• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

AMD Zen 2 (Ryzen 3000) - *** NO COMPETITOR HINTING ***

OcUK Staff
Joined
17 Oct 2002
Posts
38,228
Location
OcUK HQ
I remember when £900 would get you a total top of the range PC ☹️

Easy to remember the good stuff, but I also remember paying £349 for a HP CD-Writer a long time ago, generally things are much better. :)

I remember times when just hard drive was 900quid !!!!

Yep I remember paying a lot of money for a Quantum Fireball and a Quantum Bigfoot drives, it is easy to complain, but reality is things have gotten much cheaper and the reality also is the flagship stuff there is no need for, the mainstream perfectly powerful stuff is fantastic value for money compared to years long ago. :)
 
Associate
Joined
26 Sep 2018
Posts
349
Easy to remember the good stuff, but I also remember paying £349 for a HP CD-Writer a long time ago, generally things are much better. :)



Yep I remember paying a lot of money for a Quantum Fireball and a Quantum Bigfoot drives, it is easy to complain, but reality is things have gotten much cheaper and the reality also is the flagship stuff there is no need for, the mainstream perfectly powerful stuff is fantastic value for money compared to years long ago. :)

The fact you can get a 2TB nvme SSD for ~£250 is nuts. That sort of performance / size was small car territory not long ago.
 
Associate
Joined
26 Mar 2007
Posts
1,604
I remember times when just hard drive was 900quid !!!!
Those were the days...

Extracted from a trade price list from 1999 ;)

Code:
STOCK CODE   DESCRIPTION   1+   5+
9IBMU/WIDESCSI   9.0 GB SCSI II U/Wide/U2 SCSI IBM 7200 rpm    192.50   189.00
9IBMSCSI   9.0 GB IBM SCSI Ultra 2 10000rpm 4mb cache   355.10   348.40
18IBMSCSI   18.2 GB IBM SCSI Ultra 2 10000rpm 4mb cache   556.50   546.00
18QUA   18.2 GB SCSI Quantum Atlas 4 U2 7200rpm 2mb cache   424.00   416.00
18SEALVDSCSI   18.2 GB SCSI  Seagate Barracuda 1mb 7200rpm   450.50   442.00
13QUANTUM   13 GB Quantum CR 5400rpm UDMA   102.50   100.50
   15 GB Western Digital IDE U/DMA   105.00   103.00
16IBM   16.8 GB IDE IBM Titan 5400 rpm UDMA   111.50   109.00
17MAX   17 GB IDE Diamond Max 5400rpm   126.50   124.00
18.2QUA   18.2GB IDE Quantum Fireball KA 7200rpm 8.5ms ATA 66   192.50   189.00
 
Associate
Joined
24 May 2011
Posts
166
Regarding the X470 vs. X570. I usually do long term builds (current build is 8 years old). I'll probably hand on to my next build for 5-6 years at least. PCI-E 4.0 is the only reason to upgrade really. What are peoples thoughts on the relevancy of PCI-E 4.0 in the coming years? I never get top end cards really. Mid-high tier cards mainly (Thinking of a 2070 Super and will upgrade to the next one in 3-4 years). Is PCI-E 4.0 worth it for me?
 
Soldato
Joined
13 Jun 2009
Posts
6,847
Regarding the X470 vs. X570. I usually do long term builds (current build is 8 years old). I'll probably hand on to my next build for 5-6 years at least. PCI-E 4.0 is the only reason to upgrade really. What are peoples thoughts on the relevancy of PCI-E 4.0 in the coming years? I never get top end cards really. Mid-high tier cards mainly (Thinking of a 2070 Super and will upgrade to the next one in 3-4 years). Is PCI-E 4.0 worth it for me?
I also keep my rigs for ages (current is over 10 years old) but decided PCIe 4.0 was not useful. I don't even have any cards that require PCIe 3.0 (except for GPU) at the moment, and in fact a lot of cards run at 1.0 or 2.0 speeds even if advertised as being 3.0 compatible.
 
Permabanned
Joined
23 Apr 2014
Posts
23,553
Location
Hertfordshire
Regarding the X470 vs. X570. I usually do long term builds (current build is 8 years old). I'll probably hand on to my next build for 5-6 years at least. PCI-E 4.0 is the only reason to upgrade really. What are peoples thoughts on the relevancy of PCI-E 4.0 in the coming years? I never get top end cards really. Mid-high tier cards mainly (Thinking of a 2070 Super and will upgrade to the next one in 3-4 years). Is PCI-E 4.0 worth it for me?

There is a review floating around on PCI-E 4 vs the others and it offered no appreciable benefit "at the moment" for current GPU's.
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Feb 2015
Posts
12,616
PS/2 had a brief resurgence couple years ago, before they figured out how to do n-key rollover and polling rates above 125Hz on USB. And allow fancy keyboards into BIOS. Not relevant these days

There is still demand for ps/2 but people just kind of shut up as it seemed a losing battle.

Also some people use ps/2 kvm's on consumer boards.

The way I see it it takes up space for 1 or 2 usb ports, but if you already got 6+ usb on a board anyway (typically 8 with front ports), then I see adding a ps/2 port for that flexibility vs usb ports that will never get used as more useful.

I have a usb keyboard, usb mouse, usb printer, 2 phones connected, usb powered headphone amplifier, gamepad, usb microphone. Which is a fair few devices and still have 5 available ports.

Its a bit like the arguments that its better to keep spare unused hdmi ports on a gpu over having the flexibility of dvi. Flexibility is usually king.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
18 May 2010
Posts
22,371
Location
London
This AMD slide has the 3800x 9% faster in multi thread than the 3700x.

AMDjpg-1280x640.jpg
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Feb 2015
Posts
12,616
So Anandtech just posted a twitter message saying they are redoing their CPU tests because of a new bios showing very different boost behavior.

D-8fA7DXUAAmQUf

This looks like p-states got tuned to be more aggressive, i expect to boost media review scores, but probably bad for real world use as it makes the cpu's less efficient, I noticed my 2600X has way too agressive p-states vs my 8600k probably for the same reason. Simply opening notepad on my 2600X takes it to max boost clocks.
 
Back
Top Bottom