[SOLVED] New dude building first computer

[jacobalanbaker]

Recently got into gaming for the first time with some games that my in-laws showed me (ARK, Destiny, Rocket League).
I really wish I could play them but I just have an awful laptop.

So this is what I put together on pcpartpicker.

https://pcpartpicker.com/user/jbaker12/saved/4B47WZ

I am really new to this and would love some feedback. Let me know of you have any suggestions. Budget is 1200.

 

[alexoiu]

Not sure about those RAMs. Look for some reviews, to make sure that they are supported by Ryzen.
Other than that, I see no issues.

 

[jacobalanbaker]

Not sure about those RAMs. Look for some reviews, to make sure that they are supported by Ryzen.
Other than that, I see no issues.

 

[COLGeek]

The heatsink that ships with the Ryzen is sufficient for many users, so you could drop the Hyper 212.

 

[jacobalanbaker]

I did some research on that and most people think it is fine but more people seem to be talking about the motherboard and that it works well with the b350 Mobo but I planned to get a b450 tomohawk.
What are the difference between these?

Is there a good resource on the basics of computer parts? All of these message boards seem to have some many references to things like memory latency, c14 vs c16 etc.
I am not sure if I have the technical know how to keep up with all of this?

 

[jacobalanbaker]

The heatsink that ships with the Ryzen is sufficient for many users, so you could drop the Hyper 212.

 

[jacobalanbaker]

Is the fan only for the CPU? Is it not also for the Mobo and GPU?

 

[COLGeek]

The heatsink attaches to the CPU bracket and cools the CPU and surrounding motherboard components. You don't need both and can only use one of them at a time (between the AMD and Hyper heatsinks).

 

[ohiou_grad_2006]

I like the system. Since it is your first build, I would consider dropping the hyper 212 cooler as suggested. I would also then think on getting the Ryzen 2600x instead of the 2600. 2600 is a good CPU, but the 2600x should be a little faster out of the box. Since you are saving money on the cooler, I say use the savings toward the better processor.

Also, how about this card instead?

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/9FQRsY/powercolor-radeon-rx-vega-64-8gb-video-card-axrx-vega-64-8gbhbm2-3dh

No ray tracing, but is a bit faster than the 2060. Should run closer to a gtx 2070 or gtx 1080 for not much more than the 2060.

What will you use for a monitor? A nice 144hz display will make everything seem smooth.

 

[jacobalanbaker]

I was going to go with the
Asus - VP228H 21.5" 1920x1080 60 Hz Monitor
but I also have an 20" ACER AL 2016W B with is a 75 hx. Which is better?

Is ray tracing going to be a bigger deal in the next few years though? Even if the other card is faster will I have a harder time using it with future games if it doesn't have ray tracing?

 

[ohiou_grad_2006]

On the monitor, the 75hz is better. Think of it this way. 1 hz=1 fps. In other words, you get a nice PC like your building now, but you get a 60hz monitor, you are limiting that nice graphics card to 60 fps. If your card does higher frames, either of those will, then you will get screen tearing, etc. Basically, you'll have to use software solutions to stop the screen tearing for fast paced games. Look at something like this if you haven't purchased a monitor.

https://www.microcenter.com/product/511129/25mx-245-full-hd-144hz-hdmi-dp-freesync-gaming-led-monitor

https://www.microcenter.com/product/511129/25mx-245-full-hd-144hz-hdmi-dp-freesync-gaming-led-monitor

This is a budget monitor, but it's 144hz. I have the 27 inch version. But these are 1080p. Once you get 144hz, as you play and games start going toward 100fps or higher, and you use freesync, it really seems to make games run a lot smoother in my opinion. Plus you don't get as much lag when you are hitting a button and waiting for your character on screen to respond.

As far as ray tracing, it will be interesting. Think about it this way though, AMD has said they don't think ray tracing will be a big thing for about 5 more years. AMD makes the graphics cards for the PS4 and Xbox one, and I think for the upcoming consoles also. So they may dictate a little what is used. We will see if ray tracing is a thing. I think you take a performance hit when ray tracing is enabled, so it would be interesting to see how a 2060 does with ray tracing turned on.

 

[jacobalanbaker]

I like the system. Since it is your first build, I would consider dropping the hyper 212 cooler as suggested. I would also then think on getting the Ryzen 2600x instead of the 2600. 2600 is a good CPU, but the 2600x should be a little faster out of the box. Since you are saving money on the cooler, I say use the savings toward the better processor.

Also, how about this card instead?

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/9F...ga-64-8gb-video-card-axrx-vega-64-8gbhbm2-3dh

No ray tracing, but is a bit faster than the 2060. Should run closer to a gtx 2070 or gtx 1080 for not much more than the 2060.

What will you use for a monitor? A nice 144hz display will make everything seem smooth.

Well I guess I am not sure about the Vega because I am not sure I want to spend another $50 on the GPU. Is there another GPU that is a good value for the $350 price range? Also, are two cheaper cards going to outperform one more expensive one? Let's say 2 RX 570s (4 gb) vs 1 RTX 2060 (6 gb).
Sorry if these are dumb questions, I really get quite lost in all of this as I research.

 

[cryoburner]

I say stick with the 2060. Vega 64 will be more power hungry, and in turn will almost certainly run hotter and be noisier, especially one like that with a blower-style single fan cooler. And the performance differences between a 2060 and Vega 64 will be very minor. In fact, many reviews show performance of the 2060, 1070 Ti, and Vega 64 to be extremely close, on average. In my opinion, the 2060 is arguably the best card around this price range right now.

And no, don't go with two slower cards. Again, two cards are bound to be more power-hungry and noisy than a single one, and not all games work properly with multiple cards. If a game doesn't support multiple card setups, you can be stuck running a single card in that game, which will be much slower, or you might potentially run into performance or stability issues.

 

[g-unit1111]

And no, don't go with two slower cards. Again, two cards are bound to be more power-hungry and noisy than a single one, and not all games work properly with multiple cards. If a game doesn't support multiple card setups, you can be stuck running a single card in that game, which will be much slower, or you might potentially run into performance or stability issues.

Absolutely agree 110%. There's no reason to get two slower cards and go SLI mode. You won't get better performance than you would with a stronger single card. Trust me, I've been there and I would much rather have a 2080TI than two 2070s.

 

[ohio_buckeye]

I don't think they even support sli on the 60 series. Isn't it just the 80 series now?

 

[ohiou_grad_2006]

Personally, I went with a Vega 56. If it's not equal to the 2060, it's in the ballpark somewhere above a 1070 usually, maybe a little below the 1070ti. It likely does consume more power than a 2060, but I got it instead of a 2060.

My reasoning was that the 2060 6gb of vram is enough now, but what about a year or so now. So for me personally, I valued the extra 2gb of vram. Also, in the past it seems that AMD drivers improved over time and that the cards seemed to last better in the longer term. So in my case, that's why I went that way. The power consumption doesn't really bother me. I have 750 watt PSU and single card, so that PSU should not be working to hard. Plus I've got 6 case fans, so keeping it cool is no big issue. Though mine runs cool, and I think a lot of guys like to undervolt them.