Tech News                                                       

If you're planning to build a new PC or just curious about future tech, you might have heard of PCIe 7.0 or PCIe 8.0—the 

 that promises blazing-fast speeds up to 1TB per second.

Sounds impressive, but what does it really mean for you as a gamer, creator, or everyday PC user? Let’s break it down.

What Is PCIe and Why It Matters for Modern PCs

PCIe (Peripheral Component Interconnect Express) is the highway that connects your CPU to high-performance components like your GPU, SSD, sound card, and more. Every few years, a new version of PCIe comes out—doubling the speed of the previous generation:

With PCIe 8.0, a full 16-lane connection can move up to 1TB/s of data bidirectionally. That’s 4× faster than PCIe 6.0, and over 30× faster than PCIe 3.0. It’s designed for AI training, big data, HPC, and the next generation of ultra-demanding applications.

PCIe 8.0 is built for data centers, enterprise servers, and AI labs first—not everyday gaming rigs. While it’s exciting tech, most consumer workloads (like gaming, streaming, or editing) don’t even max out PCIe 4.0 yet.

In fact, PCIe 4.0 is still more than enough for most users in 2025. Even PCIe 5.0, which is now starting to appear in mainstream motherboards, offers more bandwidth than most GPUs or SSDs can fully use today.

So unless you’re working with massive AI datasets or high-speed networking, you can 

comfortably stick with PCIe 4.0 or 5.0 for now

PCIe 8.0 Is Backward Compatible: Upgrade Without Replacing Everything

Worried about future-proofing? Good news: PCIe 8.0 will be fully backward-compatible. 

This “plug and play” compatibility makes upgrades stress-free. You won’t need to replace all your hardware at once, saving you money and time.

PCIe 8.0 Speed and Power Efficiency: What’s New Under the Hood

Aside from raw speed, PCIe 8.0 also focuses on efficiency:

In other words: not just faster—also leaner and cleaner.

PCIe 8.0 Summary: What Consumers Need to Know Before Upgrading

If you’re building or upgrading a PC in 2025:





If you're planning to build a new PC or just curious about future tech, you might have heard of PCIe 7.0 or PCIe 8.0—the upcoming interface standard that promises blazing-fast speeds up to 1TB per second.

Sounds impressive, but what does it really mean for you as a gamer, creator, or everyday PC user? Let’s break it down.



What Is PCIe and Why It Matters for Modern PCs



(Resource: PCI-SIG)



PCIe (Peripheral Component Interconnect Express) is the highway that connects your CPU to high-performance components like your GPU, SSD, sound card, and more. Every few years, a new version of PCIe comes out—doubling the speed of the previous generation:





PCIe 3.0 (2010): 8 GT/s



PCIe 4.0 (2017): 16 GT/s



PCIe 5.0 (2019): 32 GT/s



PCIe 6.0 (2022): 64 GT/s



PCIe 7.0 (expected 2025): 128 GT/s



PCIe 8.0 (expected 2028): 256 GT/s

With PCIe 8.0, a full 16-lane connection can move up to 1TB/s of data bidirectionally. That’s 4× faster than PCIe 6.0, and over 30× faster than PCIe 3.0. It’s designed for AI training, big data, HPC, and the next generation of ultra-demanding applications.







Do You Really Need PCIe 8.0 for Gaming?

Short answer: Not any time soon.

PCIe 8.0 is built for data centers, enterprise servers, and AI labs first—not everyday gaming rigs. While it’s exciting tech, most consumer workloads (like gaming, streaming, or editing) don’t even max out PCIe 4.0 yet.

In fact, PCIe 4.0 is still more than enough for most users in 2025. Even PCIe 5.0, which is now starting to appear in mainstream motherboards, offers more bandwidth than most GPUs or SSDs can fully use today.

So unless you’re working with massive AI datasets or high-speed networking, you can comfortably stick with PCIe 4.0 or 5.0 for now—without missing out.







PCIe 8.0 Is Backward Compatible: Upgrade Without Replacing Everything

Worried about future-proofing? Good news: PCIe 8.0 will be fully backward-compatible. 





Your older PCIe 4.0 or 5.0 SSDs and GPUs will still work on new PCIe 8.0 motherboards.



And vice versa, if you buy a PCIe 8.0 GPU down the line, it will still work on your current board (just at a lower speed).

