Database Users

Which is the better device? Nexus 7 or Nexus 10?

Quite a simple question really, which was already mentioned in the title of the thread. What do you believe to be the best tablet? A 16 GB Nexus 7 WiFi model or a 16 GB Nexus 10 WiFi model?

Hmm...
Brad387 said:
Quite a simple question really, which was already mentioned in the title of the thread. What do you believe to be the best tablet? A 16 GB Nexus 7 WiFi model or a 16 GB Nexus 10 WiFi model?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Kind of an odd question really. Clearly the 10 has better specs, including screen.
But I'm pretty sure many of us bought a Nexus 7 because it was 7 inches portable. So, I'm pretty confident saying that the Nexus 7 is a better 7 inch tab than the 10 is.

PMOttawa said:
Kind of an odd question really. Clearly the 10 has better specs, including screen.
But I'm pretty sure many of us bought a Nexus 7 because it was 7 inches portable. So, I'm pretty confident saying that the Nexus 7 is a better 7 inch tab than the 10 is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, it is obvious that the Nexus 7 (which is a 7" tab) is better at being a 7" tablet than a Nexus 10 (which isn't a 7" tab, but a 10" one). However, isn't the Nexus 10 only a dual-core processor? I know the screen resolution is quite amazing, but besides that isn't it actually worse?

CPU: http://www.arm.com/products/processors/cortex-a/cortex-a15.php
GPU: http://www.arm.com/products/multimedia/mali-graphics-hardware/mali-t604.php
CPU core count isn't all that matters. I don't have any real-world benchmarks, but I'm pretty sure that CPU alone can execute tasks faster and better than the Tegra 3. And since the GPU and CPU aren't on the same chip (that I know of), that also comes with it's share of better performance.

espionage724 said:
CPU: http://www.arm.com/products/processors/cortex-a/cortex-a15.php
GPU: http://www.arm.com/products/multimedia/mali-graphics-hardware/mali-t604.php
CPU core count isn't all that matters. I don't have any real-world benchmarks, but I'm pretty sure that CPU alone can execute tasks faster and better than the Tegra 3. And since the GPU and CPU aren't on the same chip (that I know of), that also comes with it's share of better performance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This ^.
You cant really justify which is better becuase the size difference. Like the first poster said we all bought this for the form factor. So to us the N7 is better regardless of the specs. However spec wise... i would go with the N10.

Two completely different forms factors and uses. They are both great devices.

CPU in the N10 is about twice as fast as the best A9 (S4 Pro) out now. It is more than likely about 3-4 times faster than the T3.

Two different devices for different purposes, its like comparing a motor bike to a car

Brad387 said:
Quite a simple question really, which was already mentioned in the title of the thread. What do you believe to be the best tablet? A 16 GB Nexus 7 WiFi model or a 16 GB Nexus 10 WiFi model?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is like asking: 'What is the best: a semi or a van?'
Those 2 tablets are just in a different market, ergo not comparable.
If you don't take the size in the comparison, the Nexus 10 would win: more efficient/faster processor, way better grafics, almost quadripple resolution, ..etc.

By specs, N10 destroys the N7.

In terms of pure performance, which one is better?
The Nexus 10 is a dual core vs Tegra 3 Quad core.
2gb ram vs 1gb ram.
Also take in consideration Tegra Zone support, although not really related to performance. The Tegra 3 gets larger list of premium games.

killer8297 said:
In terms of pure performance, which one is better?
The Nexus 10 is a dual core vs Tegra 3 Quad core.
2gb ram vs 1gb ram.
Also take in consideration Tegra Zone support, although not really related to performance. The Tegra 3 gets larger list of premium games.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It isn't even a comparison. The N10 slaughters the N7. Pros vs joes if you will.

