[SOLVED] Cpu choice

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

George_229

Reputable
Jul 26, 2017
25
5
4,545
Hello everyone.
As of yesterday evening, my motherboard VRM section fried. I will be taking the computer to the repair shop to ensure from pros that it is the motherboard at fault and not say psu, just in case, or gpu.
In lieu with that, unless it is easily fixable, I am thinking about getting a new mobo and a cpu. What should I go for?

My current specs are:

Intel i5 7500
Gtx 1070 seahawk
H110m-C motherboard
2 sticks of ddr4 2133 mhz Ripjsaw memory
Evga 750w platinum psu
Barracuda 1TB hdd
Kingston 250gb sad.
Samsung 840 Evo 500 GB Ssd.

Thoughts?
 
Solution
PCPartPicker Part List

CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 3700X 3.6 GHz 8-Core Processor ($418.61 @ Amazon Canada)
CPU Cooler: Thermalright Macho Rev.B 73.6 CFM CPU Cooler ($106.96 @ Amazon Canada)
Motherboard: MSI B450 Gaming Plus MAX ATX AM4 Motherboard ($148.50 @ Vuugo)
Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR4-3200 CL16 Memory ($133.99 @ Newegg Canada)
Case: Fractal Design Meshify C ATX Mid Tower Case ($134.50 @ Vuugo)
Total: $942.56
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2020-08-20 13:27 EDT-0400

George_229

Reputable
Jul 26, 2017
25
5
4,545
I just wanted to say that taking the PC to a computer repair technician can be very hit or miss. Not all of them know what they are doing but all of them will at the very least pretend like they are right even when they might be wrong. It would probably be better to take the PC to a friend who is knowledgeable about computers. If you have a friend like that.

I'll give my breakdown of what I think the problem could be. The motherboard is of low quality so it is very possible that it has failed. Usually the weakest link is the first to break in a chain. That power supply would probably be OK. Though I can't say for sure I believe the power supply isn't the problem unless it's old. If it's old I'd replace it. An old PSU is more than 5 years old or no longer in warranty. You never want to use a power supply to failure though. Ryzen 7 3700x and a B550 is fine. Would be a fine upgrade. I believe that would fix your problem. Just be aware if it is the PSU it could ruin your new system. Though I wouldn't worry so much about that being the case. Often power supplies just simply no longer work if they fail. That's not always true but often times it is. Really even a B450 motherboard is OK but don't skimp on the motherboard if you don't have to. B550 or X570 is really what I recommend. Don't skimp, don't go overboard, just get what you need.

No worries! We decided not to take the computer to repair shop.

I already fixed the motherboard as a matter of fact after taking it out last night. Though I am still looking for a replacement. I am not safe with this hardware.

I am trying to find the root cause of the problem so that when I buy new parts in a few weeks, i dont fry them.

You suggest the latter b550? What is the stark difference between 450 and 550? DB recommended the former. Thank you!
 

Davidc94

Reputable
Feb 11, 2020
19
6
4,525
No worries! We decided not to take the computer to repair shop.

I already fixed the motherboard as a matter of fact after taking it out last night. Though I am still looking for a replacement. I am not safe with this hardware.

I am trying to find the root cause of the problem so that when I buy new parts in a few weeks, i dont fry them.

You suggest the latter b550? What is the stark difference between 450 and 550? DB recommended the former. Thank you!
Hello, sorry to chime in randomly.

The difference between a b450 and b550 is mainly what cpu they were designed for as well as features. The b450 was designed for the ryzen 2k series while the b550 was designed for the ryzen 3k series. The b series are "lower end" boards compared to the x series (x570, x470, etc.), but don't let that sound like a disservice to them; they are still good at what they do.

Now that being said, you can use ryzen 3k series cpus on b450 boards, assuming their bios's have been flashed. b550 have no need to be flashed (though nowadays most b450's are flashed from the manufacturer) for 3k series.

Hopefully i clarified enough.

Have you checked the voltages on the powersupply cables? My friend actually had something similar happen and we found there was a cable that had left a brown spot in the cpu power area which made it act the same as yours and a new cable fixed his problem, but since you are upgrading, i worry about the power supply. I dont remember if you mentioned, ill dig again, but how old is the power supply?
 

George_229

Reputable
Jul 26, 2017
25
5
4,545
Hello, sorry to chime in randomly.