This “plug and play” compatibility makes upgrades stress-free. You won’t need to replace all your hardware at once, saving you money and time.



PCIe 8.0 Speed and Power Efficiency: What’s New Under the Hood

Aside from raw speed, PCIe 8.0 also focuses on efficiency:





Lower power consumption (especially important for laptops and servers)



New connector designs for better signal integrity and cooling



Still maintains low latency despite huge bandwidth increases

In other words: not just faster—also leaner and cleaner.







PCIe 8.0 Summary: What Consumers Need to Know Before Upgrading

If you’re building or upgrading a PC in 2025:





Stick with PCIe 4.0 or 5.0 — they’re fast, stable, and cost-effective.



Don’t rush into PCIe 5.0 if your components don’t demand it yet.



No need to wait for PCIe 8.0—it’s coming in 2028, and it’s aimed at high-end commercial workloads for now.

PCIe 8.0 brings 256.0 GT/s speed—but PCIe 4.0 is still plenty for most users today.

PCIe 8.0 Explained: Everything We Know About the 2028 Specification Release

Hardware Tips                                                   

When shopping for a graphics card, you may notice that the same model often comes in both dual-fan and triple-fan versions, with a price difference of around NT$1,000–2,000. So, should you save money and go for the cheaper dual-fan card, or spend a little extra for the cooler-looking triple-fan card?

How Fan Count Affects GPU Cooling and Performance

A graphics card primarily relies on its fans to cool the GPU chip and other onboard components. The number of fans can affect:

Dual-Fan Graphics Cards – Pros and Cons

Triple-Fan Graphics Cards – Pros and Cons

Which Is Better for You: Dual-Fan or Triple-Fan GPU?

Here are three key factors to help you choose the right GPU design:





When shopping for a graphics card, you may notice that the same model often comes in both dual-fan and triple-fan versions, with a price difference of around NT$1,000–2,000. So, should you save money and go for the cheaper dual-fan card, or spend a little extra for the cooler-looking triple-fan card?



How Fan Count Affects GPU Cooling and Performance

A graphics card primarily relies on its fans to cool the GPU chip and other onboard components. The number of fans can affect:





Cooling efficiency – More fans generally mean better heat dissipation.



Noise level – Better cooling can come with higher noise output, depending on fan speed and design.



Card length & case compatibility – More fans typically require a longer card, which may limit compatibility with certain PC cases.



Dual-Fan Graphics Cards – Pros and Cons

Pros:





Shorter length (typically 200–280 mm), ideal for small form factor (SFF) cases or ITX builds.



Lower cost and better value for budget-conscious buyers.



More flexible installation space, less likely to interfere with other components.

Cons:





Slightly lower cooling performance compared to triple-fan designs.



Under heavy load, temperatures may be higher, causing fans to spin faster and generate more noise.







Triple-Fan Graphics Cards – Pros and Cons

Pros:





Superior cooling efficiency, well-suited for high-end GPUs.



More stable temperatures during extended gaming or rendering sessions.



Can achieve the same cooling performance at lower fan speeds, making them quieter under load.

Cons:





Longer length (often 300 mm or more), requiring careful case clearance checks.



Usually slightly more expensive than dual-fan variants.







Which Is Better for You: Dual-Fan or Triple-Fan GPU?

Here are three key factors to help you choose the right GPU design:

1. Case Size & Compatibility





Limited space (ITX / compact mATX cases) → Dual-fan GPU



Mid-tower or larger ATX cases → Triple-fan GPU

2. Budget





Tight budget → Dual-fan GPU



Flexible budget → Triple-fan GPU

3. Usage Needs





Heavy GPU workloads (e.g., 4K gaming, 3D rendering) → Triple-fan GPU for better cooling.



Light to moderate use → Dual-fan GPU for lower noise and cost savings.





Dual-fan or triple-fan GPU? Here’s what you need to know before you buy.

Dual-Fan vs. Triple-Fan GPU: What to Know Before Buying a Graphics Card

How-to Guides                                                   

Building a gaming PC means paying attention to every component – including the power supply. In recent years, Intel released new ATX power supply standards (ATX 3.0 and ATX 3.1) to accommodate the increasing power demands of modern hardware. This article breaks down the differences between ATX 3.0 and ATX 3.1 in a beginner-friendly way, focusing on practical implications for PC builders and gamers. We’ll cover what changed in the 

limits differ, and what it means for choosing a PSU.