I'd still keep my 7". It performs just fine for what I need it for. 10" is too big. I'm more comfortable with my laptop at that point.
Sent from my SGH-T999 using xda app-developers app

Tegra has CPUs and GPU on a single chip, and other details
espionage724 said:
CPU core count isn't all that matters. I don't have any real-world benchmarks, but I'm pretty sure that CPU alone can execute tasks faster and better than the Tegra 3. And since the GPU and CPU aren't on the same chip (that I know of), that also comes with it's share of better performance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are confused.
The Tegra is a System-on-Chip ("SoC") that has both CPU and GPU cores on the same die. The CPU complex has four A9 ARM cores, plus a fifth "ninja" A7 core. The GPU has 12 cores, plus a number of special functional units. All cores access the shared RAM through a single memory controller.
The CPU complex spends most of its time running only the power-optimized "ninja" core, with the other cores powered off. The ninja CPU has a simpler A7 core and is implemented with power-optimized low-leakage transistors. (The A7 core does less speculative work, and thus is more power efficient than the A9 cores even taking into account the extra clock cycles needed.) If the workload increases, the main cores are powered up and execution is switched over, with the ninja core left idle in a low power mode.
The GPU complex has 12 general execution units, but these aren't directly comparable to CPU cores. You can't even compare them to the "cores" in other types of GPUs. In addition, there are other special units such as video and audio decoders in the GPU complex. These operations could be done on the main CPU or, sometimes, the GPU. But they are common and power-hungry enough to get hard-wired logic.
All of this complexity makes it really difficult to benchmark and compare. Or really easy, if your goal is to make one product look faster than another.
The Tegra is carefully tuned to do HD video decode with only the ninja core and GPU turned on, thus consuming little power. There is just enough CPU time left over to supervise the cellular modem for housekeeping operations, or do other trivial tasks. But if you add in just a little application work, the main four cores are activated and power usage goes way up.
Another way to skew the test result is to pick specific micro benchmarks. The Apple A5 (which is unrelated to the ARM numbers e.g. A7 and A9) was designed for a high resolution screen, and knowing that many early apps would be iPhone apps with pixel doubling. They put extra gates to increase the pixel fill rate and smoothing performance. This resulted in a bigger chip, but better performance with modest power use for these functions.
My estimation: The Nexus 7 with Tegra 3 is faster, has the potential to be more power efficient, and will have better long-term support and improvements. The N10 has the big advantage of 2GB of memory, which may become important with future versions of Android.

becker. said:
You are confused.
The Tegra is a System-on-Chip ("SoC") that has both CPU and GPU cores on the same die. The CPU complex has four A9 ARM cores, plus a fifth "ninja" A7 core. The GPU has 12 cores, plus a number of special functional units. All cores access the shared RAM through a single memory controller.
The CPU complex spends most of its time running only the power-optimized "ninja" core, with the other cores powered off. The ninja CPU has a simpler A7 core and is implemented with power-optimized low-leakage transistors. (The A7 core does less speculative work, and thus is more power efficient than the A9 cores even taking into account the extra clock cycles needed.) If the workload increases, the main cores are powered up and execution is switched over, with the ninja core left idle in a low power mode.
The GPU complex has 12 general execution units, but these aren't directly comparable to CPU cores. You can't even compare them to the "cores" in other types of GPUs. In addition, there are other special units such as video and audio decoders in the GPU complex. These operations could be done on the main CPU or, sometimes, the GPU. But they are common and power-hungry enough to get hard-wired logic.
All of this complexity makes it really difficult to benchmark and compare. Or really easy, if your goal is to make one product look faster than another.
The Tegra is carefully tuned to do HD video decode with only the ninja core and GPU turned on, thus consuming little power. There is just enough CPU time left over to supervise the cellular modem for housekeeping operations, or do other trivial tasks. But if you add in just a little application work, the main four cores are activated and power usage goes way up.
Another way to skew the test result is to pick specific micro benchmarks. The Apple A5 (which is unrelated to the ARM numbers e.g. A7 and A9) was designed for a high resolution screen, and knowing that many early apps would be iPhone apps with pixel doubling. They put extra gates to increase the pixel fill rate and smoothing performance. This resulted in a bigger chip, but better performance with modest power use for these functions.
My estimation: The Nexus 7 with Tegra 3 is faster, has the potential to be more power efficient, and will have better long-term support and improvements. The N10 has the big advantage of 2GB of memory, which may become important with future versions of Android.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Best answer I've seen.
And has been said before, surely, in the end it comes down to what do you want to do with it. I prefer my n7 because 10" tablets are simply too big and uncomfortable
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app

Real world experience will require the device in hand. The resolution being pushed will need a lot more backbone to provide the same smooth experience as the lower resolution device. Just look at the iPad 2 vs 3. The iPad 2 felt like a better experience because of the lower resolution. Most people couldn't even tell the two apart or correctly identify which was one or the other.
Resolution that high is retarded on a 10" screen. Waste of battery and resources.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA Premium HD app

