Advice for New PC Needed

[Captain Chuck]

I am considering this rig setup for a new computer for DCS. I don't do VR btw. I will be using a 1440 Monitor 

Do you think it will run DCS at a respectable level?

AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D
Palit GeForce RTX 4070 GamingPro
ASRock B650 Pro RS
32GB  6000MHz
ADATA LEGEND 710 (1000gb)
ZALMAN GigaMax III 850W
ID-Cooling ZOOMFLOW 240X
Cougar Airface RGB

 

Any help at all is more than welcome

EDIT: Oh yeah... I forgot..... I do mostly Multiplayer.

Edited June 13, 2024 by Captain Chuck

[speed-of-heat]

that would nearly do vr very well... So no worries in 2d... More ssd required is the only thing I'd add...

 

[Captain Chuck]

1 hour ago, speed-of-heat said:

that would nearly do vr very well... So no worries in 2d... More ssd required is the only thing I'd add...

 

Well, I will have the OS installed on the SSD that is included in those specs. I have two more 1,000GB M.2 sticks already which will be added. One stick has DCS on it already and the other M.2 has my files on it, Documents, Music etc.  I am assuming that I can just plug these in, and good to go, for now. 

[Biggus]

With MP, I'd seriously consider bumping the RAM up to 64GB.  It's not directly comparable, but for my DDR4 system it made a noticeable difference in performance for me on the servers I play on.  Otherwise it looks like a pretty respectable build.

[Lange_666]

11 hours ago, Captain Chuck said:

Do you think it will run DCS at a respectable level?

Yes but... for how long?
The 12GB on my 3080ti get already totally filled up on more demanding maps and that's not at full max settings.
It doesn't cause any stutters at a capped 60 FPS so it's perfectly fine to play with the VRAM maxed out but you then buy yourself a system which runs against it's limits already.
Same goes for the RAM. I have 64GB and it goes above 32 GB on more demanding maps or multiplayer and also not at max settings.

[Captain Chuck]

4 hours ago, Lange_666 said:

Yes but... for how long?

Same goes for the RAM. I have 64GB and it goes above 32 GB on more demanding maps or multiplayer and also not at max settings.

I will check but I think this motherboard has 4 RAM slots. If so, I can add 2 more 16 gb sticks in later. The other question I have, is what do you all think about starting out with two sticks or 24gb RAM instead of the 16gb sticks?

[LucShep]

59 minutes ago, Captain Chuck said:

I will check but I think this motherboard has 4 RAM slots. If so, I can add 2 more 16 gb sticks in later. The other question I have, is what do you all think about starting out with two sticks or 24gb RAM instead of the 16gb sticks?

AM5 does not play well with 4 sticks of RAM (one of the downsides of this platform).
You should avoid it because, then, it almost surely will be unable to run the memory at EXPO profile (the XMP equivalent for AMD).
So, better keep it at 2 sticks of RAM only for AM5.

For 64GB on AM5, you should get a good 2x 32GB DDR5 6000 CL30 kit with AMD Expo profile.
For example, among other kits, the GSKILL Flare X5 DDR5 64GB (2X 32GB) 6000 CL30 - F5-6000J3040G32GX2-FX5.
 

Edited June 14, 2024 by LucShep

[Captain Chuck]

15 minutes ago, LucShep said:

AM5 does not play well with 4 sticks of RAM at all (one of the downsides of this platform).
You should avoid it because, then, it almost surely will be unable to run the memory at EXPO profile (the XMP equivalent for AMD).
So, keep it at 2 sticks of RAM only for AM5.

For 64GB on AM5, you should get a good 2x 32GB DDR5 6000 CL30 kit with AMD Expo profile.
For example, among other kits, the GSKILL Flare X5 DDR5 64GB (2X 32GB) 6000 CL30 - F5-6000J3040G32GX2-FX5.
 

 

Thanks for that. Also I just realized that the ID-Cooling ZOOMFLOW 240X in those specs is a water cooled system. This was suggested to me by the seller however, I was wondering if a water cooled rig was a good idea or not. I don't know much about them but I assume they'd be a pain in the ass.

[kksnowbear]

40 minutes ago, LucShep said:

AM5 does not play well with 4 sticks of RAM (one of the downsides of this platform).
You should avoid it because, then, it almost surely will be unable to run the memory at EXPO profile (the XMP equivalent for AMD).

Not exactly accurate.