ATX 3.0 is a major update to the long-standing ATX power supply design guide, released by Intel in 2022. It was developed in response to new generations of GPUs and CPUs that can draw significantly more power, with rapid spikes in consumption. ATX 3.0 introduced new guidelines to ensure PSUs can deliver these power spikes reliably, and it also brought in a new high-power connector (the 12VHPWR) for next-gen graphics cards. For PC builders, ATX 3.0 PSUs marked a big step forward from earlier ATX 2.x units, especially if you plan to use high-end GPUs like NVIDIA’s RTX 5000 series.

ATX 3.1, released in 2023, is a refinement of the 3.0 standard. It builds on the same features but includes some tweaks based on industry feedback and new PCI-SIG updates. While not a revolutionary jump, ATX 3.1 updated certain technical specifications – notably the 

 (Previously Known as 12VHPWR) connector design and the transient power excursion requirements – to improve safety and performance. For the average gamer or builder, an ATX 3.1 PSU is largely similar to ATX 3.0, but with a bit more polish on these key aspects.

The 12VHPWR Connector: Updates from ATX 3.0 to 3.1

One of the headline features of ATX 3.0 was the introduction of the 12VHPWR connector (sometimes called the “PCIe 5.0 16-pin” power connector). This 12+4 pin connector can supply up to 600 Watts to a graphics card over a single cable – a big improvement over the older 8-pin (150 W) connectors. The extra 4 pins are sense wires that communicate with the GPU, allowing it to know the power capacity available (e.g. 150W, 300W, 450W, or 600W depending on cable/PSU). In practice, this meant ATX 3.0 PSUs could ship with a single native cable for high-end GPUs (no more multiple daisy-chained 8-pins or adapter dongles), simplifying cable management for builders.

ATX 3.1 keeps the that same connector, but incorporates an updated design as defined by PCI-SIG. Often referred to as the 

connector, the revised connector has subtle mechanical improvements to enhance safety. For example, the sense-pin configuration and pin length were adjusted to ensure the GPU can detect a proper full insertion of the plug (reducing the chance of the connector not being fully seated – a known issue that led to some melting connectors in early RTX 4090 usage). In short, ATX 3.1’s power connector is the same shape and pin-count, but built to a refined standard: if you buy an ATX 3.1 PSU, its 12VHPWR cable will adhere to the latest PCIe spec for better contact and durability.

↑Graphics card damaged due to overheating connector (Image from 

From a builder’s perspective, both ATX 3.0 and 3.1 PSUs will support the latest GPUs with the 12VHPWR or 12V2x6. There’s no difference in how you plug in your card – they are cross-compatible. The advantage of ATX 3.1’s version is simply added reliability. If you already have an ATX 3.0 PSU with a 12VHPWR and use it correctly (fully seated cable, not bending it too sharply, etc.), you’re generally fine. But ATX 3.1 gives extra peace of mind that the connector meets the newest safety refinements from PCI-SIG.

Transient Power Excursions: Handling Spikes in Power

Aside from the physical connector, the most important updates are in how these standards handle transient power excursions – in simpler terms, sudden power spikes. Modern GPUs and CPUs can momentarily draw far more than their average power (for example, a 300W TDP GPU might spike to 450–600W for a few milliseconds when under a sudden heavy load). If a PSU can’t handle these surges, your system could become unstable or shut down unexpectedly.

ATX 3.0 set a new requirement that power supplies be able to accommodate extreme spikes without issue. Intel’s ATX 3.0 design guide specifies that a compliant PSU must handle power excursions up to 200% of its rated power for very short durations. It also lays out specific timing brackets – for instance (simplified for clarity): up to ~120% load for tens of milliseconds, ~160–180% for a few milliseconds, and ~200% for microseconds. This was a big change from earlier ATX 2.x units, which weren’t explicitly designed for such high surges. In practical terms, an ATX 3.0 750 W PSU could briefly supply up to ~1500 W in a spike, and a 1200 W PSU could handle almost 2400 W in a microsecond-scale transient. This ensures GPUs like the RTX 30/40/50 series, which are known for transient spikes, won’t overwhelm the PSU and cause shutdowns as long as the PSU is ATX 3.0 compliant.