I say wait another 3 months before committed to buying 10 inch. Google might upgrade its 10 inch with 3G, who knows, having experiencing what they did with 7 inch.

player911 said:
Real world experience will require the device in hand. The resolution being pushed will need a lot more backbone to provide the same smooth experience as the lower resolution device. Just look at the iPad 2 vs 3. The iPad 2 felt like a better experience because of the lower resolution. Most people couldn't even tell the two apart or correctly identify which was one or the other.
Resolution that high is retarded on a 10" screen. Waste of battery and resources.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA Premium HD app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree.A super display is great if everything is built to look good on it but not if it comes at too big of cost in performance.That is what happened to the ipad 3.They made a good device pretty, but slow.On a small screen most can't tell the difference in dvd quality and full hd.Both would look good but one would smoke the other with the same hardware doing other things. jmo

player911 said:
The iPad 2 felt like a better experience because of the lower resolution. Most people couldn't even tell the two apart or correctly identify which was one or the other.
Resolution that high is retarded on a 10" screen. Waste of battery and resources.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Keep in mind why the iPad has pointlessly high resolution. It wasn't that Apple wanted to provide an exceptional experience. It was that the underlying software wasn't designed for different screen sizes and proportions. They had a choice between redesigning the API combined with converting apps, or making the screen exactly double the number of pixels in each direction. Apple's big market advantage was the higher app count, and many apps wouldn't be converted to a new interface ("walking dead" / will never be updated). So they went with a hardware solution, and marketed the "retina display" as a plus rather than a work-around for a primitive API. (A replay of the Mac ROM holding back OS improvements.)

Ofcourse specs wise N10 wins..But N10 lacks some features like its only WIFI no 3G/2G !!! it will be tough for my country .

Galaxy Note 10.1 2014 Edition Exynos CPU (European model)

Well,
the other thread is having discussion mainly about the Snapdragon 800 version, but since we Europeans can't have it, it is better to have the discussion about the Exynos models here.
Do you think Heterogeneous Multi-Processing Capability will be implemented in the Note 10.1 2014?
http://youtu.be/fLrSTJECVaU
http://youtu.be/8LNPxExkLMo
http://youtu.be/1t-6jqhELVk

The wifi only model will be exynos based. I live in the US and only want the exynos version.

Why do you think that we (Europeans) won't get the Snapdragon 800 version?

In Europe
WiFi = Exynos
LTE = Snapdragon 800

Live4Racing said:
In Europe
WiFi = Exynos
LTE = Snapdragon 800
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Isn't that true everywhere?
Speaking of the Exynos version. How does the community support for those devices stack up against their snapdragon
siblings (thinking of s4 and so on)?

Aletheia said:
Isn't that true everywhere?
Speaking of the Exynos version. How does the community support for those devices stack up against their snapdragon
siblings (thinking of s4 and so on)?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
from what i have read and heard, the snapdragon siblings seem to have much more dev support than the exynos ones - that being said, with the new note 10.1, we might be able to expect some pretty damn good dev support so long as the rumors/claims about HMP being fixed are true. i think the biggest downfall of the previous octa chips is that they either use all 4 A15 chips or all 4 A7 chips, not a combination of them or anything else - the cache translation function is broken (i think thats what it is called... i may be wrong on the name).
but i think if they have fixed it, and if the new note actually offers HMP, then there should be some good dev support i would suspect - not everyone wants to pay for an extra contract for their device when they can just tether or hotspot to their phone, which they always have on them anyways.
On that *note* (pun intended) does anyone know if, on this new device, the 3g and lte models will have phone and sms functionality via headset of some sort? i can't imagine why would would purposely disable this feature, as the device has the proper radios etc for it. and if it is somehow disabled, does anyone know if that is something that can be brought over to the device with a new rom/kernel or other mod?
just my 3 cents, yea that's right, 3 cents....

asaqwert said:
On that *note* (pun intended) does anyone know if, on this new device, the 3g and lte models will have phone and sms functionality via headset of some sort? i can't imagine why would would purposely disable this feature, as the device has the proper radios etc for it. and if it is somehow disabled, does anyone know if that is something that can be brought over to the device with a new rom/kernel or other mod?
just my 3 cents, yea that's right, 3 cents....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Make a "note" to look into a program called Tablet Talk.
You can make any tablet into a sms/mms and phone... so worth the price.

