My next PC?


I’m thinking of upgrading my pc. I’m very much Intel orientated when it comes to processors and not being a gamer I’m not inclined to have a separate graphics card or get overly concerned about overclocking.
I think that the processor to go for is the i9 9000 with a Z390 chipset. It would be connected to a 4k tv.
The price spread on motherboards is massive but they all seem to offer 4096x2160, @ 30hz through the HDMI slot but 60hz through the DisplayPort.
Do I really need 60hz?
The major job of the pc is to process video files from H264 to H265 or compress H265 files some of which are 4k. This means VideoRedo or Handbrake.
My existing processor is an i7 which is a couple of generations old so I would expect an i9 to be significantly faster subject to the software’s ability to fully utilise the available threads.
As is my habit I will agonise over this for a while. In the meantime hopefully prices will drop: some of the motherboards are ridiculously expensive.

I’d be grateful for any pointers.


cp2, I was recently in your situation and if you don't mind, I will offer my opinions and my lessons learned. My favorite motherboards are made by MSI. I just bought the MSI MPG Z390 Gaming Edge AC LGA1151 (Intel 8th and 9th Gen) M.2 USB 3.1 Gen 2 DDR4 HDMI DP Wi-Fi SLI CFX ATX Z390 Gaming Motherboard (BTW, currently on sale from Amazon for $159.) I love MSI bios and overclocking is a breeze with only changing one setting to jump the processor to any speed. I currently am overclocking my 8th gen i7 to 5 Ghz with no heat or performance issues. Also the AC version of the motherboard includes a wireless output so if you use ethernet you won't need this version of the MB and the non-AC version is even cheaper. Also more recommendations. 1) Buy an m.2 SSD drive that screws right onto the motherboard. Samsung Magician software shows that my m.2 drive is 7X faster (reads) than my SATA port connected SSD's. 2) Buy the non-graphics version of the i9 (Core i9-9900KF) which is cheaper than the one with graphics support, and go with an nVidia graphics card. You can buy older versions, even used ones for reasonable prices. Trust me the performance gain is worth it. And if you use VRD a lot, the performance gain using NVenc is amazing. I now can process my 1 hr TV shows with VRD in 4.5 minutes and CPU isn't overloaded and stays cool. Without NVenc, processing takes at least twice that long and CPU runs hot. And although I used to have NVenc issues, with the two latest betas of VRD, it seems to be working reliably again. 3) You should be using DisplayPort. I recently switched from HDMI and although I can't prove it, it seems that everything is working faster and better. Don't know if its related to refresh rate or not, but it's becoming the way to go. BTW, some new monitors only offer DisplayPort now. My last Dell monitor didn't even have any HDMI ports. Lastly this MSI motherboard has RGB Led ports which supports the latest LED lighting strips and cooling fans and works with Mystic light software. Great side benefit. Again, these are my opinions and recommendations. Good luck with whatever you decide. I couldn't be happier with the choices I've made.


Well-known member
30 vs 60 refresh for the mouse alone is a big difference for me. I was blaming W10 for being so awful till I
checked and realized the refresh was only 30.
Had to get a display port to HDMI adapter to get the higher resolutions and refresh rates.

I've never experienced anything beyond 60. The review websites all seem to say "you have to see it to believe it" for the modern advances ... HDR,OLED,4k/120Hz etc.

Waiting for Ryzen 3950X and the new Asus Proart monitor to be actually out where they can be purchased. This year would be nice.

As it is I'm trying to make myself move over to the Ryzen 1700/W10 and drop in the 3950X "someday".
The 1700 is only 50% faster then my 3930 6 core from 2012. That's not very good progress for almost an 8 year span. I like to hope the 3950X might actually double my cpu encoding speed.

NVEnc is roughly approx. to software X264 2Pass/MediumPreset and is great for removing freckles...flawless skin but is very very fast.


Thanks for your comments. I will admit to be riddled with prejudices (having them saves so much time). So, for me Intel processor, no separate graphics card is the way to go. My current processor is an i7-7700: I’m thinking that an i9-9000 even without overclocking will outperform that. I also believe that you cannot overclock and retain in-processor graphics.
Having the pc connected to a LG uhd tv means that an hdmi cable is required. Up to now I have allowed the pc and tv to handshake without over-riding them. They settle on 3840*2160 at 29hz which I do not find the best for video playback. Fortunately all of my av stuff in on NAS devices which my tv can play from directly.

My current thoughts are to go for a heart and lung transplant - motherboard, processor, cpu fan, memory - into my existing case and using the SSD, HD drive and Blu-ray writer I already have, plus the satellite tuner card, terrestrial tv card and Hauppauge Colossus 2 capture card. (My existing case came with an LED model name illumination that could be changed in colour. I switched it off).
Baby steps. I’m looking for a performance on processing times boost with potential for further upgrades if warranted. My ambitions are clearly less than you guys.
A quick look reveals that there are plenty of DisplayPort to hdmi cables on offer and that certainly seems the way to go.
i shall undoubtably be agonising over this for a while longer yet.
Last edited:


Well-known member
A quick look reveals that there are plenty of DisplayPort to hdmi cables on offer and that certainly seems the way to go.
i shall undoubtably be agonising over this for a while longer yet.
Ok, there is some tricky stuff with "DisplayPort to HDMI" cables or adapter...Active or Passive.


I read up on it and had it sorted out when I spent $30 for my Active adapter.
Radeon 290 HDMI >1900x1200,
Radeon 290 DisplayPort to HDMI > 4k/30 or 1440p/60

My brain is not handing out the details today.
Think it had to do with how much resolution and refresh rate came out the other end of the cable.

I've never had anything that had an Intel IGPU in it. So never able to do any testing.
I did finally cave and bought a Nvidia 1660 Super just to see what GPU encoding was all about.
Then they released the 1650 Super ($100 cheaper) with updated NVEnc hardware equal to all the others now.

Wish I could just buy an Intel cpu and wrangle it into one of my AMD motherboards. :)

Good luck!
Last edited:
Top Bottom