Any upgrade possibilities for my PC?

[DaemonForce]

All you need to know is that I'm a guy on a pair of 32GB kits telling you that you don't need 64GB.
Unless you have an absolutely MASSIVE workflow with 3D models and VR components you'll rarely squeak beyond 24GB.
If you do any kind of memory overclocking, you'll want to stick to a single pair of DIMMs anyway.
The only thing in this list that could possibly be holding you back from whatever is the 3060Ti.
I don't see anything wrong with your build.

I use my PC for livestreaming, video editing and some rendering. Minimal to zero gaming, though...

Are there any parts on my backup PC that I could add to my main PC, perhaps? Probably not since it's an AMD PC and my main is Intel, so I should leave it as it is, right?

You're fine. If you rely on the backup PC as a stream ingest server or doing the heavy lifting for overlays, stream tools or whatever else it should be fine.
Even if you don't, that main PC should be more than enough to handle the stream controls, scene/overlay management and all the other assets without hitching.
My trio is a Ryzen 5 3600, FX-8370 and Athlon 2650e. I depend on accelerators like a Quadro P620, Seagate WarpDrive and operate a stupid amount of storage.
I've found that it's best to stick to a particular build philosophy for recording but streaming is fine too. Your pairing should run circles around mine. Easily.

 

[winterwonderland]

All you need to know is that I'm a guy on a pair of 32GB kits telling you that you don't need 64GB.
Unless you have an absolutely MASSIVE workflow with 3D models and VR components you'll rarely squeak beyond 24GB.
If you do any kind of memory overclocking, you'll want to stick to a single pair of DIMMs anyway.
The only thing in this list that could possibly be holding you back from whatever is the 3060Ti.
I don't see anything wrong with your build.

You're fine. If you rely on the backup PC as a stream ingest server or doing the heavy lifting for overlays, stream tools or whatever else it should be fine.
Even if you don't, that main PC should be more than enough to handle the stream controls, scene/overlay management and all the other assets without hitching.
My trio is a Ryzen 5 3600, FX-8370 and Athlon 2650e. I depend on accelerators like a Quadro P620, Seagate WarpDrive and operate a stupid amount of storage.
I've found that it's best to stick to a particular build philosophy for recording but streaming is fine too. Your pairing should run circles around mine. Easily.

I've decided to not do any upgrades on my main PC just yet. It's not like I am struggling with my current setup anyway. It's still nice to get an input and ideas on what my options are in case I'd do any upgrades.

The only thing would probably be an upgrade on the GPU if I'd sell the on I currently have. How is the GPU on my main PC vs. the one on the backup PC?

 

[Chrispy_]

I've decided to not do any upgrades on my main PC just yet. It's not like I am struggling with my current setup anyway. It's still nice to get an input and ideas on what my options are in case I'd do any upgrades.

The only thing would probably be an upgrade on the GPU if I'd sell the on I currently have. How is the GPU on my main PC vs. the one on the backup PC?

Check your local ebay equivalent (finn.no?)

The 6700XT probably has more life as a gaming GPU because it has 12GB so I'd imagine it's worth more than the 3060Ti.
Over here I'm seeing used 6700XT selling for ~€200+ and the 3060Ti selling for ~€175.

If you're using CUDA at all, then get rid of the Radeon to fund something like a 5060Ti 16GB (acceptable card for the money, IMO). If you're not using CUDA at all then the 9600XT is a really nice option. The way CUDA is claiming more and more of the productivity and AI market, the less sense a Radeon makes as a non-gaming investment.

 

[Shrek]

Unless you have an absolutely MASSIVE workflow with 3D models and VR components you'll rarely squeak beyond 24GB.

I agree, all that extra RAM will probably just go unused.

 

[GerKNG]

i would say a 14700k but not with DDR4, so swapping your board for that makes no sense and it increases the total price by so much that it is not worth it, and the 12700k on its own is good enough to not make a full upgrade to another platform a good idea either.

i'd keep it as it is and buy a 9070XT until a real upgrade in the future becomes sensible and affordable.

