Building a new PC for Elite: Dangerous Odyssey (hardware discussion)

[Alec Turner]

Almost entirely because of the extra cores. More cores, even E-cores, are a big deal...for anything that will actually use them (e.g. not most games).



It counts a lot for a significant number of games and a fair number of other memory sensitive tasks. CPUs only need to reach out to main memory if they cannot find what they need in local cache, and more than 90% of work is done on less than 10% of data. Increasing cache size increases cache hit rates which means fewer cycles wasted waiting on main memory. It takes ~40 cycles to get something in the L3. It takes 300+ to get something out of main memory.



AMD's v-cache parts are, so far, outliers. They have three times the L3 cache of their standard equivalents, but run at lower clock speeds and are more locked down.

Some prior CPUs have had unusually large last level caches, relative to their contemporaries, which has occasionally had similar effect on gaming performance. The AMD K6-II/III+ (one of the first consumer CPUs with a significant integrated L2 cache), the Pentium IV EE Galatin (a rebranded Xeon with a 2MiB L3 cache) and the 5th Generation Core i5/7 Broadwell-C parts (with a 64MiB eDRAM L4 cache) are some examples.



SRAM is expensive and does not scale well (logic is still shrinking with newer manufacturing nodes, but SRAM is largely stagnant), which is why to get larger amounts of it economically, it has to be stacked. Intel has no stacked caches, yet.

More last level cache makes up for slower memory, to an extent, and faster memory makes up for less cache, again, to an extent. Intel's consumer CPUs are monolithic and have lower memory latency because of it. AMD's chiplet CPUs have the memory controller on package, but not on the same die as the CPU cores, which makes comparable main memory performance harder to achive...and is one of the reasons the cache helps AMD CPUs so much.



Because it's the same gaming performance for less total platform cost and one third of the power.

CPUs cost the roughly same, but you cannot cheap out on an i7 motherboard because it will throttle heavily, or fail early, if you do. Likewise you cannot get by without a high-end CPU cooler because the i7 will throttle. Nor can you really cheap out on memory, because the platform scales very well with memory.

The 7800X3D will run as fast as it's going to run (outside of the hands of an extreme OCer) on a $125 motherboard with a $40 cooler, plus whatever 2x16GiB kit of DDR5 that can be had for 90 bucks. You can also run it with a PSU 100-200w less than would be recommended for an i7 or i9, all other things being equal. All in all, this is typically enough to sping for the next step up in GPU, which is a huge deal for gaming.

Great response, thanks. Very timely too. I've been doing a fair bit of research into the i7-14700KF over the weekend and am starting to have second thoughts about that CPU. Firstly it clearly runs hot under load, with most reviews recommending a good water cooled system to avoid it overheating and throttling its performance. Given I don't really want to go down the water cooled route and am also favouring a case which perhaps doesn't allow for optimum air circulation I'm worried about that now. Compared to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D (which is clearly a tried, tested and really efficient gaming focused CPU), or even the i5 14600KF, the i7 sounds more like a bit of a power/mobo/memory greedy workhorse CPU than a thoroughbred gaming CPU. I also hadn't realised how new it was so it seems like it hasn't had time to really prove itself in the field yet or feature in a lot of gaming focused reviews. My only concern over the 7800X3D is that it sounds really brilliant when focused on gaming but not so great for other things like video rendering etc (which I do a fair amount of).

And then there's the 4070Ti vs. 4080 thing. Yes, the 4080 does perform a fair bit better than the 4070Ti, but for £300 more so it should (and common "wisdom" is that by the time you've paid that you might as well get a 4090, and that way leads madness imho). @Morbad threw together a 4080 build for me for a similar price to my original i7-14700KF which I've linked here but I''m still tempted to stick with the 4070Ti (unless prices change in the next month or super versions of those GPU's come out) and maybe just go with a more refined CPU choice and bring the overall price down a bit?

I'd appreciate further thoughts on the i5 14600KF as an alternative (which seemed to come up in a fair few "best gaming CPU for 2023" type reviews) and also on what memory to pair with either that or the 7800X3D (I gather the latter is only really rated for 5200MHZ DDR5?).

