Old PC died - Building new one

[joepacelli]

So my old PC would have been 7 years old this March but unfortunately the system has died. This is what it consisted of
Case: Corsair Obsidian Series 750D Airflow
PSU: Corsair RMx Series RM750X 750W
Motherboard: MSI B350 Tomahawk
CPU: Ryzen 1700X
Memory: Corsair Vengeance 16Gb (2x8gb)
GPU: Geforce RTX 3060 TI
Storage: Samsung 960 EVO M.2 250Gb
Samsung 850 EVO 2.5" 500Gb
Seagate Firecuda Gaming SSHD 1Tb
Cooling: Corsair Hydro Series H110i

So this is what I'm keeping from old system
Case: Corsair Obsidian Series 750D Airflow
GPU: Geforce RTX 3060 TI

What I'm looking at purchasing
CPU: Ryzen 7900X
Memory: Teamgroup 32Gb (2x16gb) DDR5

Can I re-use the following
PSU: Corsair RMx Series RM750X 750W
Is the PSU strong enough or do I need bigger?

Cooling: Corsair Hydro Series H110i
Can the cooling be re-used?
If so, does it fit AM5 chip?

Next the NVMe
I was thinking of doing 3 WD_BLACK 1TB SN850X NVMe
But then I was thinking, could I just format the old Samsung 960 EVO M.2 250Gb and just use it as my C: OS Drive

I'm not really a gamer, primary use is development using Visual Studio, SQL Server installation, Azure Dev Ops
I also use it for STL's and running Bambu Studio to slice STL's for printing

Motherboard:
It would need 3 M.2 slots, not really to worried about PCI5 since none of these NVMe meet that standard and neither does the GPU
So do I go B650 or X670?

Thanks
Joe

 

[adilazimdegilx]

You can keep PSU, it's more than enough.

AM5 didnt really change the mounting system, so almost all AM4 compatible coolers should work. There are some exceptions to this but a quick google search on H110i tells that you can use it on AM5. And it should be enough for cooling 7900x. Just one thing, AMD did change how these CPUs behave underload. Nowadays they will just boost until they hit 95C unless they hit their other limits. That's normal behavior in stock settings.

B650 MBs can support 3 Nvmes. You can look at models like MSI MAG B650 Tomahawk Wifi or Gigabyte B650 Gaming X AX. Although I don't know why you want separate 1TB drives. Usually 2TB and even 4TB prices scale linearly. Unless that's a specific need, just get one or two 2TBs. That way you'll have your other slot/slots open for future upgrades. And you can surely use your old 250GB drive if you want.

Lastly, what happened to your last system? I'm asking because technically it still has some upgrade potential unless MB is the one that died. It actually supports something like 5900x. Just wanted to mention it.

 

[dgianstefani]

Don't buy a 7900X it's a six core in disguise.

Either go for a 7800X3D or a 7950X.

Don't buy three 1 TB drives, get two or one 2 TB M.2

Also 32 GB is small for a workstation.

 

[joepacelli]

So I removed everything from last one and when I booted, nothing blank screen. Replaced the CMOS battery, it booted into BIOS, so I replaced the NVMe and re-started, again blank screen. Removed the NVMe to boot into BIOS again, blank screen. Removed the battery, re-added, it booted into BIOS, powered it down. This time didn't put back NVMe and just powered it back on, blank screen.

And I tried pressing all the F11, DEL, ESC buttons, Nothing.

Prior to this I was experiencing issue where I would reboot system and it wouldn't reboot, i would power off and on, and would do this multiple times before it would reboot.

So I figured it's been 7 years. Might as well get the new system.

So the MSI MAG B650 Tomahawk Wifi is about $212
where the MSI PRO X670-P WiFi ProSeries is $228

 

[Vya Domus]

Buy a 7900 and turn PBO on = 7900X + an extra stock cooler if you ever need one and it will make it easier to resell if you upgrade the CPU.

 

[gurusmi]

AM5 didnt really change the mounting system, so almost all AM4 compatible coolers should work.

This statement is completly wrong. There is a difference in the height between AM4 and AM5. A CPU Cooler needs no meet the different height. So it definitly need to meet the new AM5 socket measurements!

 

[Vya Domus]

If the cooler needs the stock AM4 backplate it will work.

