Best Mini-ATX board for 2700 or 2700x ? Also, which CPU?

bizzmeister

bizzmeister

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 26, 2010
Messages
2,439
hey guys, trying to build a decent gaming PC with an AMD chip for once.

Looking to get a solid 4.0ghz on air or wherever the small box case permits. Don’t want a crazy over clock by any means, just something decent for gaming.


Do you go with the 2700x or the 2700 ? I see that there is only a $50 or so difference between the 2 on Amazon. Don’t mind paying extra at all. Gonna be doing 144hz 1920x1080 gaming. This mini gaming box I want to build will be used for literally nothing else but gaming.

This will all be housed inside the ThermalTake Core V21 mini box.


Thanks for your input! Looking forward to hearing what you guys have to say!
 
Which games will you be playing, exactly?

It's important you supply that info, if you want 144hz in online games. There's a big variation on how many cores are supported, and sometimes Intel takes a commanding lead.
 
whateverer said:
Which games will you be playing, exactly?

It's important you supply that info, if you want 144hz in online games. There's a big variation on how many cores are supported, and sometimes Intel takes a commanding lead.
Click to expand...

Overwatch, PUBG, Apex Legends, Black Ops 4, Battlefield 5 Firestorm, CS:GO


I’m used to playing on my build in my sig and that runs everything flawlessly @ 1440p and its super old with that 4770k. That’s why I’m thinking I’ll be just fine with either ? Especially at a lower res like 1920x1080
 
"Commanding" is relative as the AMD chip will get you generally ~80% of what a high end Intel chip will get you. 1080p will show the single core strength of Intel. Intel will get you more FPS now. AMD gets you a better upgrade path. If you're using it "only" for gaming, I'd probably go with something like the 9400F and an Intel mITX board. Or maybe a 8700 non-k if only because of the thermal constraints. But in a year, you can throw in a Zen2 or Zen2+/Zen3 chip if you go AMD. With Intel you're probably looking at a new socket for the next gen chips as they've had 2 generations on this socket already. Honestly, in a gaming only build, I'd go 2600X if you're looking at AMD as it will go over 4Ghz. Similar price to the 6C/6T Intel chips.
 
kirbyrj said:
"Commanding" is relative as the AMD chip will get you generally ~80% of what a high end Intel chip will get you. 1080p will show the single core strength of Intel. Intel will get you more FPS now. AMD gets you a better upgrade path. If you're using it "only" for gaming, I'd probably go with something like the 9400F and an Intel mITX board. Or maybe a 8700 non-k if only because of the thermal constraints. But in a year, you can throw in a Zen2 or Zen2+/Zen3 chip if you go AMD. With Intel you're probably looking at a new socket for the next gen chips as they've had 2 generations on this socket already. Honestly, in a gaming only build, I'd go 2600X if you're looking at AMD as it will go over 4Ghz. Similar price to the 6C/6T Intel chips.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the info, will definitely look into the 2600x too
 
Yeah., you could jump on the 2600x today for cheap, and then go with a Zen 2 8 or 12-core next year. That will keep you solid for the next 5 years, as the PS5 is expected to have Zen 2 8-core.

Of the games on your list, only PUBG And BF5 are 20% faster on Intel - everything else plays the same on both CPUs.

Intel is having serious chip supply problems (if you want anything cheaper than n$350), and is not expected to resolve this until the end of the year, so Zen 2 will be able to roll all over Intel's midrange, while challenging the top-end. That is why they preemptively released the 9900k, so they could at least iron-out the supply problems (and cash-in on $500 CPUs) a few months before they will have to make price cuts.
 
Last edited:
https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/TUF-B450M-PRO-GAMING/

I'd look for that board in mATX. Seems to have better VRM than the TUF "Plus" board and better onboard sound. Only thing is it is tough to find. I've only seen it on eBay for around $130. The "Plus" version is $90-110 depending on where you look.

Sounds like you're actually looking for a mini-ITX board and not a micro ATX according to your other thread.
 
Last edited:
kirbyrj said:
https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/TUF-B450M-PRO-GAMING/

I'd look for that board in mATX. Seems to have better VRM than the TUF "Plus" board and better onboard sound. Only thing is it is tough to find. I've only seen it on eBay for around $130. The "Plus" version is $90-110 depending on where you look.

Sounds like you're actually looking for a mini-ITX board and not a micro ATX according to your other thread.
Click to expand...


Yes exactly, thank you. I will check that board out and change out the title on the other thread over there.
 
kirbyrj said:
"Commanding" is relative as the AMD chip will get you generally ~80% of what a high end Intel chip will get you. 1080p will show the single core strength of Intel. Intel will get you more FPS now. AMD gets you a better upgrade path. If you're using it "only" for gaming, I'd probably go with something like the 9400F and an Intel mITX board. Or maybe a 8700 non-k if only because of the thermal constraints. But in a year, you can throw in a Zen2 or Zen2+/Zen3 chip if you go AMD. With Intel you're probably looking at a new socket for the next gen chips as they've had 2 generations on this socket already. Honestly, in a gaming only build, I'd go 2600X if you're looking at AMD as it will go over 4Ghz. Similar price to the 6C/6T Intel chips.
Click to expand...