 

[Helmut Grokenberger]

Great response, thanks. Very timely too. I've been doing a fair bit of research into the i7-14700KF over the weekend and am starting to have second thoughts about that CPU. Firstly it clearly runs hot under load, with most reviews recommending a good water cooled system to avoid it overheating and throttling its performance. Given I don't really want to go down the water cooled route and am also favouring a case which perhaps doesn't allow for optimum air circulation I'm worried about that now. Compared to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D (which is clearly a tried, tested and really efficient gaming focused CPU), or even the i5 14600KF, the i7 sounds more like a bit of a power/mobo/memory greedy workhorse CPU than a thoroughbred gaming CPU. I also hadn't realised how new it was so it seems like it hasn't had time to really prove itself in the field yet or feature in a lot of gaming focused reviews. My only concern over the 7800X3D is that it sounds really brilliant when focused on gaming but not so great for other things like video rendering etc (which I do a fair amount of).

And then there's the 4070Ti vs. 4080 thing. Yes, the 4080 does perform a fair bit better than the 4070Ti, but for £300 more so it should (and common "wisdom" is that by the time you've paid that you might as well get a 4090, and that way leads madness imho). @Morbad threw together a 4080 build for me for a similar price to my original i7-14700KF which I've linked here but I''m still tempted to stick with the 4070Ti (unless prices change in the next month or super versions of those GPU's come out) and maybe just go with a more refined CPU choice and bring the overall price down a bit?

I'd appreciate further thoughts on the i5 14600KF as an alternative (which seemed to come up in a fair few "best gaming PC for 2023" types reviews) and also on what memory to pair with either that or the 7800X3D (I gather the latter is only really rated for 5200MHZ DDR5?).

I have no personal experience with the 7800X3D or the i7 in question, but I just wanted to chime in with the caveat that the AMDs can run hot, too, especially on air. Now I'm one generation behind, and I run a R9 and not a R7, so take this with a grain of salt. My CPU is the 5900X, and I run it on air cooling, and it has been a bit of a challenge. For one because of my case size - I have a Sharkoon BW9000, and between my 3080ti and the CPU cooler (I use a Noctua NH-U12A) my case is full, and I had to invest in some good case cooling to keep my temperatures in check; I have five additional fans running on my case to help the airflow, two 140 mm intakes at the front, a 120 mm exhaust in the rear and two 140 mm exhausts at the top. In reality my case is probably too small.

The other thing (maybe Morbad can explain it better) is that the AMDs have this what I call "race to finish" behavior (I don't know if modern Intels do that to; I would assume so). As long as the CPU operates within the set power and current limits of what they call PBO2, the system will boost individual cores as far as it can (up to the set limit). I guess this is to maximize performance in single core or mixed loads. The result on my system is that it can produce more heat with only a few cores loaded and thus boosted near the 5 GHz mark than on an all-core load with lower core clocks. In the former case my CPU easily reaches 85°C (the thermal throttle limit is 90°C), in the latter case it sits at more or less relaxed 78°C.

What I'm saying: Those AMDs are designed to run hot (well, they are designed to use all the power you allow them to use), you will need good cooling and air flow, and you can't start panicking (should you go the AMD route) when you see 80+ on your CPU under load. It's probably rather normal unless you have a giant case with perfect cooling and airflow.

Edit: Maybe that was too rambly. The CPU has somewhat conservative default parameters of course, but the better your cooling is, the more you can push these for the optimum performance. As always. But the modern higher performing Ryzens still run "warm".

 

[STRONTIUM DOG]

anyting going above or = to the 4070 is job done in my book and that corsair vengeance ddr5 is blisteringly good ram
morbad really is the man ere to consult on your final choice's good luck with whatever you choose 07
cpu wise i found elite is just not that demanding really.......
having knoked up various builds im my m8 repairs shop to toy around with such as building a pc inside a cardboard box for the crack
he did say he was gona sling in some 7 gand fanless nvida an take a photo but that was a month ago now............
(and he gone off to thailand)

 

[Northpin]

My only concern over the 7800X3D is that it sounds really brilliant when focused on gaming but not so great for other things like video rendering etc (which I do a fair amount of).