The difference between a b450 and b550 is mainly what cpu they were designed for as well as features. The b450 was designed for the ryzen 2k series while the b550 was designed for the ryzen 3k series. The b series are "lower end" boards compared to the x series (x570, x470, etc.), but don't let that sound like a disservice to them; they are still good at what they do.

Now that being said, you can use ryzen 3k series cpus on b450 boards, assuming their bios's have been flashed. b550 have no need to be flashed (though nowadays most b450's are flashed from the manufacturer) for 3k series.

Hopefully i clarified enough.

Have you checked the voltages on the powersupply cables? My friend actually had something similar happen and we found there was a cable that had left a brown spot in the cpu power area which made it act the same as yours and a new cable fixed his problem, but since you are upgrading, i worry about the power supply. I dont remember if you mentioned, ill dig again, but how old is the power supply?
Psu is 4-years-old. I took down entire pc yesterday and only left motherboard psu, cpu, and ram. It finally posted after I took out CMOS battery and shorted the power for feedback. After changing ram slots too, it booted. I thought it was a fault ram stick but no. System is posting 16 gb ram even with ram slots swapped.
The problem arises later... when I try to plug in anything into the lower half of the motherboard like gpu or the wireless adapter (I moved my pc upstairs due to home renovations I'm performing. I dont want pc to sit where wood debris and paint is all over so to say).
Thinking it was a gpu, I took my brother's 1050ti and plugged it to my pc. Motherboard now has same problem as it had the day before -no post at all. Despite it being there 2 hours ago.
CPU fans spin but no display. GPU fan runs.

Rear fan runs. Motherboard won't turn on peripherals such as mouse or keyboard or display.

I plugged my gpu into my brother's similar psu and motherboard (his is better). Result? Gtx 1070 runs like a candy as does 1050ti.

My final conclusion is that it is either the motherboard only, but partially. In short - lower half of the motherboard such as pci express slot 3.0 and such.

Or, it is psu that is wasting energy and not delivering it correctly. I can plug psu to my brother's pc but I do not want to damage his components. His evga 750w bronze has been with him for 8 years.

I think I'll replace entire system except gpu and hdd/ssd's at this point. Quite frustrating .

Apologies for a long post.
 
The only ACTUAL, tangible differences between B450 and B550 motherboards are the fact that B550 has native PCIe 4.0 support and more USB 3.2 Gen 2 ports, as well as potentially internal headers as well. Some B450 boards have them, but not all, but none of them have PCIe 4.0 support.

As I said before, UNLESS you are going to use a PCIe 4.0 graphics card AND/OR a PCIe 4.0 NVME drive, you are not going to see any real benefit from the use of a B550 motherboard or any motherboard, such as X570, that has native PCIe 4.0 support. And even then, we haven't REALLY seen this translate into tangible performance gains yet for the most part because those PCIe 4.0 NVME drives haven't really offered a substantial increase yet in random performance, and you are not going to see those advertised sequential performance numbers unless you are writing to another equally fast NVME drive OR reading from a very large installer or other file.

Windows operating system pretty much "lives" and dies by the random reads and writes, and this is where increased IOPS can really make a difference in how fast things feel or even translate into noticeable performance gains in some cases. Sequential reads and writes, are nice, but you rarely see this except in benchmarks.

For graphics cards, if you are planning to upgrade your graphics card soon, then you MIGHT see some difference in performance, but much as when we went from PCIe 2.0 to 3.0, it is unlikely that there will be any "Wow" factor, and in fact I'm pretty sure I haven't heard anything about there being one from any of the X570 owners running Navi cards. As seen here:

Looking at the results, we can see a whole lot of nothing. PCI-Express 4.0 achieves only tiny improvements over PCI-Express 3.0—in the sub-1-percent range When averaged over all our benchmarks, we barely notice a 1% difference to PCIe Gen 3. I also included data for PCI-Express Gen 2, data which can be used interchangeably to represent PCIe 3.0 x8 (or PCIe 4.0 x4). Here, the differences are a little bit more pronounced, but with 2%, not much to write home about, either. These results align with what we found in previous PCI-Express scaling articles.

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/pci-express-4-0-performance-scaling-radeon-rx-5700-xt/24.html

So the benefits, at least for THIS generation of PCIe 4.0 capable hardware, seems to be largely.........................a big, fat, nothingburger, for the most part. Certainly, on paper, there are POTENTIAL benefits, but as of so far they don't translate into reality, so I don't see the point of paying a LOT more for those boards. Especially when, those CPUs will run fine on last gen chipsets.