ATX 3.1 refines these power excursion limits. According to Intel’s updated 3.1 specification, the allowable transient overshoot levels were adjusted slightly. The changes are technical, but essentially Intel fine-tuned how much over current and for how long a PSU must supply power. For example, ATX 3.1 might require sustaining 200% load for a slightly shorter duration than 3.0 did, or define additional tiers for intermediate spike durations. These tweaks align with data collected from real-world GPU behavior and testing feedback. The practical implication is that ATX 3.1 PSUs are even less likely to trip OCP/OPP (over-current/over-power protection) during sudden bursts, compared to ATX 3.0 units. They have been tested to handle transients with an extra margin of stability.

For PC builders, if you’re running power-hungry GPUs or doing extreme overclocking, these transient handling improvements mean 

fewer chances of a random reboot when your GPU spikes to full load

. ATX 3.0 already made great strides here, and ATX 3.1 polishes it further. That said, in normal gaming usage, you might not notice a difference – both standards are designed to handle GPU/CPU spikes that previous generation PSUs might not tolerate. It’s mainly an assurance of stability under extreme conditions.

Other Notable Differences and Similarities

Beyond the connector and transient power requirements, ATX 3.0 and 3.1 share most features. Both maintain the standard ATX PSU dimensions and mounting, the typical 24-pin motherboard connector, CPU EPS 8-pin connectors, SATA, etc. They also both coexist with ATX12VO (a separate, optional standard focusing on single-rail 12V-only PSUs for better efficiency). If you’re building a typical gaming PC, you’ll likely use a multi-rail ATX 3.x PSU (which provides 12V, 5V, 3.3V rails in the traditional way).

Here’s a summary comparison of the two standards:

Table: Comparing key aspects of ATX 3.0 vs ATX 3.1 power supply standards.

As shown above, the differences are not dramatic – ATX 3.1 mainly fine-tunes what ATX 3.0 introduced. Both standards require high efficiency (with ATX 80 Plus certifications typically applied separately) and support new “low-power sleep” states and modern standby features on motherboards (helpful for reducing idle power draw). ATX 3.1 may incorporate slightly updated requirements for those as well, though those changes are minor for end-users.

Practical Implications for PC Builders & Gamers

So, what does all this mean when you’re shopping for or building a gaming PC?

ATX 3.0 vs ATX 3.1 ultimately comes down to evolution, not revolution. ATX 3.0 brought huge improvements for powering today’s power-hungry GPUs and CPUs, and 

 those improvements. The main practical takeaways are the support for the 12V2x6(12VHPWR) high-power GPU connector and strong handling of transient surges – both critical for high-end gaming rigs. ATX 3.1 

 of the connector and adds even more resilience to sudden power spikes, benefiting extreme use cases and further safeguarding against power-related crashes.

For most PC builders and gamers, both standards will serve you well. If you’re on the cutting edge, ATX 3.1 offers peace of mind that you have the latest spec. Otherwise, an ATX 3.0 PSU from a reputable brand already covers the vast majority of needs for current and upcoming hardware. In either case, these standards represent a positive development: they are ensuring that PSUs keep up with the fast pace of GPU and CPU advancements, delivering stable and safe power for your gaming adventures.





Building a gaming PC means paying attention to every component – including the power supply. In recent years, Intel released new ATX power supply standards (ATX 3.0 and ATX 3.1) to accommodate the increasing power demands of modern hardware. This article breaks down the differences between ATX 3.0 and ATX 3.1 in a beginner-friendly way, focusing on practical implications for PC builders and gamers. We’ll cover what changed in the 12V-2x6 connector, how transient power excursion limits differ, and what it means for choosing a PSU.



Introduction to ATX 3.0 and ATX 3.1

ATX 3.0 is a major update to the long-standing ATX power supply design guide, released by Intel in 2022. It was developed in response to new generations of GPUs and CPUs that can draw significantly more power, with rapid spikes in consumption. ATX 3.0 introduced new guidelines to ensure PSUs can deliver these power spikes reliably, and it also brought in a new high-power connector (the 12VHPWR) for next-gen graphics cards. For PC builders, ATX 3.0 PSUs marked a big step forward from earlier ATX 2.x units, especially if you plan to use high-end GPUs like NVIDIA’s RTX 5000 series.