You should only be concerned it your "other things" mean some Adobe stuff that is well known to run much better on Intel than it does on Amd.
Like for example Adobe Premiere - which makes use of Intel Quicksync to kinda smoke AMDs out of the picture.
However, since you opted for a KF intel processor - which lacks integrated graphics which is the basic requirement for Intel QuickSync - that tells me you are not really into Adobe Premiere.

Also you should be concerning about X3D processor if you are dead set to overclock them - well, due to the extra cache and restrictions it imposes, they're kinda locked in that regard. But if you dont buy processors to oc the hell outa them... X3D cpus are quite dandy

 

[Morbad]

I also hadn't realised how new it was so it seems like it hasn't had time to really prove itself in the field yet or feature in a lot of gaming focused reviews.

The 14th gen isn't really new. It's just a second release of Raptor Lake (13th gen), which itself was a refinement of Alder Lake. The architecture and manufacturing process behind the 14700K is quite mature.

My only concern over the 7800X3D is that it sounds really brilliant when focused on gaming but not so great for other things like video rendering etc (which I do a fair amount of).

Noting which apps you use and what sort of work you do in them will allow you to look up specific benchmarks. Also keep in mind what can and cannot be run on the GPU.

There are large gaps in relative performance in some areas, but it's not like the 7800X3D is slow.

And then there's the 4070Ti vs. 4080 thing. Yes, the 4080 does perform a fair bit better than the 4070Ti, but for £300 more so it should (and common "wisdom" is that by the time you've paid that you might as well get a 4090, and that way leads madness imho).

There are large price gaps between the 4070 Ti, 4080, and 4090, but performance scales almost linearly here, so there isn't really a sweet spot past which the bigger GPU doesn't make sense, unless constrained by the games one intends to play or the display one expect to use.

Pick a minimum performance target and a budget, then fit what fits.

I'd appreciate further thoughts on the i5 14600KF as an alternative (which seemed to come up in a fair few "best gaming CPU for 2023" type reviews) and also on what memory to pair with either that or the 7800X3D (I gather the latter is only really rated for 5200MHZ DDR5?).

The 14600K(F) is a solid choice, especially if limited to air cooling. Bit of an all-rounder. If ordering from PCS keep the same board and 6000MT/s memory, unless you need to squeeze a bigger GPU into the budget.

Both platforms are officially limited to fairly low memory speeds, but PCS doesn't even sell memory that would begin to push the limits of either. The Intel parts scale a bit better than the AMD X3D parts, and you can get away with cheaper memory on the 7800X3D without it being as much of a potential hit, but with recent firmware (which PCS should be using) pretty much every 7800X3D is good for at least 6000-6400MT/s on the memory, even on budget boards. I'd probably also take the 6000 MT/s stuff, unless 5600 or 5200 is significantly cheaper.

Like for example Adobe Premiere - which makes use of Intel Quicksync to kinda smoke AMDs out of the picture.
However, since you opted for a KF intel processor - which lacks integrated graphics which is the basic requirement for Intel QuickSync - that tells me you are not really into Adobe Premiere.

Most of the stuff that one can use QuickSync for can also be accelerated with NVENC and even Alec's lowest end GPU choice (the 4070 Ti) has the fastest and most modern NVENC version available. It's why I tentatively recommended the KF over the K...the IGP would mostly only be a diagnostic tool.

 

[Jack Winter]

FWIW, I watched a youtuber the other night complaining about the recent x3d processors. He claimed problems with the switching on and off of cores when switching between games and other workloads. Some games even running on the wrong set of cores.. Apparently he also had long term problems with the RAM, and had to run it at stock speeds and not the advertised EXPO speeds. Of course this might have been down to motherboard, RAM, and his own setup and ability to troubleshoot and fix things..