Itchiee said:
Make a "note" to look into a program called Tablet Talk.
You can make any tablet into a sms/mms and phone... so worth the price.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have definitely used and like tablet SMS on my new nexus but I just find it a hassle as the tablet always needs to be tethered anyways so I need my phone with me regardless. The idea behind having full talk and text on the tablet is so I don't absolutely need both devices with me all the time... I guess with a tablet that has 3g or late then you don't really need the phone with you anymore, and I can see an upside of this setup.... You can use just one phone number and have it accessible on two devices...just kind of seems ****ty to basically be forced into having two separate phone bills each month though if the option could have very easily been there to have the talk and text directly active and working on the tablet. I wonder if there is some sort of mod or hack that could be used to gain this functionality considering that on a 3g or late device the rradios are all there to support this.....

asaqwert said:
On that *note* (pun intended) does anyone know if, on this new device, the 3g and lte models will have phone and sms functionality via headset of some sort? i can't imagine why would would purposely disable this feature, as the device has the proper radios etc for it. and if it is somehow disabled, does anyone know if that is something that can be brought over to the device with a new rom/kernel or other mod?
just my 3 cents, yea that's right, 3 cents....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In all review that i saw, all tablet can phone and send sms/mms.
There are the apps for this.
So, i will buy the 4G version because i want the Snap800, and because it will have a lot of support then Exynos base...

Guich said:
In all review that i saw, all tablet can phone and send sms/mms.
There are the apps for this.
So, i will buy the 4G version because i want the Snap800, and because it will have a lot of support then Exynos base...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what is exepcted price difference between Wifi only and 4g
what is the support that makes u willing to spend that difference ! is it from Samsung it self, or free developers !
will it be in just Applications ! or the Android system updates running !
this is going to be my first device,and i am already highly considering the 3G version as i dont have smartphone, and hope i can use the note (beside its main functions) as a smart phone + to connect to net when no wifi around or on the road , with headset .. but i will wait till after release to see reviews about that .
if the 3g not making call as a phone, i will get wifi, and for internet connection i will use usb flash modem (by OTG adaptor)

Dr_Muhsin said:
what is exepcted price difference between Wifi only and 4g
i dont have smartphone, and hope i can use the note (beside its main functions) as a smart phone + to connect to net when no wifi around or on the road , with headset .. but i will wait till after release to see reviews about that .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The price difference between the wifi only and 4g models can be $100-$200 for 16GB models, and sometimes you can't even find the higher capacity models in 4g or wifi. It can be a hassle trying to find the model you want. Data plans for cell based tablets can be ridiculously high for 4g models so have a carrier in mind if you want to go the 4g route. Keep in mind Im using 4g here as a generic term for cell based tablet (4g/3g/lte). Im sticking with getting a wifi based note 10.1 this time around because I hope to use it for content creation and media playback.

Kernel source
So, is this good news as far as dev support for the Exynos versions is concerned?
sammobile.com/2013/09/20/samsung-releases-kernel-source-for-galaxy-note-10-1-2014-edition

In john lewis web its only left the white wifi version. I hope that its because they are receiving next week the new one

'Note' that the tablet with not ship with HMP/GTS out-of-box.
They were recently finalized. They will ship with cluster migration/core migration logic initially. Later there will be some kernel/patch upgrade to have HMP enabled.

CLARiiON said:
'Note' that the tablet with not ship with HMP/GTS out-of-box.
They were recently finalized. They will ship with cluster migration/core migration logic initially. Later there will be some kernel/patch upgrade to have HMP enabled.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i was reading that in the octa-core you could only have 4 cores being used at a time; and that the lower ghz quad cores were to save power.
but if android's cpu governor will fluctuate the cpu speed up and down based on the workload, what's the diff?
doesn't that make the other 4 cores useless?
so in effect a 2.3Ghz quad-core vs a 2.4Ghz quad+1.7Ghz quad would have the same performance??
now if you can use more than 4 cores at a time that's a different story.
am i way off base here?
-Tony

