Jump to content
You must now use your email address to sign in [click for more info] ×

Performance: are CPUs of AMD slower compared to Intel in Affinity?


Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, TheFlow said:

Yeah, at work I now got a brand new 64GB Ram machine with i7 12700K and an RTX 3070Ti. I'll read reviews and benchmarks of the new Ryzen CPUs and compare to Intels counterparts. The only programs I've run into in the last years that were "specifically CPU problematic" seem to be the Affinity Suite. :D

If you do a full new built, I personally would go Intel this generation. It's fairly neck and neck overall, but AMD has been having some rough windows 11 driver issues, the motherboards are way cheaper on the Intel side, and overall Intel is playing the value side this time around you don't loss very total raw performance but you save hundreds of dollars between the CPU+Motherboard and even more if you opt for DDR4 instead of DDR5 which based on all the real world benchmarks I've found going DDR5 over DDR4 is really just bragging rights.

 

2022-11-16_083454.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same issues here! I'm using AMD cpu and motherboard (Ryzen 7 2700x, Asus Prime X470Pro with latest Bios version), Asus RTX 3060ti, Nvidia Studio Driver, 32GB DDR4 RAM. Affinity suit runs laggy, especially Photo, it becomes laggy when adjust the slider for choosing color, adjustment layers,... I mean the slider was damn slow when drag the slider controller. But the funny thing is Affinity suit runs more smoothly on my super old Macbook Pro (2012).

Idk but maybe I think Affinity Suit has some problems with Windows AMD system. I tried Affinity 2, just a little bit better performance! I truly hope Affinity could fix this in near future, bring "amazing performance" to Windows Users as its marketing and as it did for MAC, iOS version.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  

9 hours ago, Sonny Nguyen said:

Same issues here! I'm using AMD cpu and motherboard (Ryzen 7 2700x, Asus Prime X470Pro with latest Bios version), Asus RTX 3060ti, Nvidia Studio Driver, 32GB DDR4 RAM. Affinity suit runs laggy, especially Photo, it becomes laggy when adjust the slider for choosing color, adjustment layers,... I mean the slider was damn slow when drag the slider controller. But the funny thing is Affinity suit runs more smoothly on my super old Macbook Pro (2012).

Idk but maybe I think Affinity Suit has some problems with Windows AMD system. I tried Affinity 2, just a little bit better performance! I truly hope Affinity could fix this in near future, bring "amazing performance" to Windows Users as its marketing and as it did for MAC, iOS version.

In case you didn't read the whole thread, you to could probably do a fairly cheap in place CPU upgrade to a 5500/5600 which both work just fine with Affinity. Even if there is legit issues with old AMD CPUs and affinity given all the other stuff that goes unfixed I doubt you'll see much if any time invested into fixing it given AMDs tiny market share, especially during the 1xxx 2xxx Ryzen time. Attached is a screenshot of the AMD vs Intel Market share through those CPUs. As you can see there was a huge uptick when the 3xxxx series came out because they were vastly better CPUs.

Now that said, the lagginess you've describing sounds quite intense and seems likely to be more a system issue.

 

Things I'd do to get started:

Open a command prompt as admin and run:

sfc /scannow

To check for any major system file issues, it's a good first step in any troubleshooting chain.

Run a full passmark benchmark [free trial] to make sure the system is benchmarking close to what it should, if the CPU, RAM, Drives, or GPU aren't benchmarking close to what they should than there's almost certainly hardware/driver issues.

Try the Nvidia game drivers instead of the studio drivers.

Also try changing the render in Affinity to WARP, despite the devs telling me WARP should always be worse, I find on windows systems it's quite often better, especially on Nvidia systems. I have ancient AMD video cards that work far better with Affinity than my 1080 ti or 2070 super ever did.

In my experience reporting issues to serif they prioritize Mac issues so their software runs far better on macs.

 

 

2022-11-18_084021.jpg

2022-11-18_084820.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a Ryzen 7 1700X, and it's perfectly fine for most things, including editing 4K video in DaVinci Resolve Studio. Suggesting he needs to replace the 1700x for something like Affinity V2 is utter madness.