I have to admit that I'm in the camp of Intel/Nvidia since many years.. But from what I understand an Intel CPU paired with enough good/fast RAM, and an upper tier Nvidia card makes for an awesome video editing workstation, and good gaming. Take my opinion with a pinch of salt, I'm not an all out fan boy, but clearly biased! And no doubt others will prefer an AMD solution.

As regards cooling I upgraded into a smaller older case (10 years old) designed to run cool and without a lot of fan noise. My upgrade was a B660 Asus motherboard, an Intel 12900k + Noctua NH-D15, and a Nvidia 4090 FE. The CPU cooler kept it cool enough for playing Elite and some light video editing in Resolve. What it couldn't do was for instance to run Cinebench without the CPU quickly being thermal throttled. Things improved a lot once I got a Lian Li Lancool III with 3 front intake fans, the increased airflow dropped both CPU and GPU temps, but Cinebench will still throttle the CPU but far less severely than before. Again temps while playing Elite are excellent. My conclusion is that I'll be ok with the system as is, but if I want to really load down all the cores of the CPU I'd be better advised to add liquid cooling for the CPU.

I think it's probably a question of what one does with the PC, most likely air cooling is good enough, but to max out the CPU load on all cores it would profit from liquid cooling..

If you're really concerned about CPU temps, maybe an AIO would be in order. Maybe something like this: https://www.arctic.de/en/Liquid-Freezer-II-360/ACFRE00068B

 

[AlSki]

I've been doing a fair bit of research into the ....

Welcome to the slippery slope. ;-)

All this research leads to knowledge, and with that comes the possibility for future upgrades or even tackling a build yourself in the future. And if you consider upgrades, then you free yourself from worrying about making the perfect choices right now.

I started with my First machine just to play ED, and since then it's become much like Trigger's broom. I might be using the same power cable that plugs into the wall, but nothing else. I'm on my second CPU, third GPU, etc.

 

[Morbad]

FWIW, I watched a youtuber the other night complaining about the recent x3d processors. He claimed problems with the switching on and off of cores when switching between games and other workloads. Some games even running on the wrong set of cores..

Scheduling on heterogeneous processors can be tricky. Multi-CCX AMD parts can potentially have threads sent to the wrong CCX for the workload and this is exacerbated when the CCXes have significantly different capabilities (e.g. one standard CCX, on with v-cache). Intel is not immune to scheduling issues either, with applications that incorrectly use, or fail to use, E-cores occasionally being problematic (a recent example would be Atlas Fallen).

However, this doesn't apply to the 7800X3D. The 7800X3D is entirely homogeneous. It has one CCX on one CCD with eight virtually identical cores that are all essentially fungible. There are fewer potential scheduling issues with a 7800X3D than there are with any of the non-X3D dual-CCX AMD parts and fewer potential issues than with any Intel part that has active E-cores.

Apparently he also had long term problems with the RAM, and had to run it at stock speeds and not the advertised EXPO speeds. Of course this might have been down to motherboard, RAM, and his own setup and ability to troubleshoot and fix things..

This is almost certainly a problem with memory manufacturer's EXPO profile, or a defective memory kit that can't run at settings it was binned to run at. XMP has long had similar issues. In general, if one is pushing memory significantly further than the platform officially supports, pre-overclocked profiles are pretty hit or miss. Anyone who knows what they are doing sets their memory parameters manually.

Not really relevant for a pre-built, as it's the integrator's responsibility to make sure everything works at whatever settings they advertise.

 

[Alec Turner]

T(h)inkering continues but this is where I'm currently at ..

Case​

FRACTAL NORTH TG GAMING CASE (WHITE)​

Processor (CPU)​

AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D Eight Core CPU (4.2GHz-5.0GHz/104MB w/3D V-CACHE/AM5)​

