Small but heavy .... Livingroom Gem build.....

[Memmento Mori]

So i got the opportunity to build a small living room gem for movie watching, gaming, browsing and maybe future photo and video editing.... 

 

And im struggling in a heavy way... to many options and not sure about anything, so i decided to put you through it as well.  

 

Most parts im looking to buy second hand to safe some money as the friend wants to spend it on a nice case rather as it has to be in the living room....  So I did some research and here started my struggle. AMD or Intel? 7950X3D/9950X3D or 14900K? As its not for me and i don't want to have any troubleshooting problems of a unstable platform, I tend to go AM5, which is even second-hand more expensive than the Intel platform. But 7000/9000 series cpus are a better fit for gaming and workloads then intel currently.... More future proved?  

 

Case will be  NCASE M2 Grater (best compromise between performance, space, and look i found so far - any advice is welcome) In respect of thermals, it should not be a problem - case support the Thermalright perles asasin mini and just bought thermal grizly delider for AM5 (20 EUR secondhand - what a deal  ) so i can delid Intel and AM5 so it should be fine....

 

Next looking into the motherboards. Found a deal for the MSI MPG B650I edge Wi-Fi for about 150 EUR - used just 3 weeks with full warranty VS ROG STRIX B850-I GAMING Wi-Fi new from the store, which is about 310 EUR - 380 EUR. The difference is PCIE4 VS PCIE5, the asus one has more conectivity options and never wifi standard (which is not possible to use yet here) but is it worth the money? Does it makes sense?  The GPU will probably be a 9070 from AMD if i don't find a good deal for something better for the same price range and the SSD M2 disks will be the PCIE 4 WD blacks as i have some spare ones... Any experience from Reallife or constructive thoughts? Any aspect i forgot? 

 

BTW 9070XT - enough for 4K TV gaming? 

 

PSU: Cooler Master SFX Platinum 1300W - found one for 130 EUR - good or not? The seller claims it's louder than he is used to. For this he is selling it, but any concerns eventually experience to share?  Or should i rather go with a classic ATX PSU ?

 

Any advice and thought will be appreciated   Thank you

[Kaz]

55 minutes ago, Memmento Mori said:

7950X3D/9950X3D or 14900K

The only reason to go intel is the integrated graphics, which is useful for running Virtual Machines.  VM usage doesn't look like something you're interested in, so I would recommend AMD.  14900K had problems with degrading, there was a microcode update, and a 3 year extension of the warranty, but I certainly wouldn't de-lid one.  Guaranteed they won't honor the warranty if it's delidded, and no amount of thermal cooling will make up for a CPU zapping itself to death.  Supposedly it's fixed, but we won't truly know until???  It hasn't been long enough for degredation to show up since the micro code update.

 

AMD has better performance, and uses less power, which puts it at a clear advantage.

1 hour ago, Memmento Mori said:

So i got the opportunity to build a small living room gem for movie watching, gaming, browsing and maybe future photo and video editing.... 

 

"Maybe, and future" are expensive investments.  If you want a computer that is future proof, the only sure way is to build it in the future.  I think you are over spending on the CPU and could go with an 800 series X3D.  The x3D cores are only on the first CCD.  A 9800X3D has 1 CCD with 8 cores, a 9900X3D has 2 CCD's with 6 cores each (making it only have 6 X3D cores and a clear loser for gaming).  The 9950X3D has 2 CCD's with each having 8 cores, only one of them has X3D cache making it 8 cores that have X3D cache.  Windows doesn't have a great way to assign cores to a specific task, so it's possible to have games using non-X3D cores and gaming performance can vary. 

 

That makes the 9800X3D the best gaming CPU, and the 9950X3D the best workhorse.  You can still video edit with 8 cores, it's just going to take longer than 16 cores.  If you aren't spending hours doing it, the time difference is probably inconsequential and not something you will recognize/notice.  I'd also point out that the time difference is a compute difference, and not the amount of time it takes someone to figure out what they want to change and how to change it.

 

Intel 14700K is also a decent option if you still want to go Intel.  The only advantage the 14900K has is more e-cores, which you don't want doing the gaming processing anyways.

 

Would I get the 9800X3D or the 7800X3D?  That would depend on the market, my budget and the goals.  The CPU will make a bigger difference at 1080p than 1440p or 4k.  If going with a lower CPU allows for a better graphics card and higher resolution, I'd choose that.  1080p tends to be CPU bound, while just about anything else will be limited by the graphics card.  At 4K resolution it's going to be a smaller difference, although it does supposedly help the 1% lows, but those are rare by nature.