ATX 3.1, released in 2023, is a refinement of the 3.0 standard. It builds on the same features but includes some tweaks based on industry feedback and new PCI-SIG updates. While not a revolutionary jump, ATX 3.1 updated certain technical specifications – notably the 12V-2x6 (Previously Known as 12VHPWR) connector design and the transient power excursion requirements – to improve safety and performance. For the average gamer or builder, an ATX 3.1 PSU is largely similar to ATX 3.0, but with a bit more polish on these key aspects.



The 12VHPWR Connector: Updates from ATX 3.0 to 3.1

One of the headline features of ATX 3.0 was the introduction of the 12VHPWR connector (sometimes called the “PCIe 5.0 16-pin” power connector). This 12+4 pin connector can supply up to 600 Watts to a graphics card over a single cable – a big improvement over the older 8-pin (150 W) connectors. The extra 4 pins are sense wires that communicate with the GPU, allowing it to know the power capacity available (e.g. 150W, 300W, 450W, or 600W depending on cable/PSU). In practice, this meant ATX 3.0 PSUs could ship with a single native cable for high-end GPUs (no more multiple daisy-chained 8-pins or adapter dongles), simplifying cable management for builders.



ATX 3.1 keeps the that same connector, but incorporates an updated design as defined by PCI-SIG. Often referred to as the 12V-2x6 connector, the revised connector has subtle mechanical improvements to enhance safety. For example, the sense-pin configuration and pin length were adjusted to ensure the GPU can detect a proper full insertion of the plug (reducing the chance of the connector not being fully seated – a known issue that led to some melting connectors in early RTX 4090 usage). In short, ATX 3.1’s power connector is the same shape and pin-count, but built to a refined standard: if you buy an ATX 3.1 PSU, its 12VHPWR cable will adhere to the latest PCIe spec for better contact and durability.





↑Graphics card damaged due to overheating connector (Image from reddit, r/nvidia)



From a builder’s perspective, both ATX 3.0 and 3.1 PSUs will support the latest GPUs with the 12VHPWR or 12V2x6. There’s no difference in how you plug in your card – they are cross-compatible. The advantage of ATX 3.1’s version is simply added reliability. If you already have an ATX 3.0 PSU with a 12VHPWR and use it correctly (fully seated cable, not bending it too sharply, etc.), you’re generally fine. But ATX 3.1 gives extra peace of mind that the connector meets the newest safety refinements from PCI-SIG.



Transient Power Excursions: Handling Spikes in Power

Aside from the physical connector, the most important updates are in how these standards handle transient power excursions – in simpler terms, sudden power spikes. Modern GPUs and CPUs can momentarily draw far more than their average power (for example, a 300W TDP GPU might spike to 450–600W for a few milliseconds when under a sudden heavy load). If a PSU can’t handle these surges, your system could become unstable or shut down unexpectedly.



ATX 3.0 set a new requirement that power supplies be able to accommodate extreme spikes without issue. Intel’s ATX 3.0 design guide specifies that a compliant PSU must handle power excursions up to 200% of its rated power for very short durations. It also lays out specific timing brackets – for instance (simplified for clarity): up to ~120% load for tens of milliseconds, ~160–180% for a few milliseconds, and ~200% for microseconds. This was a big change from earlier ATX 2.x units, which weren’t explicitly designed for such high surges. In practical terms, an ATX 3.0 750 W PSU could briefly supply up to ~1500 W in a spike, and a 1200 W PSU could handle almost 2400 W in a microsecond-scale transient. This ensures GPUs like the RTX 30/40/50 series, which are known for transient spikes, won’t overwhelm the PSU and cause shutdowns as long as the PSU is ATX 3.0 compliant.



ATX 3.1 refines these power excursion limits. According to Intel’s updated 3.1 specification, the allowable transient overshoot levels were adjusted slightly. The changes are technical, but essentially Intel fine-tuned how much over current and for how long a PSU must supply power. For example, ATX 3.1 might require sustaining 200% load for a slightly shorter duration than 3.0 did, or define additional tiers for intermediate spike durations. These tweaks align with data collected from real-world GPU behavior and testing feedback. The practical implication is that ATX 3.1 PSUs are even less likely to trip OCP/OPP (over-current/over-power protection) during sudden bursts, compared to ATX 3.0 units. They have been tested to handle transients with an extra margin of stability.