I have a Radeon RX580 with 8GB of RAM and 64 GB system RAM, and here's one problem I've found with AP V2: It horks up massive amounts of GPU RAM, and when Windows runs out of GPU RAM, it uses system RAM to swap (same idea as a page file). When this happens, the program starts to become unresponsive. This can make other programs run slowly, or even the entire Windows interface lag.

So my suggestion would be to DISABLE "Enable OpenCL computer acceleration" in all the V2 apps performance settings.

You can monitor this in the Task Manager, scroll down and select the GPU box an it will display a consumption graph.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AMD's new plat/AM5 is for crazy people, rn. It's too expensive and more for enthusiasts. Intel is still using an older socket and so while moving to their socket is cheaper, it's a potential dead-end for people who want the option to upgrade more often. At least it's DDR4 though. 5000 series is a better value for people currently on AM4 if they can do a drop-in upgrade on their mobo, then the extra money not spent going to a new platform can go into a new GPU. Unless they really need the newer features on current mobos. If they went with something like 4000 series NVIDIA, then they may consider if they need PCI4/5. I know on 3000 series it doesn't really impact performance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To add to my previous post, my V2 installation was rename the MSIX to ZIP and extract it hack. It's possible that Windows treats programs installed as an app differently from programs when it comes to allocating resources, but I don't know.

Another thing to look at, V1 and V2 use scratch/temp folders, which go on your C:\, these can inflate rapidly, and when you have less the 10% space on drive, performance can fall dramatically, even on an SSD.  One should be able to specify these directories, like most other software, but it is what it is.

I use this program to analyze my disks, and it's a good way to see where your space is evaporating to:

https://www.diskanalyzer.com/

Needing a new CPU is the least likely issue, especially if you're happy with it otherwise.

EDIT: Affinty Paint V2 opens for me in about 3-4 seconds, which is what V1 loaded in. Just counting One One-Thousand, Two One-Thousand...

Edited by ChopperNova
Added info. Fixed stupid spelling/grammer.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, ChopperNova said:

To add to my previous post, my V2 installation was rename the MSIX to ZIP and extract it hack. It's possible that Windows treats programs installed as an app differently from programs when it comes to allocating resources, but I don't know.

Another thing to look at, V1 and V2 use scratch/temp folders, which go on your C:\, these can inflate rapidly, and when you have less the 10% space on drive, performance can fall dramatically, even on an SSD.  One should be able to specify these directories, like most other software, but it is what it is.

I use this program to analyze my disks, and it's a good way to see where your space is evaporating to:

https://www.diskanalyzer.com/

Needing a new CPU is the least likely issue, especially if you're happy with it otherwise.

EDIT: Affinty Paint V2 opens for me in about 3-4 seconds, which is what V1 loaded in. Just counting One One-Thousand, Two One-Thousand...

Interestingly you have an AMD video card where as the two people with issues have Nvidia cards. You wouldn't happen to have a Nvidia card to test in your computer would you? I'm just curious since I know with my own tests affinity seems to heavily favor AMD over Nvidia.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, ChopperNova said:

when you have less the 10% space on drive, performance can fall dramatically, even on an SSD. 

This is an interesting performance-related point that a lot of people aren't aware of. If you use a Samsung SSD, then their Samsung Magician software can reserve space so that this doesn't happen.

If you don't have a Samsung SSD, you can manually prevent this happening by shrinking your main partition and leaving 10% of the SSD as unallocated space at the end of the disk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, RPC said:

Interestingly you have an AMD video card where as the two people with issues have Nvidia cards. You wouldn't happen to have a Nvidia card to test in your computer would you? I'm just curious since I know with my own tests affinity seems to heavily favor AMD over Nvidia.
 

I do not, sorry.

Thoughts:

Do you know anything about Resizeable BAR BIOS settings? My MB (Asus X-470x Prime) supports it, but either my CPU or GPU doesn't, so it's off. Perhaps NVIDIA cards handle this differently than Radeon cards on AMD MBs? Just a shot in the dark, trying to find the common denominator of failure.

Do you if there's a difference between people who installed the MSIX as an app, or Unzipped and ran it from that directory (like me)? Windows may allocate resources differently to apps, since it's "sandboxed", isn't it getting a virtual GPU device? So It's probably Affinity's choice of clumping cat-litter to fill the sandbox. That's my theory, and I'm sticking with it.