I've completed four AM5 builds in the past several months, all with four fully populated RAM slots, and all running at the modules' rated EXPO speeds.  All of them passed extensive testing in the shop before being put in service, and all are still in service right now running perfectly as expected.

Three are running 64G in four 16G modules. Two of these are primarily flight sim machines (to include DCS).

In my experience, a successful outcome depends a lot on the exact components used, and also to some extent who does the work.

Edited June 14, 2024 by kksnowbear

[Lange_666]

14 minutes ago, Captain Chuck said:

Thanks for that. Also I just realized that the ID-Cooling ZOOMFLOW 240X in those specs is a water cooled system. This was suggested to me by the seller however, I was wondering if a water cooled rig was a good idea or not. I don't know much about them but I assume they'd be a pain in the ass.

It's a closed AIO system (All In One = pump+flexible tubes+radiator+fans). They are no more pain in the ass then an air cooled system.

[Romandv]

My system +/- has similar performance(7700X/7900XT/1440P). Running DCS on max settings, FPS is always 60.
I have 32GB RAM, I would buy another 32GB now.
I have a 1TB+500GB SSD. Need at least 2 or 2.5. Modern games are too heavy, but I'm already too lazy to remove the video card to put another 1TB.

[LucShep]

1 hour ago, kksnowbear said:

Not exactly accurate.

I've completed four AM5 builds in the past several months, all with four fully populated RAM slots, and all running at the modules' rated EXPO speeds.  All of them passed extensive testing in the shop before being put in service, and all are still in service right now running perfectly as expected.

Three are running 64G in four 16G modules. Two of these are primarily flight sim machines (to include DCS).

In my experience, a successful outcome depends a lot on the exact components used, and also to some extent who does the work.

I'll rephrase then.
It will maybe run at AMD EXPO if that's below 5600Mhz CL40 speed/latency, which AFAIK is well below ideal (i.e, slower) for AMD 7000 series CPUs, ideal being 6000Mhz CL30.

If you have found an AM5 motherboard that can run 4 sticks of 6000 CL30 (AMD EXPO) RAM at that ideal rated speed/latency, please inform which is one is that.
Because I've build nearly a dozen of AM5 systems and none was able to do it. Same in HW forums I've been, noone has been able to do it. It's too much stress on the IMC. 

Edited June 14, 2024 by LucShep

[Captain Chuck]

2 minutes ago, Romandv said:

I have a 1TB+500GB SSD. Need at least 2 or 2.5. Modern games are too heavy, but I'm already too lazy to remove the video card to put another 1TB.

Yeah, I'm thinking 3TB is minimum. In my old gaming laptop I have 2.5TB altogether with the OS using 500GB on its own SSD. Leaving 1TB for DCS and 1TB for my files and programs. Well, the SSD which DCS and another game (which I don't even use) is on is full enough and the SSD for my files and programs, though not full, is on its way!

[Captain Chuck]

This all fascinating stuff! 

I'm wishing I had the resources to assemble this new PC myself. I looked into it but in my location, and situation, it is difficult to obtain the components without making the assembled PC more expensive than me having someone else build it for me. 

[kksnowbear]

All four builds I'm referring to are running 6000MT/s modules at the rated speed and CAS latency less than 40.

These were all Asus boards. Three are B650E-F models, my own desktop is a X670E-F ROG Strix Gaming model.

This is kinda what I meant about choosing carefully the components and builder.  I had no problem getting these to work as designed.

Invoking factors such as what's "ideal" obviously doesn't make a lot of sense when doing so results in a build that doesn't work.

See, these edits are continuously changing the rules mid-game to a standard that is progressively less attainable. First it was "You can't run four modules", then we edited it to "Well,  you can but they won't run at anything faster than 5600 CAS40..."  And finally "Well it'll run 5600 but not at the ideal 6000MT/s CAS30".   (I'm paraphrasing, but these are the accurate nature of the edits in general).

That's the problem: Yes, if the builder insists on specs that are simply not attainable, then a failure is pretty much assured from the beginning.  A good builder understands the limits of the technology - for better or worse, whether right or wrong - and works within those limits to achieve a high success rate.  So far, four of four (100%) that I've done have worked exactly as planned, exactly as rated, and for clients who are 100% pleased with the outcome.

Yes, we'd all prefer to have hardware that runs faster, better etc...but as the old saying goes "Wish in one hand, sh*t in the other, see which fills up first".