 

1 hour ago, Memmento Mori said:

Next looking into the motherboards. Found a deal for the MSI MPG B650I edge Wi-Fi for about 150 EUR - used just 3 weeks with full warranty VS ROG STRIX B850-I GAMING Wi-Fi new from the store, which is about 310 EUR - 380 EUR. The difference is PCIE4 VS PCIE5, the asus one has more conectivity options and never wifi standard (which is not possible to use yet here) but is it worth the money? Does it makes sense?  The GPU will probably be a 9070 from AMD if i don't find a good deal for something better for the same price range and the SSD M2 disks will be the PCIE 4 WD blacks as i have some spare ones... Any experience from Reallife or constructive thoughts? Any aspect i forgot? 

 

No graphics cards are fully saturating PCIE 4, so PCIE 5 is really for storage, and since you already have PCIE 4 m2 drives, I don't think it's worth spending additional money on.

 

I don't know much about the power supply or cases on the market, so I can't help there. 

 

1 hour ago, Memmento Mori said:

BTW 9070XT - enough for 4K TV gaming?

9070XT should be a good experience for 4K gaming, but don't expect to max out the graphic settings of games without some upscaling.  If you don't want to use upscaling, I suggest knocking shadow details down a notch or two.  Shadows are very hard on GPU performance.  My brain doesn't pay attention to how much detail is in a shadow, only that there is a shadow and I should be looking at what is causing it.

 

Let us know how it goes!

[Slaughtahouse]

What's the primary use for your client? Sounds like it's everything under the sun. 

 

If it's a living room PC and "maybe" there would be some photo / video editing, you don't need the highest end components. I'd would try to stick with lower power parts for a quieter build. 

 

Used Zen 4 on AM5 will be plenty for a long while, especially for gaming at 4K. E.g., 7800X3D or 7950X (non 3D) would both be good options since they're likely to be on the second hand market. Next is simply defining priority.

- If media consumption, 7800X3D.

- If editing, 7950X.

I wouldn't go for 7900/7950 X3D versions since I've heard they're cumbersome for the user to get the most out of the chips for gaming. 7950X on ECO mode and the 7800X3D both sip like 100w under load... Both should be easy to keep quiet, especially when viewing/listening to content in a living room.

 

9070 / 9070 XT / 7900 XT / 7900 XTX / 4070 Ti / 5070 Ti are all good options IMO for 4K / 60fps+ gaming. All have 16GB or more VRAM. Nvidia should only be favoured IMO if they predominantly play games with RT. Alan Wake, Cyberpunk, Outlaws, Black Myth Wukong etc.

 

Pick your poison factoring size, power consumption etc. Of course you could spend more but if I had to pick today, 9070XT would be my go to. Since its 7900 XT / XTX like performance with better RT and FSR4 support. 

 

PCIE4 will be good for a long time, even if PCIE5 quickly replaces it. The rest, really up to you and reviews. If the MSI board is reliable, go for it.

 

Good luck!

 

[Mr. Fox]

ASUS A21 baby tower is what I think to be the best SFF case you can buy and also one of the most affordable. I'd have to say it is my favorite and I spent weeks looking at alternatives that were almost entirely a huge turn-off due to the sacrifice of function for form factor to the point that it just wasn't worth it; not to mention anything somewhat interesting was usually grossly overpriced and a very poor value. Second favorite, but borderline too small, is the ASUS AP201. Both will support a 360 AIO for better temps and quieter operation. I've owned both.  You can find fancier cases that cost a whole lot more and offer a lot less functionality.

Edited March 30 by Mr. Fox

[Memmento Mori]

12 hours ago, Mr. Fox said:

ASUS A21 baby tower is what I think to be the best SFF case you can buy and also one of the most affordable. I'd have to say it is my favorite and I spent weeks looking at alternatives that were almost entirely a huge turn-off due to the sacrifice of function for form factor to the point that it just wasn't worth it; not to mention anything somewhat interesting was usually grossly overpriced and a very poor value. Second favorite, but borderline too small, is the ASUS AP201. Both will support a 360 AIO for better temps and quieter operation. I've owned both.  You can find fancier cases that cost a whole lot more and offer a lot less functionality.

 Thank you for the advice, but the buyer declined bcs of the design of it so inhave to stick to the M2 grater case. 

 

 

20 hours ago, Slaughtahouse said:

What's the primary use for your client? Sounds like it's everything under the sun. 