 

[dgianstefani]

To the OP, the 7900/7900X is comprised of two reject die 7800X (six cores enabled out of the eight core CCD), so what you're getting is a chip that couldn't perform well enough to be either a 7800X or a 7950X, and if you try to use more than six cores in a task you get severe core to core latency due to the individual cores being on separate chiplets that are forced to communicate through the IO die.

 

[arbiter]

Question though with parts resusing like PSU is if you figured out what died in the old machine. if you dont' know what was cause of you could be resusing a part that was the cause if say psu went bad. Just saying to cover bases.

 

[Vya Domus]

comprised of two reject die 7800X

There is no 7800X bro, I guess you meant 7600X.

if you try to use more than six cores in a task you get severe core to core latency due to the individual cores being on separate chiplets

There is a latency penalty whether there are disabled cores or not genius. Irrelevant for pretty much anything a consumer would do, non 3D cache similarly clocked 7000 series CPUs have similar margin of error minimums whether they have 1 or two chiplets. Like I said, stupid misinformation.

 

[adilazimdegilx]

This statement is completly wrong. There is a difference in the height between AM4 and AM5. A CPU Cooler needs no meet the different height. So it definitly need to meet the new AM5 socket measurements!

Umm.. no? AM5 CPU were normally supposed to be thinner but AMD put thicker IHS on them just so AM4 coolers can still be used on AM5 without modifications. There are some exceptions when a cooler uses different backplate but just like @Vya Domus said, if a cooler can use standard AM4 backplate it will just work AM5. Height isn't a problem.

 

[dgianstefani]

There is no 7800X bro, I guess you meant 7600X.

There is a latency penalty whether there are disabled cores or not genius. Irrelevant for pretty much anything a consumer would do

The latency penalty is when you use more than six cores. At least with a 7950X you can use up to eight cores without getting the inter CCD latency penalty.

You can see this if you disable one CCD, and this example is with an eight core CCD, with a six core the issue is even more common since you bump into the six core limit much more than an eight core limit.

What's that? more than 4x the latency from going to a different CCD?

non 3D cache similarly clocked 7000 series CPUs have similar margin of error minimums whether they have 1 or two chiplets. Like I said, stupid misinformation.

Straight up false. But I guess you're only good at accusing others of "misinformation" and are immune to it yourself.

There is no 7800X bro, I guess you meant 7600X.

The only accurate statement you made, but we both know what I meant, you're just being pedantic.

 

[mechtech]

So my old PC would have been 7 years old this March but unfortunately the system has died. This is what it consisted of
Case: Corsair Obsidian Series 750D Airflow
PSU: Corsair RMx Series RM750X 750W
Motherboard: MSI B350 Tomahawk
CPU: Ryzen 1700X
Memory: Corsair Vengeance 16Gb (2x8gb)
GPU: Geforce RTX 3060 TI
Storage: Samsung 960 EVO M.2 250Gb
Samsung 850 EVO 2.5" 500Gb
Seagate Firecuda Gaming SSHD 1Tb
Cooling: Corsair Hydro Series H110i

So this is what I'm keeping from old system
Case: Corsair Obsidian Series 750D Airflow
GPU: Geforce RTX 3060 TI

What I'm looking at purchasing
CPU: Ryzen 7900X
Memory: Teamgroup 32Gb (2x16gb) DDR5

Can I re-use the following
PSU: Corsair RMx Series RM750X 750W
Is the PSU strong enough or do I need bigger?

Cooling: Corsair Hydro Series H110i
Can the cooling be re-used?
If so, does it fit AM5 chip?

Next the NVMe
I was thinking of doing 3 WD_BLACK 1TB SN850X NVMe
But then I was thinking, could I just format the old Samsung 960 EVO M.2 250Gb and just use it as my C: OS Drive

I'm not really a gamer, primary use is development using Visual Studio, SQL Server installation, Azure Dev Ops
I also use it for STL's and running Bambu Studio to slice STL's for printing

Motherboard:
It would need 3 M.2 slots, not really to worried about PCI5 since none of these NVMe meet that standard and neither does the GPU
So do I go B650 or X670?

Thanks
Joe

probably the motherboard that died

My nephew had an msi b450 tomahawk, died after 4 years, and my buddy had an msi b450 gaming plus and it just died at about 4.5 years old.

I have a x570 aero g and it has 4 m.2 slots I got it last november for a good price. I find the triple and quad slot m.2 boards have gone up quite a bit.