Edited June 14, 2024 by kksnowbear

[LucShep]

31 minutes ago, kksnowbear said:

See, these edits are continuously changing the rules mid-game to a standard that is progressively less attainable. First it was "You can't run four modules", then we edited it to "Well,  you can but they won't run at anything faster than 5600 CAS40..."  And finally "Well it'll run 5600 but not at the ideal 6000MT/s CAS30".   (I'm paraphrasing, but these are the accurate nature of the edits in general).
 

That's the problem: Yes, if the builder insists on specs that are simply not attainable, then a failure is pretty much assured from the beginning.  A good builder understands the limits of the technology - for better or worse, whether right or wrong - and works within those limits to achieve a high success rate.  So far, four of four (100%) that I've done have worked exactly as planned, exactly as rated, and for clients who are 100% pleased with the outcome.

Yes, we'd all prefer to have hardware that runs faster, better etc...but as the old saying goes "Wish in one hand, sh*t in the other, see which fills up first".

My edits are purely down to the fact that I have to rely on translators (english is not my native language) which, as you may know, usually can't interpret context of original content. Hence the various edits you see through many of my posts all across the forum.

The data is the same as 1st time I posted, regardless of edits - keep the BS in your side please.
My point remains the same. 6000 CL30 EXPO with 4 sticks in AM5 7000 series CPU is too much stress on the IMC.

But of course, you can rely and send your build to @kksnowbear because the guy can do magic that, it seems, no one has been able to do.
Not even RAM manufacturers (there is no 64GB, 96GB, or 128GB 4x modules kit at 6000 CL30 EXPO for a reason - IMC stress).
Hey, I'm sure it'll be a "beast" of a system "rocking" those specs 

Edited June 14, 2024 by LucShep

[kksnowbear]

Several members of this forum have done exactly that (trusted me to do their builds) and they're all happy, thanks.

It's not magic.  It's understanding the technology and working with what it is.

Simple.

PS: Pretty sure translators aren't making you go back and change your posts.  The translator may not always be accurate, but the edits of themselves were not initiated by a translator.

Edited June 14, 2024 by kksnowbear

[LucShep]

8 minutes ago, kksnowbear said:

Several members of this forum have done exactly that (trusted me to do their builds) and they're all happy, thanks.

It's not magic.  It's understanding the technology and working with what it is.

Simple.

PS: Pretty sure translators aren't making you go back and change your posts.  The translator may not always be accurate, but the edits of themselves were not initiated by a translator.

 

I'm so sorry.... I had "EXPOfor" and ammended that with a space..... pardon for my OCD.   

BTW, I'm curious... what's the BIOS version on those "three are B650E-F models, my own desktop is a B670E-F ROG Strix Gaming" ?

[kksnowbear]

The edits I'm referring to were not simple typos. They altered the technical values being discussed, essentially as i said already:

First it was "You can't run four modules", then we edited it to "Well,  you can but they won't run at anything faster than 5600 CAS40..."  And finally "Well it'll run 5600 but not at the ideal 6000MT/s CAS30".   (I'm paraphrasing, but these are the accurate nature of the edits in general).

As I mentioned, these edits are continuously changing the rules mid-game to a standard that is progressively less attainable (regarding speed and CAS).  By the last edit, you're describing something that I know isn't going to work, and therefore I'd never sell it to a client.

This is also fairly simple:  Client wants 64G, I put it in their build - within the technology's limits, of course, regarding speeds.  But, as we all know, having too little RAM is far (far) worse than having speeds that are slightly less.

BIOS versions are generally updated to whatever is current during the build.  I'm sure it's varied over time, and I'm equally sure that some of my clients are capable of updating BIOS themselves, while most of them won't do it.

Edited June 14, 2024 by kksnowbear

[Aapje]

With 4 DIMMs you are introducing headaches and to get an optimal result you will almost certainly need to get 4 DIMMs from the same batch. So that completely defeats the purpose of building it now and adding more later, because then the risk is high that the new batch is slightly different.

There is also zero need if the goal is 64 GB. That can be achieved with just 2 DIMMS.

[LucShep]

3 hours ago, kksnowbear said:

The edits I'm referring to were not simple typos. They altered the technical values being discussed, essentially as i said already:

First it was "You can't run four modules", then we edited it to "Well,  you can but they won't run at anything faster than 5600 CAS40..."  And finally "Well it'll run 5600 but not at the ideal 6000MT/s CAS30".   (I'm paraphrasing, but these are the accurate nature of the edits in general).