 

If it's a living room PC and "maybe" there would be some photo / video editing, you don't need the highest end components. I'd would try to stick with lower power parts for a quieter build. 

 

Used Zen 4 on AM5 will be plenty for a long while, especially for gaming at 4K. E.g., 7800X3D or 7950X (non 3D) would both be good options since they're likely to be on the second hand market. Next is simply defining priority.

- If media consumption, 7800X3D.

- If editing, 7950X.

I wouldn't go for 7900/7950 X3D versions since I've heard they're cumbersome for the user to get the most out of the chips for gaming. 7950X on ECO mode and the 7800X3D both sip like 100w under load... Both should be easy to keep quiet, especially when viewing/listening to content in a living room.

 

9070 / 9070 XT / 7900 XT / 7900 XTX / 4070 Ti / 5070 Ti are all good options IMO for 4K / 60fps+ gaming. All have 16GB or more VRAM. Nvidia should only be favoured IMO if they predominantly play games with RT. Alan Wake, Cyberpunk, Outlaws, Black Myth Wukong etc.

 

Pick your poison factoring size, power consumption etc. Of course you could spend more but if I had to pick today, 9070XT would be my go to. Since its 7900 XT / XTX like performance with better RT and FSR4 support. 

 

PCIE4 will be good for a long time, even if PCIE5 quickly replaces it. The rest, really up to you and reviews. If the MSI board is reliable, go for it.

 

Good luck!

 

 

 

On 29/03/2025 at 09:26, Kaz said:

The only reason to go intel is the integrated graphics, which is useful for running Virtual Machines.  VM usage doesn't look like something you're interested in, so I would recommend AMD.  14900K had problems with degrading, there was a microcode update, and a 3 year extension of the warranty, but I certainly wouldn't de-lid one.  Guaranteed they won't honor the warranty if it's delidded, and no amount of thermal cooling will make up for a CPU zapping itself to death.  Supposedly it's fixed, but we won't truly know until???  It hasn't been long enough for degredation to show up since the micro code update.

 

AMD has better performance, and uses less power, which puts it at a clear advantage.

 

"Maybe, and future" are expensive investments.  If you want a computer that is future proof, the only sure way is to build it in the future.  I think you are over spending on the CPU and could go with an 800 series X3D.  The x3D cores are only on the first CCD.  A 9800X3D has 1 CCD with 8 cores, a 9900X3D has 2 CCD's with 6 cores each (making it only have 6 X3D cores and a clear loser for gaming).  The 9950X3D has 2 CCD's with each having 8 cores, only one of them has X3D cache making it 8 cores that have X3D cache.  Windows doesn't have a great way to assign cores to a specific task, so it's possible to have games using non-X3D cores and gaming performance can vary. 

 

That makes the 9800X3D the best gaming CPU, and the 9950X3D the best workhorse.  You can still video edit with 8 cores, it's just going to take longer than 16 cores.  If you aren't spending hours doing it, the time difference is probably inconsequential and not something you will recognize/notice.  I'd also point out that the time difference is a compute difference, and not the amount of time it takes someone to figure out what they want to change and how to change it.

 

Intel 14700K is also a decent option if you still want to go Intel.  The only advantage the 14900K has is more e-cores, which you don't want doing the gaming processing anyways.

 

Would I get the 9800X3D or the 7800X3D?  That would depend on the market, my budget and the goals.  The CPU will make a bigger difference at 1080p than 1440p or 4k.  If going with a lower CPU allows for a better graphics card and higher resolution, I'd choose that.  1080p tends to be CPU bound, while just about anything else will be limited by the graphics card.  At 4K resolution it's going to be a smaller difference, although it does supposedly help the 1% lows, but those are rare by nature.

 

 

No graphics cards are fully saturating PCIE 4, so PCIE 5 is really for storage, and since you already have PCIE 4 m2 drives, I don't think it's worth spending additional money on.

 

I don't know much about the power supply or cases on the market, so I can't help there. 

 

9070XT should be a good experience for 4K gaming, but don't expect to max out the graphic settings of games without some upscaling.  If you don't want to use upscaling, I suggest knocking shadow details down a notch or two.  Shadows are very hard on GPU performance.  My brain doesn't pay attention to how much detail is in a shadow, only that there is a shadow and I should be looking at what is causing it.

 

Let us know how it goes!

thank you both for your thoughts and yes i agree with you but unfortunatelly the one cheap b650 is without warranty in the end and im not going to pay 160€ for a board without warranty when i can buy new one of the same for 220€ and now the dilema continues - 320€ is the asus strix b850 board new so hmmmmm

 

same with the cpu 7800x3d used is about 380€ and new one for 420€ and 9800x3d is for about 520€ so hmmm 

 

so basically used older platform vs new older platform vs new and new platform…  tending to the middle way new but older platform?