Now, if you PLAN to upgrade to a newer Ryzen 4000 series Zen 3 CPU in the next year or so, then it might be worth getting one of those boards now, otherwise, the cost of these B550 and X570 boards will likely be significantly lower in a year, or other boards, that DO have tangible performance benefits and potentially even OTHER newer features, will likely be available by then and THAT might make it worth doing. There's certainly nothing wrong with buying a B550 or X570 motherboard, other than they are unnecessarily expensive compared to B450 and X470, but don't buy one expecting it to offer you some magical gain or benefit over what you could pay a hundred dollars less for.
 

Karadjgne

Titan
Ambassador
B550 can offer native usb-c internal headers. That's irritating as even x570 doesn't, they were built prior to that release. So if you have/get a case that's got front panel usb-c ports, you'll need Intel or B550 to get them to work at full capacity, or use up an internal usb3.2 header with adapter at half strength.
 
There is no such thing as USB-C internal headers, because USB-C is a form factor, not a standard. USB 3.2 Gen 2, IS a standard. USB-C could be USB 3.0/3.1, it could be USB 3.1 Gen 2. It could be USB 3.2 Gen 1 or Gen 2. It is merely the form factor, much like M.2.
 

Karadjgne

Titan
Ambassador
There is no such thing as USB-C internal headers, because USB-C is a form factor, not a standard. USB 3.2 Gen 2, IS a standard. USB-C could be USB 3.0/3.1, it could be USB 3.1 Gen 2. It could be USB 3.2 Gen 1 or Gen 2. It is merely the form factor, much like M.2.

Huh? There's usb-c A-key internal headers. If using a adapter or the 3.0/3.1 or even 3.2 gen 1, you may or may not get usb-c power delivery (short changed to 5v/3A) and chances are you'll be stuck at 5Gb/s. To get full power delivery of upto 20v/5A And full 10-20Gb/s bandwidth you need pcie3.2 gen 2 capable port .

But there's most definitely a USB-C A-key internal header on most newer Intel and many amd B550 mobo's.

A-key right in front of usb 3 to type-c adapter
 

George_229

Reputable
Jul 26, 2017
25
5
4,545
I take that back... there are no GPU's I saw on market in store yet that I can get that is not amd. I was already told about 5700 xt series... I might get what DB recommended as I dont think the gtx 30 series will use 4.0 but I could be wrong.
 
Huh? There's usb-c A-key internal headers. If using a adapter or the 3.0/3.1 or even 3.2 gen 1, you may or may not get usb-c power delivery (short changed to 5v/3A) and chances are you'll be stuck at 5Gb/s. To get full power delivery of upto 20v/5A And full 10-20Gb/s bandwidth you need pcie3.2 gen 2 capable port .

But there's most definitely a USB-C A-key internal header on most newer Intel and many amd B550 mobo's.
Like I said.

USB-C (formally known as USB Type-C) is a 24-pin USB connector system with a rotationally symmetrical connector.[2]

The USB Type-C Specification 1.0 was published by the USB Implementers Forum (USB-IF) and was finalized in August 2014.[3] It was developed at roughly the same time as the USB 3.1 specification. In July 2016, it was adopted by the IEC as "IEC 62680-1-3".[4]

A device with a Type-C connector does not necessarily implement USB, USB Power Delivery, or any Alternate Mode: the Type-C connector is common to several technologies while mandating only a few of them.[5][6]

Those internal headers are NOT specifically "USB C". They might be used for USB-A front ports that could be spec'd for a variety of compatible standards. "USB C" is NOT a standard, in terms of generational compliance for power or throughput considerations.

USB-C, on a front case panel for example, could be anything from USB 2.0/1.1 all the way up to 3.2 Gen 2 or Thunderbolt 3. USB C is a CONNECTION type, not a standard. I mean, the connection type HAS it's own standards, but they can be implemented in a variety of ways based on what the USB C connector and cabling standards support in terms of the power delivery and throughput standards of the USB spec they want to use with it.

Type-C refers to the physical shape of the the newest USB connector. (The USB Type-C connector shouldn’t be confused with the USB 3.1 or USB 3.2 standards.)
 