ncohafmuta said:
am i way off base here?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A bit. The architecture of each 4-core chip is very different; designed for different tasks. The weaker core is A7 while the more powerful core is A15. Your comparison is kind of like cylinder deactivation in a car's engine. In a V8, all eight cylinders are identical and they are shut off in pairs to save fuel and match performance to load. Think of Octa as a discreet 4 cylinder engine (A7) alongside a V8 engine (A15). Each, to your point, can be controlled so any or all of their cores can be active at a given time. The 4 cylinder's barely able to reach the low point of the V8's performance curve. Similarly, the V8 can't reach the 4 cylinders lower efficiency range. 85% of apps don't leave the A7 core so that's why it's more efficient than just shutting off some of the A15's cores; especially true at idle. It's actually a pretty neat approach to performance vs. efficiency.

BarryH_GEG said:
A bit. The architecture of each 4-core chip is very different; designed for different tasks. The weaker core is A7 while the more powerful core is A15. Your comparison is kind of like cylinder deactivation in a car's engine. In a V8, all eight cylinders are identical and they are shut off in pairs to save fuel and match performance to load. Think of Octa as a discreet 4 cylinder engine (A7) alongside a V8 engine (A15). Each, to your point, can be controlled so any or all of their cores can be active at a given time. The 4 cylinder's barely able to reach the low point of the V8's performance curve. Similarly, the V8 can't reach the 4 cylinders lower efficiency range. 85% of apps don't leave the A7 core so that's why it's more efficient than just shutting off some of the A15's cores; especially true at idle. It's actually a pretty neat approach to performance vs. efficiency.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
FWIW the 2.4 vs 2.3 was a typo. Should be the same number there.
I understand where you're coming from, thanks for that. I just never heard it explained that a A7 at Clock X was different power usage wise than a A15 at Clock X.
If it is, so be it, that answers that. Would be interesting to see real world benchmarks behind it.
-Tony

[Q] Why do Android Wear watches has duch powerful SoC?

Hi,
I'm pretty curious why all the current Android Wear devices seem to have such powerful hardware built in.
As far as I can tell, almost all the processing is done on the phone, so the SoC should not need to be so fast and power hungry.
Any ideas on why this is?
My Pebble has about 80Mhz single-core Processor (if I read that correctly) and can do many of the things the Android Wear devices can. Of course this is Apples and Oranges, but I think that even with Touchscreen and everything the processing power is unneccesarily overpowered...
Thanks.

Well, Moto 360 has a less powerful CPU. I think the reason is because these companies don't have the ability to design their own custom chips, other than maybe Samsung (who maybe just hasn't had time yet), so they need to use off the shelf chips that already have the drivers and kernels to run Android.

Older processors (like what's in the moto 360) are larger and more power hungry. Newer SoCs like the Snapdragon 400 used in the G Watch and Gear Live have higher-clocked, more powerful cores, but are manufactured with a smaller 28nm process. Smaller means more performance-per-watt. They disable all of the cores except one, which decreases power draw even more. Underclocking the one remaining core then saves even more power, all the while still performing even better than the old chip.
I seriously think Motorola just had a truck load of those TI processors sitting in a warehouse somewhere and was trying to figure out a way to make some money off them. Here's hoping they get rid of them all before the next hardware revision.

CommanderROR said:
Hi,
I'm pretty curious why all the current Android Wear devices seem to have such powerful hardware built in.
As far as I can tell, almost all the processing is done on the phone, so the SoC should not need to be so fast and power hungry.
Any ideas on why this is?
My Pebble has about 80Mhz single-core Processor (if I read that correctly) and can do many of the things the Android Wear devices can. Of course this is Apples and Oranges, but I think that even with Touchscreen and everything the processing power is unneccesarily overpowered...
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Running lower freq on a powerful cpu is more efficient than running a higher freq on a less powerful cpu
Like what another member have posted, there are perhaps more access to the current stockpile of CPUs which is cheaper than redesigning a new CPU or ordering an out-of-stock CPU (which is costlier)
or we do need to consider the possibility that there is more room for app developers to play with, without having the CPU as a limiting factor.

gtg465x said:
Well, Moto 360 has a less powerful CPU. I think the reason is because these companies don't have the ability to design their own custom chips, other than maybe Samsung (who maybe just hasn't had time yet), so they need to use off the shelf chips that already have the drivers and kernels to run Android.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The processors in other watch are not customer chips, Motorola just decided to say we rather save $10 in building the Moto-360 than letting users have a watch that is more responsive and better on battery life.