 

[dgianstefani]

i would say a 14700k but not with DDR4, so swapping your board for that makes no sense and it increases the total price by so much that it is not worth it, and the 12700k on its own is good enough to not make a full upgrade to another platform a good idea either.

i'd keep it as it is and buy a 9070XT until a real upgrade in the future becomes sensible and affordable.

So, again, a AMD GPU (and not a cheap one) for a non-gamer doing work on their PC?

Did you read the thread? Where a stronger GPU (7900XTX) is almost 3x slower than the next NVIDIA GPU for the relevant work OP is doing...

Or is default advice - buy latest AMD GPU?

 

[Shrek]

How about you replace the motherboard of your main (Intel) machine, using the DDR5 RAM from your backup PC?

 

[winterwonderland]

How about you replace the motherboard of your main (Intel) machine, using the DDR5 RAM from your backup PC?

Hmm, but isn't the mobo on the AMD PC suited for AMD CPU's?

 

[Shrek]

I am suggesting you reuse your Intel CPU

 

[Lost_Troll]

Sell your intel system and upgrade your 7600X (sell it to get some money back) to a 7700X or 9700X and get a 5060 or 9060 16Gb video card. You will be faster then upgrading you intel system with an 12900.

This is what I did, but I am running a 7900XT.

 

[winterwonderland]

Sell your intel system and upgrade your 7600X (sell it to get some money back) to a 7700X or 9700X and get a 5060 or 9060 16Gb video card. You will be faster then upgrading you intel system with an 12900.

This is what I did, but I am running a 7900XT.

Even if I am NOT gaming?

 

[RootinTootinPootin]

Even if I am NOT gaming?

just hold out on spending, if it ain't broke, don't mess with it..

you'll have plenty of options since next gen "again" is just around the corner..

 

[Shrek]

I was thinking about doubling my current RAM to 64GB or maybe 96GB

Reason not to get DDR4 (DDR5 is now cheaper)

DDR4 Module Prices Overtake DDR5 for the First Time

Usually for newer technology rollout, prices are significantly higher compared to the last-gen. However, with DRAM, the story is the opposite. For the first time since the launch of DDR5, buyers are paying more for DDR4 memory modules than for the newer standard. A combination of tariff...

www.techpowerup.com

But do you really fill what you have already?

 

[RootinTootinPootin]

But do you really fill what you have already?

there's plenty cheap of random die chips, only Samsung B-Dies are worth the buck for DDR4 and those Hynix DJR's that to 5000MT's, I still have my quad channel 32GBkit and Dual Channel 32GB Samsung B-Die kits..looking for something to run em wild..

32GBs is still plenty enough for non-gaming tasks (like what he said) and what he has already isn't shabby at all..3600MT's CL16 isn't half bad at all..

 

[dgianstefani]

Even if I am NOT gaming?

No, lol. 90% of these comments are gamers not reading the thread. Hence AMD recommendations.

 

[ARF]

Are there any upgrade possibilities to my main PC, perhaps?

I use my PC for livestreaming, video editing and some rendering. Minimal to zero gaming, though...

Despite no gaming, the weak unit is your low-end graphics card. Buy an Radeon RX 9070 16GB and call it a day.

 

[Chrispy_]

Despite no gaming, the weak unit is your low-end graphics card. Buy an Radeon RX 9070 16GB and call it a day.

I can't agree with that.

Radeon is so far behind Geforce in so many popular workloads that it's not even funny. We used to be a full Radeon studio - because 8-10 years ago CUDA didn't matter and VRAM capacity/FLOPS was the only metric applications compared about.

That software ecosystem is gone, consigned to history. You need API support these days which means CUDA, and Radeons don't offer more VRAM any more either. ROCm, HIP, and Vulkan compute are a joke - not because they're bad technologies, but because almost nothing popular supports them, and if you convert CUDA applications to those APIs the performance is as bad as software emulation - you can lose 80-90 of your CUDA performance easily.

 

[ARF]

I can't agree with that.

Radeon is so far behind Geforce in so many popular workloads that it's not even funny. We used to be a full Radeon studio - because 8-10 years ago CUDA didn't matter and VRAM capacity/FLOPS was the only metric applications compared about.