 

intel based on the degradation problems im going ti awoid bcs i dont want to have the maintanence problems asnamd seems as a safer bet for this scenario… i can jist rest in peace that it will work without problems…

 

and thank you for the discussion here, its exactly what i was looking for… 

 

sorry for the typos im on a phone and having clumsy fat fingers so just be patience… 

 

 

 

[Kaz]

Used vs new is a lot tougher decision.  I tend to buy the latest greatest and use it for 8+ years.  I'm an enthusiast, and I don't think that's the optimal solution for most people.  Most enthusiast upgrade more frequently.  I think most people won't know the difference between a processor generation, but if you ask them what they would like to buy with 140€, they can give a good answer to that.  In truth, it's going to depend more on what they are playing than anything else.  For most people, buying a couple years old stuff and upgrading in 5 years makes more sense. 

 

For competitive FPS games, newer generation stuff makes a difference.  Almost anything else, it's not really a factor.  Sadly, I think the display makes the biggest difference for competitive FPS games.  When playing Spelunky 2 on an entry level OLED TV, there's almost half a second delay on button press.  It's playable, but it takes some getting used to.  Half a second delay when shooting someone is a lot tougher to deal with.  It takes good angles and holding positions rather than challenging people in straight up gunfights.  There is a reason games are easier with cross-play enabled.  TV gamers don't have the quickest response time. 

 

With all my high end gear, most of the games I play are 10 years old.  That's why I don't upgrade very often, if it works, it works.  *shrug*

I think for anyone's first computer, can it run?  Is the real question.  There's no need to go all out to have an enjoyable experience.  People get sucked in and buy that $1200 graphics card, but they don't use it enough to care that it's a couple FPS faster in some games.  For anyone who really enjoys computers, or is a bit older and has more money available, buying high end makes sense.  Then again, my Dad's retired and he still runs 12 year old computers that he bought 2nd hand because they can run his glider sim/VR and that's all he cares about.

 

But you know, everyone needs a 5080 for minecraft! 

[Fluxmaven]

I don't get why everyone thinks they are going to be a photo or video editor these days and thinks they need a crazy workstation to do so. When you learn to drive, most people don't go out and buy an F350 dually as a first vehicle just in case they might need to tow something someday. 

 

Get a 7800X3D or 9800X3D. If your PC doesn't make you money, there is no reason to bother with anything else. For gaming either of those CPUs will be amazing. For photo/video editing they will also be plenty fast. Especially for someone that's just dabbling in it.

 

Get the cheaper motherboard. You won't notice a difference in performance and the money would be better spent elsewhere.

 

If that "maybe" turns into a reality and they start editing regularly and it becomes a priority that would benefit from a CPU upgrade, the X3D chips will always be in high demand. So you could easily sell it and grab a Zen 6 chip when those come out.

[bonami2]

Intel got ways better idle power comsumption if am not wrong. But the 13900k lose alot of performance under 150w while the ryzen lose ways less performance at 150w. I would go ryzen.

Used 13900k are cheaper and perform about the same as 14900k 14900ks if tdp limited.

If new i would go ryzen if idle power use is not an issue.

[Memmento Mori]

On 05/04/2025 at 15:37, bonami2 said:

Intel got ways better idle power comsumption if am not wrong. But the 13900k lose alot of performance under 150w while the ryzen lose ways less performance at 150w. I would go ryzen.

Used 13900k are cheaper and perform about the same as 14900k 14900ks if tdp limited.

If new i would go ryzen if idle power use is not an issue.

 

 

so small status report, i went for an AMD build and for now have the following:

 

1, The SX1000 is a 1000w 80+ Platinum SFX-L fully modular power supply - 88 EUR - Review - @Avacado - any long term experience sharing?

2, MSI MPG B650I edge Wi-Fi - 145 EUR

3, AMD 9800X3D - 450 EUR

 

wish me luck witht he MOBO and CPU hope its not a scam or broken prats  

 

BTW - any recomendation for RAM? - G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo 32GB 6400MHz CL30 AM for 100 EUR OK or not so much?  Price performace should ok right? 

 

Edited April 7 by Memmento Mori

[pio]

36 minutes ago, Memmento Mori said:

 

 

so small status report, i went for an AMD build and for now have the following:

 

1, The SX1000 is a 1000w 80+ Platinum SFX-L fully modular power supply - 88 EUR - Review - @Avacado - any long term experience sharing?