9400F is an awful recommendation. It can't overclock, and its boost is a meager 4.1 ghz, which means in many cases it'll be slower than a 2600(x) overclocked to 4.0 all-core. They both don't have IGP's so it fails on the small value an added IGP can have in troubleshooting as well. 9400F just.. really doesn't compete very well with AMD for an enthusiast. 8700 non-k could be a solid recommendation, as it's clocked a fair bit higher than the 9400F, but the EOL for LGA 1151 is likely upon us and the only upgrade left on that socket is the 9900k, which is solid, but is unlikely to ever be a cheap upgrade and I imagine is very hard to cool in a constrained environment.

For gaming on AMD, I'd probably recommend going with the 2600 non-x if you're planning on overclocking. This allows you to save some money and have the ability to upgrade with a Zen 2 & I believe(?) Zen 2+ series in the future(3xxx & 4xxx series).
 
bizzmeister said:
Gonna be doing 144hz 1920x1080 gaming.
Click to expand...

This is your decision point- 144Hz implies 144FPS, realistically more, and that demands very high single-core performance. AMD's single-core performance is good, no doubt, but there's a very real ~4.2GHz ceiling. Intel's cores are faster per GHz and can run to 5.0GHz+.

I'd look at the 8600K or 9600K, and figure out how to fit a Corsair H80 or equivalent AIO, or perhaps the largest Noctua HSF, into the build.


[I'll also add that the mentions above regarding upgradeability with AMD's AM4 products aren't bad, just that we don't yet know whether AMD will really get the per-core performance up to where Intel's cores are at 5.0GHz]
 
Stoicz said:
9400F is an awful recommendation. It can't overclock, and its boost is a meager 4.1 ghz, which means in many cases it'll be slower than a 2600(x) overclocked to 4.0 all-core. They both don't have IGP's so it fails on the small value an added IGP can have in troubleshooting as well. 9400F just.. really doesn't compete very well with AMD for an enthusiast. 8700 non-k could be a solid recommendation, as it's clocked a fair bit higher than the 9400F, but the EOL for LGA 1151 is likely upon us and the only upgrade left on that socket is the 9900k, which is solid, but is unlikely to ever be a cheap upgrade and I imagine is very hard to cool in a constrained environment.

For gaming on AMD, I'd probably recommend going with the 2600 non-x if you're planning on overclocking. This allows you to save some money and have the ability to upgrade with a Zen 2 & I believe(?) Zen 2+ series in the future(3xxx & 4xxx series).
Click to expand...

I like AMD. I have a bunch of AMD CPUs. But Intel is faster at 1080p even with the "lowly" 9400F. They run ~$170, and a 2600 non-x is around the same price. For strictly 1080p gaming right now, the 9400F is probably a better choice. I already noted the caveats that AMD will have a better upgrade path and the current Intel socket is likely EOL after this gen.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
This is your decision point- 144Hz implies 144FPS, realistically more, and that demands very high single-core performance. AMD's single-core performance is good, no doubt, but there's a very real ~4.2GHz ceiling. Intel's cores are faster per GHz and can run to 5.0GHz+.

I'd look at the 8600K or 9600K, and figure out how to fit a Corsair H80 or equivalent AIO, or perhaps the largest Noctua HSF, into the build.


[I'll also add that the mentions above regarding upgradeability with AMD's AM4 products aren't bad, just that we don't yet know whether AMD will really get the per-core performance up to where Intel's cores are at 5.0GHz]
Click to expand...


Thanks for the input, i really appreciate it guys.


I want to be clear, I have no problem buying older processors used on here, especially if it makes sense money wise but I figured something like a Ryzen 2600 or so would be perfect for the money and it’d be new. Also haven’t ventured into AMD for 10+ years.

I think my last AMD chip was the phenom 2 something ?? Lol
 
I'd try Asus Prime B450M or B450M TUF gaming PRO (not older and lower specs Plus).
Looks like the recent TUF Gaming B450M Pro uses some early info to handle Zen 2, 3700X but maybe even 3800 or 3850 : handles OC and RAM speed better.
The Prime is really cheap while the TUF Pro has a price close to lower end X470 mobos.
 
Jandor said:
I'd try Asus Prime B450M or B450M TUF gaming PRO (not older and lower specs Plus).
Looks like the recent TUF Gaming B450M Pro uses some early info to handle Zen 2, 3700X but maybe even 3800 or 3850 : handles OC and RAM speed better.
The Prime is really cheap while the TUF Pro has a price close to lower end X470 mobos.
Click to expand...

The sad thing is the MSRP of the TUF Pro was supposed to be around $100. IIRC, the sound chip is the Realtek 1200 (not to be confused with the 1220). So in theory, somewhat better than the 897 (like on the Prime board and most cheap B450 boards but not as good as the 1220 (Strix B450, or a lot of mid range and above X470).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top