Keep in mind that the original post was about a 40 second load time, so it's not a performance issue per se, but a severe bug or bottleneck or incompatibility.

If you'd like to donate a shiny new high end NVIDIA card, I'll be happy to put it in my system, as a personal favor for you. 🙂

ALSO, for people with AMD systems, there's chipset drivers that should be installed in addition to the display drivers, et al. It's not uncommon for manufacturers to have additional drivers if the board has special features, usually enhanced USB or networking. Nobody seems to know this, for some reason:

https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/x470 .

That's for x470, for example.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, ChopperNova said:

Do you know anything about Resizeable BAR BIOS settings? My MB (Asus X-470x Prime) supports it, but either my CPU or GPU doesn't, so it's off. Perhaps NVIDIA cards handle this differently than Radeon cards on AMD MBs? Just a shot in the dark, trying to find the common denominator of failure.

A resizable base address register is a setting that pertains to the PCIe bus. It allows a PCIe device, usually your graphics card, to negotiate the size of the base address register which is normally 256MB. You can read some info about what it does here: https://www.techarp.com/computer/guide-smart-access-memory/

This article has info on how to enable it for Nvidia and contains other useful information about the feature: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/geforce-rtx-30-series-resizable-bar-support/ and this is another article with similar info: https://hardwaresfera.com/en/articulos/resizable-bar/

AMD calls it "Smart Access Memory". It doesn't appear at a glance that your CPU supports it. However, there appears to be support for some platforms that aren't "officially" supported, but hard to tell whether your combination of hardware supports it (CPU + RX580)

image.png.434d5758f270755f28fef21088e13b52.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't read all the posts in this thread, but I just wanted to mention that in other software, there are actually issues when using AMD for graphic applications.

I posted this on the 3D Coat forum, where it were discussed potential issues related to the use of AMD CPUs (and here too).

Piero Desopo

 

Direction, Design <http://phoenixart.com>

Photography <http://www.pierodesopo.com>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/18/2022 at 2:23 PM, ChopperNova said:

To add to my previous post, my V2 installation was rename the MSIX to ZIP and extract it hack. It's possible that Windows treats programs installed as an app differently from programs when it comes to allocating resources, but I don't know.

Another thing to look at, V1 and V2 use scratch/temp folders, which go on your C:\, these can inflate rapidly, and when you have less the 10% space on drive, performance can fall dramatically, even on an SSD.  One should be able to specify these directories, like most other software, but it is what it is.

I use this program to analyze my disks, and it's a good way to see where your space is evaporating to:

https://www.diskanalyzer.com/

Needing a new CPU is the least likely issue, especially if you're happy with it otherwise.

EDIT: Affinty Paint V2 opens for me in about 3-4 seconds, which is what V1 loaded in. Just counting One One-Thousand, Two One-Thousand...

Weird. Nobody as far as I can tell actually suggested anyone should buy a new CPU to fix an issue. But, if anyone was planning to do it anyway, it's a great time price-wise. We recently dropped two 3000 series NVIDIA GPUs into two machines, bumped CPUs on both to 5000 series. Made a huge difference for my workflow with V1.

I don't know care to speculate what they've done to V2 to make it run harder on 1xxx CPUs. There's an AMD GPU thread in case that is helpful. This guy tested his rig on V2 and got a seriously nerfed GPU score. It's main reason why I did not pick up an AMD GPU this time around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, rvst said:

This article has info on how to enable it for Nvidia and contains other useful information about the feature: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/geforce-rtx-30-series-resizable-bar-support/ and this is another article with similar info: https://hardwaresfera.com/en/articulos/resizable-bar/

 

 

Resizable bar works with AMD Ryzen from the 5000 generation (without 5600G/5700G) in combination with AMD RADEON RX 6xxx or newer or NVIDIA RTX 30xx or newer. Intel Arc graphics cards will, as far as I know, only support RBar in combination with an Intel CPU.