Motherboard​

ASUS® TUF GAMING B650-PLUS WIFI (AM5, DDR5, PCIe 4.0, Wi-Fi 6)​

Memory (RAM)​

32GB Corsair VENGEANCE RGB DDR5 6000MHz (2 x 16GB)​

Graphics Card​

12GB NVIDIA GEFORCE RTX 4070 Ti - HDMI, DP, LHR​

1st M.2 SSD Drive​

1TB SOLIDIGM P44 PRO GEN 4 M.2 NVMe PCIe SSD (up to 7000MB/sR, 6500MB/sW)​

1st Storage Drive​

2TB Samsung 870 QVO 2.5" SSD, SATA 6Gb/s (up to 560MB/sR | 530MB/sW)​

External DVD/BLU-RAY Drive​

8x Slim USB 2.0 External DVD-RW​

Power Supply​

CORSAIR 850W RMx SERIES™ MODULAR 80 PLUS® GOLD, ULTRA QUIET​

Power Cable​

1 x 1.5 Metre UK Power Cable (Kettle Lead, 1.0mm Core)​

Processor Cooling​

PCS FrostFlow 200 Series High Performance CPU Cooler​

Thermal Paste​

ARCTIC MX-4 EXTREME THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY COMPOUND​

Extra Case Fans​

3 x Corsair AF120 RGB ELITE PWM Fan + Controller Kit​

Sound Card​

ONBOARD 6 CHANNEL (5.1) HIGH DEF AUDIO (AS STANDARD)​

Network Card​

ONBOARD 2.5Gbe LAN PORT​

USB/Thunderbolt Options​

MIN. 2 x USB 3.0 & 2 x USB 2.0 PORTS @ BACK PANEL + MIN. 2 FRONT PORTS​

The 7800X3D is winning out because, being honest with myself, the PC is far more about gaming than anything else. I make videos but it's hardly hardcore video processing work, more just using Windows free Movie Maker for general ED video capture editing (although I wouldn't mind switching to a full featured free video editor like VSDC, HitFilm or Resolve) plus a bit of Sony DVD Architect Studio once a year to compile all the family home videos onto a menu based DVD for my son to watch. I'm guessing running a pile of lowish intensity 3rd party ED app's in the background while playing Elite (Joystick Curves, TrackIR, Voice Attack, EDDI, EDCoPilot) doesn't really count for much?

P.S. I do find PCSpecialist's USB options really confusing as it seems like their more expensive offerings have less ports but then it's not at all clear what they mean by "+ standard USB ports" so I may end up asking them some questions about that (their cheapest USB option is shown here as opposed to the more expensive offering shown in the OP of this thread).

 

[Fish172]

I would be less worried about number of ports as they just drawer power from the system. Better off with large multiport external usb bank with its own power
Or as I did, two of them and minimal pc usb use.

 

[AlSki]

P.S. I do find PCSpecialist's USB options really confusing as it seems like their more expensive offerings have less ports but then it's not at all clear what they mean by "+ standard USB ports"

It looks like "+ standard USB ports" refers to what is on the rear of the motherboard, plus what goes in the front panel connector.

You are selecting from an optional Add-in Card to give you MORE

So from https://www.asus.com/uk/motherboards-components/motherboards/tuf-gaming/tuf-gaming-b650-plus-wifi/
Green = Back of case
Yellow = What you/PCS choose to connect to front panel of the case (can be used for other stuff too, but that's getting custom).
From https://www.fractal-design.com/products/cases/north/north/chalk-white/

• Front interface
  1xUSB 3.1 Gen 2 Type-C, 2xUSB 3.0, Audio & Mic

Red = Add in "PCI-E" slots

And plugging into one of the Add-in slots (i.e. the bit you are selecting)

e.g. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Expansion-...hvlocphy=&hvtargid=pla-4584276316277420&psc=1

 

[Northpin]

Most of the stuff that one can use QuickSync for can also be accelerated with NVENC and even Alec's lowest end GPU choice (the 4070 Ti) has the fastest and most modern NVENC version available. It's why I tentatively recommended the KF over the K...the IGP would mostly only be a diagnostic tool.

yes and no.
Quicksync supports more formats than NVENC, and while exporting one can use both QS and NVENC to speed up thigs better than using NVENC alone.
And quicksync may come in handy if one has a camera that shoots in a format not supported by NVENC, like for example HEVC 4:2:2

but that seems to be no issue for Alec so the 7800X3D is the better choice especially when budget matters

edit: i know it's a bit dated, but it should still be valid

 

[Morbad]

Quicksync supports more formats than NVENC, and while exporting one can use both QS and NVENC to speed up thigs better than using NVENC alone.