johnus said:
Older processors (like what's in the moto 360) are larger and more power hungry. Newer SoCs like the Snapdragon 400 used in the G Watch and Gear Live have higher-clocked, more powerful cores, but are manufactured with a smaller 28nm process. Smaller means more performance-per-watt. They disable all of the cores except one, which decreases power draw even more. Underclocking the one remaining core then saves even more power, all the while still performing even better than the old chip.
I seriously think Motorola just had a truck load of those TI processors sitting in a warehouse somewhere and was trying to figure out a way to make some money off them. Here's hoping they get rid of them all before the next hardware revision.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is the best reply thus far. The only other thing I would add on is that using the older processor has already been proven to lower battery life on a SmartWatch. This article is a great example: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/09/moto-360-review-beautiful-outside-ugly-inside/2/
You'll see there that the Moto 360 has similar overall performance, and lower battery life in the standardized tests he was able to create. This also takes into account his "screen-off" tests with battery life, leading the reviewer to believe the SoC was the culprit.
Thanks.

Best components to upgrade?

What would be the best components to upgrade on my setup
Intel Core i5-8400
8GB RAM
1TB HDD
4GB Intel Optane
Nvidia GTX 1050

Kenora_I said:
What would be the best components to upgrade on my setup
Intel Core i5-8400
8GB RAM
1TB HDD
4GB Intel Optane
Nvidia GTX 1050
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hello,
that depends on what you want to do with your PC. The mainboard is the base and limiter for all other components except the power supply(in most cases).

Well, i only have a acer pre-built the motherboard is acers....
I want to use it for video rendering or gaming
It can run pretty much anything I think I've seen people upgrade it to an rtx and stuff

@Kenora_I if it was me, and I just did this upgrade 2 weeks ago and am loving it, If your 1tb of storage isn't a Nvme/M.2 I would do that. I had a 2.5 in sata had and for $80 on Newegg I got a WD 1TB sata m.2 and it's night and day difference. Boots in like 15 secs, instant response when multitasking etc. And I just use PC for everything but gaming. So coding/compiling is a mind blown difference lol

If I was you I would start saving for a new built to be honest, aim for a B550/B550M with a Ryzen 5600X for example. Video rendering and gaming will soon become a stretch on that system if it isn't already.

Assuming the power supply is non standard and not easily upgraded, the only real bottleneck that can be remedied is storage. Agree an M2 ssd would be best upgrade likely available.

CamoGeko said:
If I was you I would start saving for a new built to be honest, aim for a B550/B550M with a Ryzen 5600X for example. Video rendering and gaming will soon become a stretch on that system if it isn't already.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have the money, but I just hate the price inflation due to the chip shortages.
Dont wanna end up like one of those people with less RAM performance that LTT demonstrated in one of his vids

Kenora_I said:
I have the money, but I just hate the price inflation due to the chip shortages.
Dont wanna end up like one of those people with less RAM performance that LTT demonstrated in one of his vids
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would build new since you have several things that could use an upgrade in the next year or two. Adding upgrades to an older oem board is just money you will never recover for an end result of a PC still in need of a mobo upgrade.
Building new doesn't have to be that expensive nor does it have to be overpriced ryzen. I threw together an example here . Room to expand RAM by 2 slots later if needed. Less than $600 bucks and could use your GTX 1050 until you get an email that it's your turn to buy card at MSRP.
EVGA's notify list works, may take 2 or 3 months but you can get a card at MSRP.

In my opinion it would be best to wait until prices falls down to regular prices.
But you may consider getting SSD and HDD as you've mentioned you would be playing games and 1TB isn't sufficient.
You can look for case or better case fan if needed.
Mechanical keyboard and Mouse can be consider too.
You haven't mentioned about the PSU you may also consider that if you are looking forward to getting power hungry GPU in future.
Get a cooler if needed if prices are fair enough for it. (if you get one then get one where you don't have to buy one if you choose to upgrade to latest CPU.
In my opinion this are some possible upgrade you can make with your currant build.
If in case you choose to make new build in future then don't upgrade anything in this build presuming that you don't have any issue with currant build and your build gets job done.
In short upgrade if needed or just don't upgrade besides storage.

tek3195 said:
EVGA's notify list works, may take 2 or 3 months but you can get a card at MSRP.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have been on the EVGA list since beginning of the year, the only email I got from them was to tell me they're swapping the model I actually wanted to a low hash model. Thanks EVGA, how about you just make me a GPU. It's been 6 months.