AMD Ryzen 7 5700X | INTEL Arc A770 LE 16 GB  | 32 GB DDR4 3200MHz | Windows 11 Pro 23H2 (22631.3296)
AMD A10-9600P | dGPU R7 M340 (2 GB)  | 8 GB DDR4 2133 MHz | Windows 10 Home 22H2 (1945.3803) 

Affinity Suite V 2.4 & Beta 2.(latest)
Better translations with: https://www.deepl.com/translator  
Interested in a robust (selfhosted) PDF Solution? Have a look at Stirling PDF

Life is too short to have meaningless discussions!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's just crazy slow load times even for a first generation Ryzen CPU such as the 1700X. I don't believe it's CPU related. In any case, if I had the money, I would likely upgrade the CPU even if this wasn't the issue since 1700X is pretty long in the tooth now, especially for single-threaded tasks. It wasn't great for single-threaded stuff when released 5 years ago, and it's even less so today. You can upgrade to a Ryzen 5000 series CPU without changing the motherboard. This will be the cheapest option. An 8 or a 12 core CPU from the Ryzen 5000 series will be MILES better than the Ryzen 1700X. If you want to switch to an intel CPU, you will also have to buy a motherboard.

Affinity Photo 2.3.1 for Windows  OS: Windows 10 Pro x64 ver. 22H2  CPU: AMD Ryzen 7950X 16-core  RAM: 64 GB DDR5-6400  GPU: MSI GeForce RTX 3090 Suprim X 24GB / driver 526.98  NVMe SSD Samsung 980 Pro 1 TB  Monitors: 2x Eizo ColorEdge CS2420 24"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ChopperNova said:

Do you if there's a difference between people who installed the MSIX as an app, or Unzipped and ran it from that directory (like me)? Windows may allocate resources differently to apps, since it's "sandboxed", isn't it getting a virtual GPU device? So It's probably Affinity's choice of clumping cat-litter to fill the sandbox. That's my theory, and I'm sticking with it.

I was curious to know the answer to this question, so I did some testing with both Windows Performance Toolkit and the benchmark feature of Affinity Photo.

Let's answer the first question:  Q.) do any of the methods launch faster or are they equivalent. A.) they're equivalent.

This shows sequential alternating launches of the MSIX installation by clicking the icon in the Start Menu and then a direct invocation of Photo.exe in an unzipped version. I waited with my mouse in the top right corner and closed the process down just as the UI became usable. The graph shows each process's CPU resource usage by time, with time on the X axis. 

image.png.3485cea6d0b0ed98c4be727d5891e1db.png

 

Now the second question. Q.) Do the different methods result in different application performance. A.) It appears there is a difference in GPU-related performance on my machine at least. Single GPU raster operations look like they take about a 20% hit when running in the sandbox.

I benchmarked three different methods of invoking Photo. The first was launching the MSIX installed version from the Start Menu (ie., in the sandbox), the second was launching the MSIX installed version directly from the executable installed in C:\Program Files\WindowsApps after having added execution rights to allow direct invocation (ie., outside the sandbox). The third was launching the application directly from the file hierarchy created by unzipping the MSIX installation archive (obviously also outside the sandbox).

I did two sets of benchmark runs for each method and during each run, I did multiple benchmarks to get the results averaged out. Pretty much everything is equivalent across all three methods, except for that GPU performance in the sandbox noted above. 

With the app versions, note that it's the exact same executable, running from the exact same location on the same machine, just invoked differently (start menu vs double click the actual executable having assigned appropriate execute permissions to the Users group). So the one is running in the sandbox, the other isn't.

image.thumb.png.f36ab888e1ceda362751f25533512591.png

 

Machine spec:

CPU: AMD Ryzen 5950x, using PBO and a negative voltage offset. Best core can hit 5,125 Mhz

Motherboard: Asus ROG Crosshair VIII Dark Hero 

RAM: 128GB

GPU: Gigabyte Auros Master RTX 3070

System disk: 2TB Samsung 980 Pro nvme

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Alex_M said:

An 8 or a 12 core CPU from the Ryzen 5000 series will be MILES better than the Ryzen 1700X. If you want to switch to an intel CPU, you will also have to buy a motherboard.

Like I said in my initial post - even the i7 7700K from 2017 is super snappy compared to my Ryzen 1700X. But as far as I remember only for Affinity apps. I sculpt 3D, paint 3D models and render animations on this machine, I kinda refuse to believe it is the machine. Switching daily for over 4 years between the i7 7700K and 1700X and it is all somewhat "close enough" for me. No huge notable differences.