Maybe look at Gigabyte Aero G or Vision motherboards
and / or
Asus creator motherboards

Gigabyte is telling me these boards have 4 m.2 slots

and asus showing these for 4+ m.2 slots

 

[Vya Domus]

I know reading comprehension is hard, but the latency penalty is when you use more than six cores.

No, my reading comprehension is stelar, you just don't know anything about this subject which is clearly above your paygrade. That's not how that works, the latency penalty exists whenever something has threads running on cores from different CCDs and those threads need to communicate, this can happen whether the CCD has 1 or 7 cores disabled.

There is no "latency penalty when you use more than six cores", that literally makes no sense. Cores aren't buckets of water where if the 6th one is full it has to spill over to the 7th, or whatever 4th grade logic you're trying to use here.

Straight up false

View attachment 333152

How come TPUs own tests do not show a single such case. You want me to believe this one chart you pulled out where we don't even know what happened there vs TPU's aggregate metric ?

"Staff member" mind you, doesn't trust his own site's data, amazing.

 

[dgianstefani]

No, my reading comprehension is stelar, you just don't know anything about this subject which is clearly above your paygrade. That's not how that works, the latency penalty exists whenever something has threads running on cores from different CCDs and those threads need to communicate, this can happen whether the CCD has 1 or 7 cores disabled.

There is no "latency penalty when you use more than six cores", that literally makes no sense. Cores aren't buckets of water where if the 6th one is full it has to spill over to the 7th, or whatever 4th grade logic you're trying to use here.

"no latency penalty when you use more than six cores"

What do you think happens when you use seven cores and each CCD only has six? Lets do a big think.

How come TPUs own tests do not show a single such case. You want me to believe this one chart you pulled out where we don't even know what happened there vs TPU's aggregate metric ?

"Staff member" mind you, doesn't trust his own site's data, amazing.

Really? I guess that's why the higher clocked 7950X3D loses to the 7800X3D.

And why the 7700X beats the higher clocked 7950X.

Umm.. no? AM5 CPU were normally supposed to be thinner but AMD put thicker IHS on them just so AM4 coolers can still be used on AM5 without modifications. There are some exceptions when a cooler uses different backplate but just like @Vya Domus said, if a cooler can use standard AM4 backplate it will just work AM5. Height isn't a problem.

Correct. This is why the coolers are compatible but AM5 has cooling issues due to the suboptimal IHS.

 

[Vya Domus]

"no latency penalty when you use more than six cores"

What do you think happens when you use seven cores and each CCD only has six? Lets do a big think.

You are seriously out of your depth, it's a matter of threads communicating across CCDs, not cores. You can incur this latency even if you have 1 process with just two threads, which is why this issue exists on any multi CCD CPU no matter how many cores it has.

And why the

Bro in the chart you're showing me the 7950X and 7900X are within .2% of each other, beyond margin of error, what are we even talking about ? One has CCDs with 6 cores, the performance should be atrocious according to you. Which it isn't, because you are wrong and you do not know what you are talking about.

And why the 7700X beats the higher clocked 7950X.

This is proving my point not yours, why are you so resilient to using your brain ? Just read what I said carefully, you'll understand.

The likely reason the 7700X beats both 7950X and 7900X is because both of those use multiple CCDs, so the issue that I've described happens on both, not just on the 7900X.

I guess that's why the higher clocked 7950X3D loses to the 7800X3D.

Completely unrelated matter, one has the 3D cache and just 1 CCD, not relevant at all.

 

[dgianstefani]

Completely unrelated matter, one has the 3D cache, not relevant at all.

They both have 3DVCache, it's just the 7950X3D 3DVCache chiplet can boost to 5.25 GHz and the 7800X3D chiplet can boost to 5.05 GHz. So all things being equal, the 7950X3D should be faster. But it's not. Care to speculate why?

You can move goalposts around by talking about threads instead of cores but it's the same root issue.

 

[Princess Garnet]

To the OP, the 7900/7900X is comprised of two reject die 7800X (six cores enabled out of the eight core CCD), so what you're getting is a chip that couldn't perform well enough to be either a 7800X or a 7950X, and if you try to use more than six cores in a task you get severe core to core latency due to the individual cores being on separate chiplets that are forced to communicate through the IO die.

This is true, but I'm not sure if I agree with what you seem to be getting at with it.

All lower SKUs are "rejects" that didn't make the cut for higher SKUs, no? Isn't that just how binning works?