2, MSI MPG B650I edge Wi-Fi - 145 EUR

3, AMD 9800X3D - 450 EUR

 

wish me luck witht he MOBO and CPU hope its not a scam or broken prats  

 

BTW - any recomendation for RAM? - G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo 32GB 6400MHz CL30 AM for 100 EUR OK or not so much?  Price performace should ok right? 

 

Sounds like a solid build!

I went with the Patriot Viper Venom 64GB DDR5-6400 CAS32 kit myself (which tightens up no problem to CAS 30 at 6400).  CL @ 30 at 6400 speeds SEEMS to be a pretty good sweet spot, at least when I was looking about 2 months ago for RAM.  If you think 32GB is enough for your needs, a lot of people like those Neo sticks.  If you're after tweaking performance, I cannot speak as DDR5 is like greek to me still.  If you're looking for EXPO and go settings, those are probably a solid bet for ease of installation and performance.

[Memmento Mori]

22 hours ago, pio said:

Sounds like a solid build!

I went with the Patriot Viper Venom 64GB DDR5-6400 CAS32 kit myself (which tightens up no problem to CAS 30 at 6400).  CL @ 30 at 6400 speeds SEEMS to be a pretty good sweet spot, at least when I was looking about 2 months ago for RAM.  If you think 32GB is enough for your needs, a lot of people like those Neo sticks.  If you're after tweaking performance, I cannot speak as DDR5 is like greek to me still.  If you're looking for EXPO and go settings, those are probably a solid bet for ease of installation and performance.

 

Thanks for the information, and yes i bought it, its a fair price as the seller bought it for 165 EUR a month ago   and yeah im not going to OC the machine, i need it rock solid stable no mather what.. the user will be more focused on stability then on anything else.... and as already menatoned im not willing to get calls all day long bcs something not working...  

[Memmento Mori]

I have a new Request or Question. 

 

How do you connect the PC (MSI MPG B650I edge Wi-Fi) and 9070XT with Sony Bravia OLED XR-55A80L and the klipsch the sevens?

 

PC to TV by HDMI for audio and video input and optical cable TV to Klipsch? 

 

Or 

 

PC to TV by HDMI for audio and video input and HDMI ARK cable TV to Klipsch? 

 

Any advice? 

[pio]

12 hours ago, Memmento Mori said:

I have a new Request or Question. 

 

How do you connect the PC (MSI MPG B650I edge Wi-Fi) and 9070XT with Sony Bravia OLED XR-55A80L and the klipsch the sevens?

 

PC to TV by HDMI for audio and video input and optical cable TV to Klipsch? 

 

Or 

 

PC to TV by HDMI for audio and video input and HDMI ARK cable TV to Klipsch? 

 

Any advice? 

I believe the usual answer is send the signal to the AVR first, and then out from the AVR to the TV.  

Coax / optical is capable of 5.1 channel.  HDMI is capable of 7.1 / THX / Atmos if I remember correctly from when I was diving into this on my TV setup.

I think @Fluxmaven might know a better answer though?  He's been way more into home theater type stuff than I have been lately.

If you're only doing 5.1 channels though, I think the easiest solution is likely just using the HDMI ARC capabilities.  If you're after more than 5.1, I'd probably want to research a little more carefully before recommending something.

[Fluxmaven]

1 hour ago, pio said:

I believe the usual answer is send the signal to the AVR first, and then out from the AVR to the TV.  

Coax / optical is capable of 5.1 channel.  HDMI is capable of 7.1 / THX / Atmos if I remember correctly from when I was diving into this on my TV setup.

I think @Fluxmaven might know a better answer though?  He's been way more into home theater type stuff than I have been lately.

If you're only doing 5.1 channels though, I think the easiest solution is likely just using the HDMI ARC capabilities.  If you're after more than 5.1, I'd probably want to research a little more carefully before recommending something.

Their audio setup "Klipsch The Sevens" are just stereo speakers not a full AVR. So no surround formats to consider. It's just 2.0 (or 2.1 since it does have a sub output). 

 

With that in mind, I'd just do HDMI from PC to TV, then HDMI from TV to speakers since ARC will turn the speakers on/off with the TV. Unless you have interference issues from other nearby equipment, there isn't really any quality difference using Optical. 

 

 

[Memmento Mori]

Thank you guys for your advices and thoughts.  Highly appreciated. Got the tv running with the klipsch for now and have to complete the pc… great to have you guys!