From what I've read so far, Ampere SUPPORTS PCIe 4.0, but there is no conclusive evidence that the Ryzen 3000 series enthusiast gaming card models will COME with PCIe 4.0 support. Supporting it, and specific models HAVING it by design, could be worlds apart. Right now, I think we really just don't actually know anything for certain on these.
 

George_229

Reputable
Jul 26, 2017
25
5
4,545
From what I've read so far, Ampere SUPPORTS PCIe 4.0, but there is no conclusive evidence that the Ryzen 3000 series enthusiast gaming card models will COME with PCIe 4.0 support. Supporting it, and specific models HAVING it by design, could be worlds apart. Right now, I think we really just don't actually know anything for certain on these.
I'll go with the parts that you recommended. I think it would be a great upgrade over my current cpu!
 

Karadjgne

Titan
Ambassador
Sigh. Dancing around the same thing from different angles. Yes the type C is the connector shape. But the A-key header on the B550 is the Only header to offer the full capacity of the type C. Any of the rest only offer at best half capacity and severely reduced (if any) power delivery. It's the difference between the type C I have hooked upto a USB 3.0 header taking 8hrs to charge my cell phone, and the regular Samsung brick that came with the phone takes 1.5 hrs. The pc through Usb-c won't charge my daughter's iPad. I get 1A at best.

The A-key (not a USB type A port) header, connected to a type C port, would.
 
Type A ports, which can be connected to the same type of headers as type C IF they are suitably capable and support the standard, can provide everything that Type C ports can. In fact, even on my very old Hero VIII can provide the EXACT SAME USB 3.1 Gen 2 power and throughput as the Type C that sits right next to it, via Type A ports.

ASMedia® USB 3.1 Gen 2 controller :
1 x USB 3.1 port(s) (1 at back panel, black, USB Type-CTM)
ASMedia® USB 3.1 Gen 2 controller :
1 x USB 3.1 port(s) (1 at back panel, red, Type-A)

As another example, the B450 Tomahawk max system I just built today.

1 x USB 3.2 Gen2 (SuperSpeed USB 10Gbps) Type-C port on the back panel
1 x USB 3.2 Gen2 (SuperSpeed USB 10Gbps) Type-A port on the back panel

Both use the EXACT SAME 10Gbps throughput and have the exact same power delivery capability. It has ZERO, AT ALL, to do with it being Type C. We are not dancing around the same thing from different angles. You are simply mistaken about "Type C" having anything to do with what any given USB port or header is capable of providing and are stuck on the connector itself, which is really the ONLY part of it that differentiates it from a Type A connector.

Type C is ONLY for convenience, so that it is reversible and requires no thought on how to connect it. Anything Type C can do, Type A can do as well, so long as the correct standard and cabling are implemented with and to the Type A header FROM either the motherboard I/O or internal header. As far as the internal header is concerned, that has nothing to do with being Type C either as the manufacturers DON'T put anything that says "Type C" header internally on their motherboards. They put USB 3.1 Gen 2, or USB 3.2 Gen 1, or USB 3.2 Gen 2 or USB 2.0, etc. designations on their internal headers.

I've never seen ANY motherboard specifications list a "Type C" internal header on the "Internal connections" detail listing.
 

Karadjgne

Titan
Ambassador
I'm not talking about rear headers/ports. I'm talking about the Gen2 A-key internal header. The usb-c front panel connectors use a A-key connection. Not a USB 3 or USB 2, A-key. And those are only found on Gen 2 capable mobo's. You can use adapters to convert an older 3.0 or 3.1 gen 1 to A-key, but you do not get the full capability of the usb-c port.

I have an X570-I, it does not have A-key. It does have a USB 3 gen 1 internal header. It has Gen 2 rear ports as well, but nothing to support a case front panel Type C connection. If I convert the 3.1 to A-key to use the USB-C front panel port on my case, I get 5v/3A max and 5Gb/s. Not the full 20v/5A and 10Gb/s the type C connector can supply.

The B550 Has a Gen 2 A-key internal header that connects directly to any front panel USB C port connector and allows Full type C capabilities with PD.

The only port direct wire so far that uses the A-Key IS a type C front panel connector, everything else is through adapters of some sort.
 
It doesn't change the fact that any A-key internal header could just as easily be used to support a front panel Type A USB 3.2 gen 2 header as it is for a Type C header. It has literally nothing to do with the header being Type C. Just because Type C front panel ports USE that internal A-key header doesn't mean it was designed or intended to ONLY be used with Type C. You are simply not getting that Type C has NOTHING, AT ALL, to do with what that A-key, or any other internal header, can provide.