And a x950 is also going to have that same inter-CCD thing happen if you use over 8 cores on it. And if you're not planning to use over 8 cores, why buy a Ryzen 9 over a Ryzen 7 to begin with? So anyone buying a Ryzen 9 is someone I would presume is buying it because they think they have a use for the cores.

And if you need more than 8 cores, a 7900 is certainly going to be far faster than a 7700 regardless of this inter-CCD latency.

So I don't really see the issue in the end.

That being said, I certainly wouldn't choose a 7900 over a 7800X3D for gaming specifically, because the latter exists and even minus this inter-CCD issue is much faster due to the extra cache.

 

[Vya Domus]

They both have 3DVCache, it's just the 7950X3D 3DVCache chiplet can boost to 5.25 GHz and the 7800X3D chiplet can boost to 5.05 GHz. So all things being equal, the 7950X3D should be faster. But it's not. Care to speculate why?

Read my comments dude, I've already explained it.

The 7800X3D is faster as a result of the multiple CCDs on the 7950X3D, threads communicating across CCDs = extra latency, which can happen irrespective of how many cores there are. The 7950X3D has fully enabled CCDs.

This goes back to my point, all multiple CCD CPUs behave the same, it's not a matter of defective cores. "A 7900X is not a six core" is complete nonsense no matter how you spin it, it's not any better or worse than any other multiple CCD CPU.

You can move goalposts around by talking about threads instead of cores but it's the same root issue.

Not it's not and this isn't me pedantic, you just don't understand how this works.

 

[dgianstefani]

This is true, but I'm not sure if I agree with what you seem to be getting at with it.

All lower SKUs are "rejects" that didn't make the cut for higher SKUs, no? Isn't that just how binning works?

And a x950 is also going to have that same inter-CCD thing happen if you use over 8 cores on it. And if you're not planning to use over 8 cores, why buy a Ryzen 9 over a Ryzen 7 to begin with? So anyone buying a Ryzen 9 is someone I would presume is buying it because they think they have a use for the cores.

And if you need more than 8 cores, a 7900 is certainly going to be far faster than a 7700 regardless of this inter-CCD latency.

So I don't really see the issue in the end.

That being said, I certainly wouldn't choose a 7900 over a 7800X3D for gaming specifically, because the latter exists and even minus this inter-CCD issue is much faster due to the extra cache.

A 33.3% higher tolerance for high core count usage before hitting the latency penalty is pretty significant, big perk of the 7950X. Besides, like you said, a 7900X is faster than a 7700X when you use more cores for productivity, it's just the downsides of the six core design are more apparent than those of the eight core design even in multi CCD chips in any real time task like gaming or audio work, for example.

 

[Vya Domus]

it's just the downsides of the six core design are more apparent than those of the eight core design even in multi CCD chips in any real time task like gaming, for example.

The guy already said he is not just using this for gaming, read his post, there is no question about whether or not a 7700X would be a better choice. It's not, the extra cores are better for his use case, you've been arguing for literally no reason at all but to spread misinformation.

 

[gurusmi]

Umm.. no? AM5 CPU were normally supposed to be thinner but AMD put thicker IHS on them just so AM4 coolers can still be used on AM5 without modifications. There are some exceptions when a cooler uses different backplate but just like @Vya Domus said, if a cooler can use standard AM4 backplate it will just work AM5. Height isn't a problem.

If you believe it or not. You cannot mount an AM4 cooler on an AM5 because of their height. I have both sockets here. My Heatkiller has both mounting kits. One cannot mount the cooler on an AM4 and also on AM4 with the same screws. Also AM5 has an integrated backplate whilst AM4 has a delivered Backplate if one is needed. I'm sorry to disturb your dreams.

 

[dgianstefani]

The guy already said he is not just using this for gaming, read his post, there is no question about whether or not a 7700X would be a better choice. It's not, the extra cores are better for his use case, you've been arguing for literally no reason at all but to spread misinformation.

Right, and there's no such thing as latency sensitive workloads that aren't gaming.

 

[gurusmi]

If the cooler needs the stock AM4 backplate it will work.

Nope.

 

[Vya Domus]

Right, and there's no such thing as latency sensitive workloads that aren't gaming.

Correct, there really aren't. Most software has no issue with this very specific problem and even where there is some performance to be lost it's insignificant.

Nope.

Do you know of any cooler that doesn't fit and uses the AM4 stock backplate ?