As I mentioned, these edits are continuously changing the rules mid-game to a standard that is progressively less attainable (regarding speed and CAS).

BIOS versions are generally updated to whatever is current during the build.  I'm sure it's varied over time, and I'm equally sure that some of my clients are capable of updating BIOS themselves, while most of them won't do it.

I did not edit the context or data in my posts.
My initial post here says the same thing you and also the OP creator replied to. 
My second post - my reply to you - was a simple explanation why it's a bad idea to do it. To which I still stick with it.

Beyond that I have no idea what you're on about (bullying?). But I do remember you editing posts well after the fact too (the NVME clusterfrak thread, for instances), shall I call you on BS then?

Regarding your own results, if those are true at all, I sincerely think you got to a "luck of the draw" combo of some sort (without even knowing how or why), of some specific Hynix M-Die kit modules and motherboard (with certain BIOS version?) and stuck strictly and sacredly with it and took the chance to make business with it, because 64GB+ with 4 module kit at 6000 CL30 EXPO certainly isn't common (if not unheard of) with AM5. 

3 hours ago, Aapje said:

With 4 DIMMs you are introducing headaches and to get an optimal result you will almost certainly need to get 4 DIMMs from the same batch. So that completely defeats the purpose of building it now and adding more later, because then the risk is high that the new batch is slightly different.

There is also zero need if the goal is 64 GB. That can be achieved with just 2 DIMMS.

There. Simple and clear. 

Edited June 14, 2024 by LucShep
spelling(?)

[kksnowbear]

Nobody said you can't edit posts.  The problem is changing your technical factors as the discussion progresses.  This doesn't mention CAS levels at all (in the paragraph where you were discussing four modules).

Later you mentioned CAS below 40, and finally (now) you're very adamantly stuck on CAS30.

Yes, if you pursue some things that are just bad ideas, you're creating a situation that is ill-advised.  Applies to everything.

I don't do that, hence my 100% success - no "headaches" at all.  Not for me, not for my clients.

PS: My results are 100% accurate as stated.  You don't need to start with the insults again.  I knew the result I'd be getting at the onset, that's what I represented to the clients - and that's what I delivered.  100% of the time.

Edited June 14, 2024 by kksnowbear

[LucShep]

@kksnowbear dude, you're full of it.

below is the original post, which is never altered on a quote made right after it.

I took the "at all" from the first sentence. Because it could wrongly be interpreted that 4 sticks of RAM do not work "period", which they do. Just not as ideal, as you can with just 2 sticks. 

What other BS are you trying to invent next?

[kksnowbear]

You didn't mention CAS until later.

The nature of 'edits' means the posts aren't the same any more, and I'm not chasing after that, thanks.

But the fact is you didn't mention CAS until later, and you've also progressively lowered the value to a point (30) where yes, it would likely be problematic.  (You also introduced the term 'ideal', the perceivable benefit of which is arguable).

But I haven't done that, I haven't promised anything of the sort to a client - because I know better.

Let me make it simpler:

Claiming you can't use four modules - wrong.  (That's what I called you on in the first place)

Saying you can't use four modules faster than 5600 under CAS40 - still wrong.  Done it on all four builds, 100% success.

Finally saying 64G at 6000 CAS30...yeah, now you've finally whittled it down to something that is a bad idea.  I wouldn't suggest that - didn't say I would, didn't say I have.

See, what you've done is progressively made the specs you're stating more likely to fail, by changing the technical factors.

Edited June 14, 2024 by kksnowbear

[LucShep]

13 minutes ago, kksnowbear said:

You didn't mention CAS until later.

The nature of 'edits' means the posts aren't the same any more, and I'm not chasing after that, thanks.

But the fact is you didn't mention CAS until later, and you've also progressively lowered the value to a point (30) where yes, it would likely be problematic.

But I haven't done that, I haven't promised anything of the sort to a client - because I know better.

What?? WHAT??

I'm not sure you've followed the thread since the beggining. The OP is not building the system himself, he's following the seller's advice.

Why should we throw a heap of nerd jargon and details, which may become confusing, to justify something (like my second post and following ones to you), when it can be really simplified instead for choices on parts (my first post, or Appje's above)?

Edited June 14, 2024 by LucShep