3.9ghz but i'm still dialling in stability when I have my ram at 3200mhz (wehen I clock the cpu to 3.8ghz however it is rock solid with said ram).

>>62479072
>Push that fucker as far as you can go
>.1 over stock
I lol'd

>>62479103

You're a retard you know that right? 3.7ghz "stock" is single core turbo - i'm pushing 3.8ghz across all 8 cores.

>>62479124
>You're a retard you know that right?
Yes. It's still funny

>>62472358
Stock will probably hit 3.8, higher to 4.0 will probably need liquidcooling.

>>62472358
>Will the stock Ryzen cooler be adequate or not? I do plan on overclocking.

no

buy aftermarket

>>62479072
I never overclocked anything since all my previous computers were shit and not worth to overclock.

Should I follow a youtube tutorial how to specifically overclock the 1700?

>>62479169

Ryzen is pretty simple to overclock so a few tutorials wouldn't hurt. Its getting fast memory speeds that requires more tuning depending on what kit you have.

I bought a 1600X and have no plans to OC it. A cheap heatsink will do just fine, right?

>>62479224

Get the thermalright grand macho and run it passive.

>>62479124
is the Ryzen master the go to way for Ryzen OC or is 3.8 unreachable due to no fancy Voltage settings?

>>62479309

For a scrub overclocking ryzen master is decent. I still swear by BIOS overclocking but i'm using a very expensive x370 board (the crosshair) and that has an obscene amount of options tailored for overclocking.

>>62475483

Quieter? I have my AiO on silent mode, i.e the fans never go over 50%.

At 100% they would be audible and the temps would probably be in the 50s but since I am sitting right next to my PC I'd rather have it be quiet.

>>62479280
This.

>>62479991

Yes, quieter. You should look up the sound profile of the fans that ship with the D15 - they are flatout better than what comes with 99% of AIO units. Then again the only good AIO unit is the EK predator.