That software ecosystem is gone, consigned to history. You need API support these days which means CUDA, and Radeons don't offer more VRAM any more either. ROCm, HIP, and Vulkan compute are a joke - not because they're bad technologies, but because almost nothing popular supports them, and if you convert CUDA applications to those APIs the performance is as bad as software emulation - you can lose 80-90 of your CUDA performance easily.

I can't agree with that.
You buy Radeon in order to support the competition and fight the criminal / illegal actions by Nvidia.
It's a political decision.

 

[Chrispy_]

I can't agree with that.
You buy Radeon in order to support the competition and fight the criminal / illegal actions by Nvidia.
It's a political decision.

Look, I'm just a consumer. I buy the hardware to use the software. I'm telling you how it is, not how I'd like it to be.

If you don't like the situation, go and campaign against the software developers who are writing CUDA apps and optimising for Nvidia. Part of the problem is that Nvidia has been investing hundreds of billions of dollars a year into CUDA alone. They're the big bad evil empire, but they're the company making APIs, providing tools for developers to use, collaborating with all of the biggest players in the software sector and putting by far the most effort into improving the entire process. Their ulterior motive is of course because they profit from this market dominance. CUDA alone is a $3.5trillion market for Nvidia - and most of the R&D is going into API and developer support.

ROCm, on the other hand is just one of several R&D projects AMD has, and AMD's entire $6.5Bn R&D budget doesn't even count as a fart by Nvidia's standards.

Why you say "support the competition" that's fine, as long as the competition is viable. In the productivity market, it really isn't any more. Too many of the most popular applications - even for self-employed individuals and small businesses on a tight budget - they simply suck unless you're running Nvidia.

 

[dgianstefani]

Look, I'm just a consumer. I buy the hardware to use the software. I'm telling you how it is, not how I'd like it to be.

If you don't like the situation, go and campaign against the software developers who are writing CUDA apps and optimising for Nvidia. Part of the problem is that Nvidia has been investing hundreds of billions of dollars a year into CUDA alone. They're the big bad evil empire, but they're the company making APIs, providing tools for developers to use, collaborating with all of the biggest players in the software sector and putting by far the most effort into improving the entire process. Their ulterior motive is of course because they profit from this market dominance. CUDA alone is a $3.5trillion market for Nvidia - and most of the R&D is going into API and developer support.

ROCm, on the other hand is just one of several R&D projects AMD has, and AMD's entire $6.5Bn R&D budget doesn't even count as a fart by Nvidia's standards.

Why you say "support the competition" that's fine, as long as the competition is viable. In the productivity market, it really isn't any more. Too many of the most popular applications - even for self-employed individuals and small businesses on a tight budget - they simply suck unless you're running Nvidia.

Not only that, but they've been (along with the added, significant, efforts of industry partners and individual developers) cumulatively doing that for years. So it's not like one year of massive effort, it's the continous evolution of the basic stuff, plus more and more levels of advanced stuff, plus an ecosystem where everything ties in with everything else. Why was the cutting off of further support of 32 bit CUDA at the hardware level such a big deal? Because it is so rare for NVIDIA to drop support for something. In this case it was necessary for the platform as a whole to advance, but it still made news everywhere, and the community (especially AMD users who couldn't even use 32 bit Physx anyway) made an uproar.

For AMD to compete they need to start now, make it their number one priority, and even then it would be ten years or so of continous effort before they even come close, meanwhile NVIDIA would continue to advance. AMD has done some decent stuff recently research wise, and is making some efforts in the right direction, but they still seem to have a #2 mentality and are quick to raise prices if they are perceived to have a better product (see Zen), so the moral argument is weak.

I can't agree with that.
You buy Radeon in order to support the competition and fight the criminal / illegal actions by Nvidia.
It's a political decision.

This is a technical forum, not a political one, so seeing political/moral arguments for buying inferior hardware/software is beyond laughable, beyond arguably being against the rules. Act according to your own principles, but advising others on limited budgets, who value their time, to buy products that perform several times worse, or even orders of magnitude worse is not just bad advice, but is both misleading and immoral, when you don't state that it's for these reasons up front.

 

[Chrispy_]

This is a technical forum, not a political one, so seeing political/moral arguments for buying inferior hardware/software is beyond laughable, beyond arguably being against the rules.