Most all archival video should be AV1 at this point. QuickSync on CPUs isn't going to support AV1 until Meteor Lake, which leaves it a pretty narrow niche if one isn't burning UltraHD Blu-rays or making files for playback on specific smart TVs. There is some use for H.264 still, if one is live streaming, but even that is going the way of AV1 soon, and both NVENC and the CPU itself (via software) are quite capable with the H.264 formats likely to be accepted.

And quicksync may come in handy if one has a camera that shoots in a format not supported by NVENC, like for example HEVC 4:2:2

I'm not a camera or video production expert, but who uses 4:2:2 and why does one need to encode to their camera's format?

1st M.2 SSD Drive​

1TB SOLIDIGM P44 PRO GEN 4 M.2 NVMe PCIe SSD (up to 7000MB/sR, 6500MB/sW)​

1st Storage Drive​

2TB Samsung 870 QVO 2.5" SSD, SATA 6Gb/s (up to 560MB/sR | 530MB/sW)​

While I don't think you'll notice any huge differences based between SSDs in general, this is an odd setup.

If you need to cut corners on storage, use a smaller/slower M.2 system drive (which is not going to negatively impact much of anything) and a larger/faster M.2 drive for games. If you then need to add another drive for bulk storage, you're probably better off doing that yourself...and a QLC drive is pretty borderline for use as a video recording drive due to the limited P/E cycles.

2.5" drives are also more internal clutter, though I suppose that is more PCS' problem, at least until you decide to upgrade something yourself.

Processor Cooling​

PCS FrostFlow 200 Series High Performance CPU Cooler​

The cheaper PCS air cooler is the better option as it will cool the 7800X3D just as well, for less. With this CPU low-mid end thermal resistance, not total heat capacity will be the limiting factor and five heatpipes directly in contact with the IHS where two of them pass directly over the CCD are at least as good as seven where only one does, especially when they are further separated by an extra several mm of copper.

The higher-end Intel CPUs will simply saturate any air cooler at full load. The 7800X3D will still run warm, temperature wise, but the thermal bottleneck is not even at the cooler (it's at the three thermal interfaces--two silicon oxide bonding layers holding the structual parts of the stacked die together, then a layer of solder TIM) before the heat even reaches the underside of the IHS) so spending more on the cooler is senseless.

I'm guessing running a pile of lowish intensity 3rd party ED app's in the background while playing Elite (Joystick Curves, TrackIR, Voice Attack, EDDI, EDCoPilot) doesn't really count for much?

No.

P.S. I do find PCSpecialist's USB options really confusing as it seems like their more expensive offerings have less ports but then it's not at all clear what they mean by "+ standard USB ports" so I may end up asking them some questions about that (their cheapest USB option is shown here as opposed to the more expensive offering shown in the OP of this thread).

Unless you're doing something pretty unusual you shouldn't need more ports on the system proper than what you see on the back of the board, plus whatever is on the case (attached via internal headers).

If you need a USB hub to sit on your desk to connect your controls or whatever to, buy a powered USB hub.

 

[Alec Turner]

It looks like "+ standard USB ports" refers to what is on the rear of the motherboard, plus what goes in the front panel connector.

You are selecting from an optional Add-in Card to give you MORE

So from https://www.asus.com/uk/motherboards-components/motherboards/tuf-gaming/tuf-gaming-b650-plus-wifi/
Green = Back of case
Yellow = What you/PCS choose to connect to front panel of the case (can be used for other stuff too, but that's getting custom).
From https://www.fractal-design.com/products/cases/north/north/chalk-white/

• Front interface
  1xUSB 3.1 Gen 2 Type-C, 2xUSB 3.0, Audio & Mic

Red = Add in "PCI-E" slots

View attachment 373472

And plugging into one of the Add-in slots (i.e. the bit you are selecting)

e.g. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Expansion-...hvlocphy=&hvtargid=pla-4584276316277420&psc=1

View attachment 373475

Nice explanation, thanks!