Sure, it is slowly time for an upgrade (and more than 16gb of Ram finally :)) so that just might be what will happen.
It is not like there's a different speed in the Affinity Suite, it's like there is a serious driver/hardware/software issue between those older AMD CPUs and Serif Products. Maybe there's some problem in the compiler of the software or something like that. I mean, before - probably around 1.6 it was a lot faster on this PC. So it almost certainly has to do with the software itself.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Prices for new AMD Ryzen CPUs are a bit higher in Germany (5600 goes for about 140€, 5600x for 180€), so I keep an eye on the bay right now, maybe a 5600 or 5600X pops up that seems trustworthy for way less compared to new.
Benched my SSD today, it writes with up to 770 MBPS and also reads with about 2400MBPS. So that should be good. I'll let you guys know what happens next. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, TheFlow said:

Prices for new AMD Ryzen CPUs are a bit higher in Germany (5600 goes for about 140€, 5600x for 180€), so I keep an eye on the bay right now, maybe a 5600 or 5600X pops up that seems trustworthy for way less compared to new.
Benched my SSD today, it writes with up to 770 MBPS and also reads with about 2400MBPS. So that should be good. I'll let you guys know what happens next. :)

Your system could nonetheless benefit from a current gen PCIe 4.0 nvme SSD (which I imagine your X470 board supports).

They are several times faster than your SSD. My Samsung 980 Pro gets 7,000MB/s of sequential read speed and around 5,000MB/s sequential write (writes slows down a bit after the turbo write cache has been filled, but even the slowest is still several times faster than 770MB/s).

Considering that the files we work with in Affinity are pretty large, such a speed up in read and write speed would be quite noticeable and contribute to a much snappier feeling system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/21/2022 at 11:51 AM, TheFlow said:

Prices for new AMD Ryzen CPUs are a bit higher in Germany (5600 goes for about 140€, 5600x for 180€), so I keep an eye on the bay right now, maybe a 5600 or 5600X pops up that seems trustworthy for way less compared to new.
Benched my SSD today, it writes with up to 770 MBPS and also reads with about 2400MBPS. So that should be good. I'll let you guys know what happens next. :)

I have the same CPU/MB as you, and I'd advise you to increase your RAM above 16 GB. It doesn't matter the speed of every other component when Windows starts thrashing the swap file, which could cause thermal throttling on an SSD. Hence, I prefer more RAM to faster RAM. I also prefer more cores to faster cores. It also kinda matters what you actually use the computer for.

Beware of benchmarks. As you edit increasingly larger files, the most RAM will ultimately beat the fastest CPU. A half-empty mechanical drive will beat a 95% full SSD in real world performance no matter how much faster it benches.

I'm not against upgrading, I'm just a little lost as to what issue you're trying to resolve, as you originally said it took 40 seconds to load Affinity Paint V2. You gotta use a little logic here; do you really think it would take a CPU TEN TIMES faster to load V2 vs V1?

So anyway, here's some benchmarks. The Affinity benchmarks were the second run. The Host is running unzipped MSIX, the Guest is running installed normally. Note how Paint V2 handles Consolas monospaced font by default in "Affinity Photo v2.0.0".

 

138047960_V2Benchmarks.thumb.png.e9b30b64e2bc614804f17e7389467935.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, rvst said:

Your system could nonetheless benefit from a current gen PCIe 4.0 nvme SSD (which I imagine your X470 board supports).

They are several times faster than your SSD. My Samsung 980 Pro gets 7,000MB/s of sequential read speed and around 5,000MB/s sequential write (writes slows down a bit after the turbo write cache has been filled, but even the slowest is still several times faster than 770MB/s).

Considering that the files we work with in Affinity are pretty large, such a speed up in read and write speed would be quite noticeable and contribute to a much snappier feeling system.

Maybe two years ago there was an issue with a 1TB Samsung 980 <something> nvme. It acted like it was thermal throttling at around 50, and Samsung Magician didn't seem to recognize it properly. Others noted issues with this particular model, so it wasn't just me; it could have just been MB compatibility. I actually sent it back and got a 970 EVO and it's great, although it's not any faster than my 500GB 950 EVO SATA. At that time, the 970 EVO was $20-$30 more than the 980.