Exactly this.
Telling an internet stranger who is asking for advice to throw themselves under the bus for your own political beliefs is highly questionable, definitely dishonest.

 

[winterwonderland]

I lost interest the moment when I saw the word "political", which has absolutely nothing to do with this for me...

So far, I am leaning towards selling my backup PC, but before selling it, I will swap the M.2 drives from the backup to my main PC, then keep the main PC as it is, since it is working like it should, and then at some later stage/year, sell my main PC and go for a DDR5 Intel PC setup instead, since Intel is what wins pretty much all the necessary tests for my purposes, meaning NOT gaming.

I mean, my friend will be ordering this pc shortly, and it seems to be a very powerful one, so I will check within a year or two how the status is then and then see what I'll do: https://www.prisjakt.no/list/pc-2025--l2242868

 

[Chrispy_]

Sounds like a solid plan. Your "backup" PC is still fit for purpose and your friend's 96GB 265K system with a 16GB 5060Ti looks like a very solid workstation that's high on performance/$

 

[Lost_Troll]

Even if I am NOT gaming?

Yes, I did this for engineering work that I do besides gaming.

No, lol. 90% of these comments are gamers not reading the thread. Hence AMD recommendations.

He asked about upgrading one of his system's, and the AMD system is faster then his Intel and has a better upgrade path since it uses DDR5. With just a CPU change and then a RAM upgrade, it would be faster then an Intel 13th or 14th gen with the DDR4 the OP would have to run. IMO..Running an Intel 13th or 14th gen CPU with DDR4 is like putting lipstick on a pig and trying to take it out.

Also the power drawing on the Intel systems is allot higher then the AMD system would be, and this was my other reason for making the change.

 

[dgianstefani]

He asked about upgrading one of his system's, and the AMD system is faster then his Intel and has a better upgrade path since it uses DDR5. With just a CPU change and then a RAM upgrade, it would be faster then an Intel 13th or 14th gen with the DDR4 the OP would have to run. IMO..Running an Intel 13th or 14th gen CPU with DDR4 is like putting lipstick on a pig and trying to take it out.

All of this is false for the workloads he does and the budget he was considering. Literally twice the money on AM5 to get the "same" performance as a 14700/900K or a 265K. It's not the same though, because no Quicksync. AM5 is dominant at literally one thing, gaming, and that's assuming you use an X3D chip paired with at least a $1000 GPU, and play at 1440/1080p high refresh, both completely irrelevant workloads to OP. DDR4/DDR5 only matters for cost/capacity and for gaming at low resolution/settings, for most workloads the speed differences are irrelevant, and for the workloads OP has, are definitely irrelevant.

All that is just CPU wise BTW. For GPU in the various workloads he does, a $350 4060 Ti 16 GB is faster than a $700 9070XT or a $750 7900XTX, because CUDA. But you still see AYYYYMD fanboys recommend their beloved cards for non gaming purposes.

Of course, the fanboys laughing at these facts won't share objective test data supporting their claims, they'll just keep spouting irrelevant BS, and proffering bad advice.

Also the power drawing on the Intel systems is allot higher then the AMD system would be, and this was my other reason for making the change.

Borderline meaningless, you're talking $25 extra a year, if that. An extra 50-100 W at max load is irrelevant, when the objective is price/performance. With ARL, it's margin of error difference at load, and both RPL and ARL are signficantly more efficient at light load, which incidentally is where the computer will spend most of it's time, not full synthetic load.

I lost interest the moment when I saw the word "political", which has absolutely nothing to do with this for me...

So far, I am leaning towards selling my backup PC, but before selling it, I will swap the M.2 drives from the backup to my main PC, then keep the main PC as it is, since it is working like it should, and then at some later stage/year, sell my main PC and go for a DDR5 Intel PC setup instead, since Intel is what wins pretty much all the necessary tests for my purposes, meaning NOT gaming.

I mean, my friend will be ordering this pc shortly, and it seems to be a very powerful one, so I will check within a year or two how the status is then and then see what I'll do: https://www.prisjakt.no/list/pc-2025--l2242868

Oh that's your friend, lol. Nice. He was in another thread. I would suggest a slightly better mobo, but the one he's picked out is still good.