Any manufacturer could put a Type A USB 3.2 gen 2 header on the front of the case and connect it to that A-key internal header via a suitable cable. The only reason they DON'T, is because everybody wants USB to be transitioned to Type C because it is preferred due to being somewhat more fool proof.

But you are right in the fact that currently, nobody is doing this. It still doesn't change the fact that the standard for that internal header has no tie to USB C other than because it's what case manufacturers are putting on the front these days. They could just as easily be putting Type A 3.2 gen2 ports and using cables that will plug into those A-key headers, and that would work just fine. In fact, there probably ARE some that will connect to those for add in cards using 3.2 Gen 2 Type A back panel PCIe cards, or will be at at some point, because in truth, Type C hasn't been widely adopted, yet, by peripheral manufacturers. It's getting there, but just like USB 3.0 did, it will likely take years for them to be widely adopted. Hell, most boards and a lot of cases still have USB 2.0 ports on back and front.
 
  • Like
Reactions: George_229

Karadjgne

Titan
Ambassador
Lol. Well of course they still have usb 2.0 typeA ports on the back panel, what else would a mouse plug into. I mean you could ostensibly use a 3.2 Gen2 port, but that'd mean upgrading a bunch of stuff to outfit the board rear panel with, when just one usb 3.2 will easily support 2x USB 2.0 ports. 1 lane takes care of mouse and standard kb in 1 shot.

With limited lanes from cpu and the rest coming from controllers, keeping lower standard ports just makes sense, because as you say, not a big need.

Only real reason for type C PD in the first place is Apple products, many don't charge from standard Gen1 or earlier ports and with many boards not having as many USB in the back as in prior boards, and the hassle of getting to the back in the first place, a front panel type C or even a type A with full PD is a nice idea.
 
A quick question regarding 3700x, is a newer intel i7 10700 any good or equivalent by chance? Or is ryzen that much superior at the moment?
Both are viable choices. Typically, the Intel products are more expensive and this latest generation of Intel isn't particularly power or overclocking friendly, but, there is nothing specifically "wrong" with going Intel either. It's just not the go to choice like it used to be. The lines between AMD and Intel when it comes to performance have been blurred, and AMD generally wins the price war, but it can go both ways depending on the costs of boards etc.
 

Karadjgne

Titan
Ambassador
Different cpu tiers. The 3700x matched up better in gaming with the 9700k, and currently comes out somewhere between a 10600k and 10700k, but the 10700k is essentially a 9900k pthats been tweaked and a 10600k is an 8700k that's been tweaked heavily.

Whether amd or Intel wins is game depending, some favor one over another, but much of that too is monitor depending. It would make zero difference to a 60Hz monitor which you chose, all of those cpus are well capable of exceeding that fps.

Back in the FX days, the lines were obvious, FX simply didn't have the performance, but gamed ok. Today's Ryzen is good enough to basically go head to head and the gap is small enough that it takes a benchmark to see any difference, you the user can't.

Intel got as much profit out of 9th gen as it could, but that ended with the price cuts in 10th Gen just to stay competitive. Either cpu is a good choice at that level, both very capable, both still open for upgrade, both ahead of the curve in gaming requirements. Most times it boils down to which gets the wallet a better deal.
 

George_229

Reputable
Jul 26, 2017
25
5
4,545
Different cpu tiers. The 3700x matched up better in gaming with the 9700k, and currently comes out somewhere between a 10600k and 10700k, but the 10700k is essentially a 9900k pthats been tweaked and a 10600k is an 8700k that's been tweaked heavily.

Whether amd or Intel wins is game depending, some favor one over another, but much of that too is monitor depending. It would make zero difference to a 60Hz monitor which you chose, all of those cpus are well capable of exceeding that fps.

Back in the FX days, the lines were obvious, FX simply didn't have the performance, but gamed ok. Today's Ryzen is good enough to basically go head to head and the gap is small enough that it takes a benchmark to see any difference, you the user can't.

Intel got as much profit out of 9th gen as it could, but that ended with the price cuts in 10th Gen just to stay competitive. Either cpu is a good choice at that level, both very capable, both still open for upgrade, both ahead of the curve in gaming requirements. Most times it boils down to which gets the wallet a better deal.
Got it. I'll stick to ryzen.
 

TRENDING THREADS