Here's the confusing thing with PCS tho' ... they offer these options (cheapest at top, more expensive at bottom) ..

But how can the 1st one not include the standard ports, and if it does include them, then it looks like it offers more ports than the 2nd and 3rd options? (but that can't be right?)

 

[Fish172]

First I think says 6 ports total. (that is the standard ports imho)
Second 8 ports
Third also 8 ports but one of them will be USB C

 

[Alec Turner]

First I think says 6 ports total. (that is the standard ports imho)
Second 8 ports
Third also 8 ports but one of them will be USB C

Except … even the first is an add on. I don’t even have to pick that (and possibly won’t following advice here) in which case I’d still get the standard ports anyway no?

 

[Alec Turner]

While I don't think you'll notice any huge differences based between SSDs in general, this is an odd setup.

My naive thinking was 1TB of more expensive fast M.2 for Windows and games that might benefit and then 2TB of cheaper SSD storage for videos, photos, etc etc. What would you suggest for a similar capacity? (apologies if you’ve already told me and thanks for your patience in advance )

 

[Morbad]

edit: i know it's a bit dated, but it should still be valid

Two points in response to the current validity of that content:

1. HEVC is already on the way out.
2. The encoder (actually dual encoders) on the RTX 4070 Ti and faster Ada parts is dramatically better than what's on the RTX 3090.

Video Encode and Decode GPU Support Matrix

Find the related video encoding and decoding support for all NVIDIA GPU products.

developer.nvidia.com

There are also concurrent session patches for the consumer parts (which I apply to most of my custom packages with NVCleanstall), so there is no limit on the number of simultaneous encoder sessions, other than what the hardware is capable of. Some of the performance hit in game streaming with NVENC also comes from NVIDIA's default use of the P2 performance state whenever CUDA is engaged, which cuts VRAM speed noticeably. This can be disabled and I've never had an NVIDIA part that had a problem with it being disabled.

Except … even the first is an add on. I don’t even have to pick that (and possibly won’t following advice here) in which case I’d still get the standard ports anyway no?

The first option says 'minimum', meaning you'll get at least what's there, but not less than what's implied elsewhere.

They aren't going to rip ports off the motherboard and probably aren't going to remove or not plug in ports on the case, so I cannot imagine getting less than what is highlighted in the motherboard image @AlSki has posted, except for those USB 2.0 headers, which the case doesn't have ports for.

To reiterate, the cheapest option (which is nothing extra) means:

2x USB 3.2 Gen 2 C ports
2x USB 3.2 Gen 1 A ports
4x USB 2.0 A ports

all on the back of the system, plus:

1x USB 3.2 Gen 1 C port
2x USB 3.2 Gen 1 A port

on the case, which the board has headers for.

My naive thinking was 1TB of more expensive fast M.2 for Windows and games that might benefit and then 2TB of cheaper SSD storage for videos, photos, etc etc. What would you suggest for a similar capacity?

I'm inclined to recommend a smaller OS+app drive to make it easier to back up (boot and app launch times are still going to be pretty damn snappy, and probably not even I/O limited, on even the PCS branded drives), then a big+fast game drive for all game installs, plus an external drive (probably mechanical) for backups, video recordings, and assorted storage.

Adding another budget M.2 for more local storage or editing files that are too slow to edit comfortably on a mechanical drive makes some sense, if it fits in your budget. You still need to make backups though and they need to be somewhere else (preferably multiple somewhere elses).

I'm half tempted to recommend that you only get a basic OS drive and add all the rest yourself, as it would certainly be cheaper. Adding drives is not complicated.

 

[Alec Turner]

I'm inclined to recommend a smaller OS+app drive to make it easier to back up (boot and app launch times are still going to be pretty damn snappy, and probably not even I/O limited, on even the PCS branded drives), then a big+fast game drive for all game installs, plus an external drive (probably mechanical) for backups, video recordings, and assorted storage.