CamoGeko said:
I have been on the EVGA list since beginning of the year, the only email I got from them was to tell me they're swapping the model I actually wanted to a low hash model. Thanks EVGA, how about you just make me a GPU. It's been 6 months.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Must depend on model. I signed up in Feb. and didn't have the money when 1660 ti came up, resubmitted for 1660 super and got it a couple of weeks ago. It's gotta be model, location shouldn't matter I wouldn't think. I don't know how they do it, but 6 months sucks.

CamoGeko said:
I have been on the EVGA list since beginning of the year, the only email I got from them was to tell me they're swapping the model I actually wanted to a low hash model. Thanks EVGA, how about you just make me a GPU. It's been 6 months.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol

ohjabarn said:
Tempted to upgrade my 2080 ti to a gigabyte 3080 ti so got it from NEWEGG however not certain my PSU would be adequate. PSU and everything (I imagine) that draws power are recorded underneath:
1 x Seasonic Focus Plus 750W 80 Plus Gold Modular Power Supply
1 x Intel Core i9-9900K 3.6GHz (Coffee Lake) Socket LGA1151 Processor
1 x Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Elite Intel Z390 (Socket 1151) DDR4 ATX Motherboard
1 x Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4 PC4-24000C16 3000MHz Dual Channel Kit
1 x Samsung 2TB 860 EVO SSD 2.5" SATA 6Gbps 64 Layer 3D V-NAND Solid State Drive
6 x Corsair ML120 Pro RGB 120mm Premium Fan with Lighting Node
1 x Be Quiet Dark Rock Pro 4 air cooler
Cheers generally functioning admirably.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You should be good, 750W is what EVGA Power Meter recommends for the components you listed. There are quite a few power supply calculators available online.

So, it really depends on what you want to do with your PC. Do you want to make your PC more suitable for gaming or work? As an example, I use editing software from Movavi and it requires a lot of good components such as SSD, high-end processor and of course a lot of RAM. From my point of view, you need to change your HDD to SSD and add more RAM, so you'll have a very powerful machine.

Now would be the time to start looking at things as prices are falling.

13600k (no overclocking) paired with a b760 mobo?

Hi guys, i'm new to this community.....
Just wanted to know if its okay to pair an intel i5 13600k with a decent b760 motherboard (eg. Gigabyte B760 Aorus Elite).....
Cause i've heard that the b series of motherboards can't deliver full power to an intel "k" series processor....
I don't know this means if the overclockable processor can't even reach it's default turbo boost or it's just i can't do overclocking.....
Cause i won't do overclocking on the 13600k but just want to know if the b760 can deliver enough power to at least run it in maximum "default"/"turbo boost" speed.....
Or should i buy a z690 mobo and pair that with the i5 13600k?
Cause i've also heard that z690 mobos are getting compatibility issues and bios issues for 13th gen intel cpus even though they are meant to support and run high end 13th gen cpus.....
Please do let me know and you guys are always appreciated...

The compatibility issues are generally caused by out of date BIOS, to my understanding. Refer to the manufacturer website.
I'm not sure I see the logic in spending the extra on a K series processor when you could just go with an i7, especially if you aren't going to overclock it. I'd put more money into your motherboard for future upgrade, so maybe just go with a 13600/13600F and spend the extra on a Z series chipset. Since the sockets are the same, you could even go with a 12th gen i7 and just save up for that killer 13900K.

I would go for 13600/f but both of these are not available in my region....
And i don't know why but an i7 13700 is overpriced in my region (like 450$+ vs 393.99$ on amazon) (and no, amazon isn't also available in my region XD).....
So, yeah, i think i have no other choice.....
So now what should i get in this situation?

There's no issue slapping a 13600k in a b760 motherboard, as long as said board is not some small form factor with crappy VRMs around the socket and meant for office PCs that just do word and excel all day. Just make sure you get a decent cpu cooler because I promise you the flimsy stock intel cooler won't be enough.

How do i know if a motherboard has good VRMs?
Is there anything written in the specs related to this?