Of course, there may have been just one, single bad 980, and Amazon kept reselling it every time it was returned...

I also always recommend Samsung, but he should be aware of this and be suspicious of any 980 "deals". And always make sure he can return them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ChopperNova said:

Maybe two years ago there was an issue with a 1TB Samsung 980 <something> nvme. It acted like it was thermal throttling at around 50, and Samsung Magician didn't seem to recognize it properly. Others noted issues with this particular model, so it wasn't just me; it could have just been MB compatibility. I actually sent it back and got a 970 EVO and it's great, although it's not any faster than my 500GB 950 EVO SATA. At that time, the 970 EVO was $20-$30 more than the 980.

Of course, there may have been just one, single bad 980, and Amazon kept reselling it every time it was returned...

I also always recommend Samsung, but he should be aware of this and be suspicious of any 980 "deals". And always make sure he can return them.

Yes, Samsung Magician STILL doesn't recognize it. 

These higher performance nvme SSDs run very hot. I have an aftermarket Sabrent heatsink on mine as well as a Noctua 40mm PWM fan mounted on a very long standoff screwed into the M2 mounting hole for the SSD so it blows directly down onto the heatsink. Mine runs at 34 celsius during a normal load. Before the heatsink / fan combination it idled at 50 celsius and temperature spiked up under load.

I probably would not buy a 980 pro again, despite having had many Samsung SSDs. The first one almost trashed all my data - it had hundreds of block read errors, so I RMA'd it. I keep wondering if the excessive heat was the cause of the drive going fubar. Inconveniently, it was my system disk, so I had to buy another SSD before I could RMA it. So now I have two 980 pros for my sins. 

The second one seems fine after using it for a few months, but these 980 pros use TLC flash, which has slower write speeds than SLC flash. After the write ahead buffer is filled, write speeds slow down considerably. 

I wasn't suggesting this particular model of SSD, just suggesting a modern PCIe 4.0 nvme SSD, as they're a lot faster than what he has now - there are quite a few with similar performance specs. I just quoted the 980 pro since that's what I ran my benchmark on to check what speed it does. 

 

Buy Sabrent Rocket NVMe PCIe 4.0 1TB M.2 Heatsink from £169.99 (Today ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/20/2022 at 1:34 AM, rvst said:

So the one is running in the sandbox, the other isn't.

image.thumb.png.f36ab888e1ceda362751f25533512591.png

Interesting test and result.

To cross check I did a run with Intel i7 and RTX 2070 on a notebook. The result is different than yours. On this machine sandbox vs. unzip does not show a relevant difference.

Nvidia driver is 526.98 studio (that's the one, that has the bugfix for some open CL issues in other applications).

Maybe somebody with another AMD - Nvidia combination can cross check as well. Would be interesting to know if the speed degration can be reproduced on multiple AMD Nvidia machines.

benchmark.thumb.png.f42afca94cf4f539a7b4787b4eefa9ba.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My board only supports PCI-E 3, not 4. So I doubt a newer SSD will bring much of a performance boost.
I have found multiple threads in different sources (twitter, gaming forums, here etc) where the 1700X is shitty and the newer AMD 5000 series CPUs just work fine.

It takes about 35-40 seconds every time. Nothing in the task manager spikes besides the CPU, but only a bit, nothing comes close to 100%. AD and AP always hang for at least 10-15 seconds until anything responds and on my new work machine with Intel CPU exactly this part is not present. It loads, then loads 2-3 seconds when the initial Logo of the App goes away and bam, I can start working immediately.

SSD has been checked with Magician and also CrystalDiskInfo.

Samsung Pro -> I have had many SSDs failing on me over the years, but I had nothing but great experiences with Samsung Pros while Crucial, Kingston and Seagate died on me. Never had a fully broken Samsung SSD. So that is my "why". I know it is always a shot in the dark.

Ryzen 5600X, 1TB Samsung 980 Pro nvme (my 256 always needs to be freed up) and 16 GB more RAM on the way, (needed the Ram anyway and figured I upgrade). If all goes to the trenches I can still build a decent Intel System with the parts and sell or send the Ryzen back. I'll let you know... :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.