Adding another budget M.2 for more local storage or editing files that are too slow to edit comfortably on a mechanical drive makes some sense, if it fits in your budget. You still need to make backups though and they need to be somewhere else (preferably multiple somewhere elses).

I'm half tempted to recommend that you only get a basic OS drive and add all the rest yourself, as it would certainly be cheaper. Adding drives is not complicated.

Backups I'm fine with (I have a bunch of external SSD's which I rotate on a semi-regular basis plus I burn a year's worth of family photos to DVD) and actually I doubt my backup space requirements will change much (I tend not to bother backing up stuff I can just re-download like game files, instead focusing on the irreplaceable stuff like personal Windows folders, home photos/videos, ED binding and log files, josytick and TrackIR config's, etc, etc). So what I'm hearing is maybe stick with the 1TB C: drive (I could downgrade to 512GB I suppose but it's only £30 less) but add a 2nd 2TB M.2 for all my games rather than the SSD? (and maybe just fit that myself - I actually just added one to my existing PC and it was trivial).

 

[Morbad]

Backups I'm fine with (I have a bunch of external SSD's which I rotate on a semi-regular basis plus I burn a year's worth of family photos to DVD) and actually I doubt my backup space requirements will change much (I tend not to bother backing up stuff I can just re-download like game files, instead focusing on the irreplaceable stuff like personal Windows folders, home photos/videos, ED binding and log files, josytick and TrackIR config's, etc, etc).

I image my entire OS drive so if something happens I can get my system config to exactly what it was at that time with minimal hassle. Even having done it a thousand times, with scripts for various settings and the like, getting Windows back the way I want it is tedious (and gets more tedious with every new release of Windows).

So what I'm hearing is maybe stick with the 1TB C: drive (I could downgrade to 512GB I suppose but it's only £30 less) but add a 2nd 2TB M.2 for all my games rather than the SSD? (and maybe just fit that myself - I actually just added one to my existing PC and it was trivial).

M.2s are SSDs, but yes, an NVMe M.2 drive is preferable to an SATA drive and 1TB is pretty skimpy if you play more than a few games at a time.

I checked the controllers and prices on all their drives and I think this would be the best option: https://www.pcspecialist.co.uk/saved-configurations/amd-am5-pc/PDX37d34Au/ (I left out the external DVD drive again as unless PCS sells the cheapest external DVD drives around, there doesn't seem to be much sense in having the system integrator include an external device that needs zero configuration on their part).

The Corsair Force MP600 uses a Phison E16 first-gen PCI-E 4.0 controller, which is still plenty fast and has a good endurance rating. I have four 1TB Phison E16 drives (three Sabrent and one Gigabyte, but they're all functionally identical) spread across various systems and I've been pleased with them.

The Solidigm P44 Pro is essentially an SK Hynix P41 with better firmware and is one of the fastest PCI-E 4.0 drives, and one of the fastest game drives currently available. It's easily a match for the slightly more expensive Samsung 990 they offer.

PCS' drive numbering and parition options don't seem to allow one to clearly dictate which M.2 slot the drives will go into, or which drive will contain the OS. Since both M.2_1 and M.2_2 are attached to the CPU and both drives are PCI-E 4.0, it shouldn't matter which of these slots they go in (as long as it's not M.2_3), but you do want the OS on the smaller drive. I assume they will put it on the first drive listed, but you should contact them to be clear on this.

There is also a configuration option possible on the Phison E16 (the Corsair Force MP600) drive. These are 512e/4kn advanced format parts that typically default to emulate 512 byte sectors. They are slightly faster if set to 4k logical sectors and changing this after the fact will erase the drive. It's not a huge deal, but you should ask for them to set the Corsair drive to 4k sector size, if possible.

Another omission on PCS' part is the specs on the memory. Corsair sells at least two versions of that Vengance RGB kit. One is CL40 the other is CL36, the CL36 kit is highly preferable. You should get clairification here as well (and a list of what the specs of all the kits they offer are), and consider a cheaper kit if all they have is the CL40 one (because signficantly tighter timings could well match the performance, for less).