For PC builders, if you’re running power-hungry GPUs or doing extreme overclocking, these transient handling improvements mean fewer chances of a random reboot when your GPU spikes to full load. ATX 3.0 already made great strides here, and ATX 3.1 polishes it further. That said, in normal gaming usage, you might not notice a difference – both standards are designed to handle GPU/CPU spikes that previous generation PSUs might not tolerate. It’s mainly an assurance of stability under extreme conditions.



Other Notable Differences and Similarities

Beyond the connector and transient power requirements, ATX 3.0 and 3.1 share most features. Both maintain the standard ATX PSU dimensions and mounting, the typical 24-pin motherboard connector, CPU EPS 8-pin connectors, SATA, etc. They also both coexist with ATX12VO (a separate, optional standard focusing on single-rail 12V-only PSUs for better efficiency). If you’re building a typical gaming PC, you’ll likely use a multi-rail ATX 3.x PSU (which provides 12V, 5V, 3.3V rails in the traditional way).



Here’s a summary comparison of the two standards:







Table: Comparing key aspects of ATX 3.0 vs ATX 3.1 power supply standards.



As shown above, the differences are not dramatic – ATX 3.1 mainly fine-tunes what ATX 3.0 introduced. Both standards require high efficiency (with ATX 80 Plus certifications typically applied separately) and support new “low-power sleep” states and modern standby features on motherboards (helpful for reducing idle power draw). ATX 3.1 may incorporate slightly updated requirements for those as well, though those changes are minor for end-users.



Practical Implications for PC Builders & Gamers

So, what does all this mean when you’re shopping for or building a gaming PC?





Future-Proofing for GPUs: If you plan to use or upgrade to a high-end graphics card, you’ll want at least an ATX 3.0 PSU. It will have the right cable (12VHPWR) out of the box and can handle the card’s power swings. An ATX 3.1 PSU gives you that plus the latest connector improvements. For example, builders using an RTX 5090 or upcoming next-gen GPUs can plug straight into a native 16-pin cable and trust their PSU to handle sudden spikes in wattage.



Stability Under Peak Loads: If you’ve ever had your PC reset when launching a game or benchmark, a likely cause is the PSU failing to meet a transient spike. ATX 3.0/3.1 units are specifically designed to prevent that. This means more stable performance in scenarios like VR gameplay, intensive ray tracing, or CPU stress tests, where power demand can jump instantaneously. ATX 3.1’s refinements further reduce the odds of tripping protections during these spikes.



Connector Safety: The updated 12VHPWR design under ATX 3.1 mitigates issues that early adopters encountered (like the melting connector problem from not fully plugging in the cable). As a gamer or builder, you should still always ensure the 16-pin plug is fully seated on your GPU and avoid bending the cable too close to the connector. But ATX 3.1 cables will be a bit more foolproof by design. Manufacturers also often include better quality 12VHPWR cables in newer PSUs, sometimes with 90-degree adapters or sturdier plugs.



Do You Need to Upgrade? If you already own a good ATX 3.0 PSU, you likely don’t need to rush out for ATX 3.1. The differences are incremental. However, if you’re buying a new PSU in 2025, check the specs – you might find some units labeled as ATX 3.1. Choosing one will give you the slight edge of the latest standard. 



Compatibility: Both ATX 3.0 and 3.1 are fully backward-compatible. They will work with any standard ATX motherboard and PC components. They simply add capabilities. For instance, you can use an ATX 3.0 PSU on an older PC build – it will perform like a high-quality ATX 2.x unit, just with extra connectors (you don’t have to use the 12VHPWR cable if your GPU doesn’t need it). Similarly, an ATX 3.1 PSU will work in any scenario an ATX 3.0 PSU would.



Conclusion

ATX 3.0 vs ATX 3.1 ultimately comes down to evolution, not revolution. ATX 3.0 brought huge improvements for powering today’s power-hungry GPUs and CPUs, and ATX 3.1 fine-tuned those improvements. The main practical takeaways are the support for the 12V2x6(12VHPWR) high-power GPU connector and strong handling of transient surges – both critical for high-end gaming rigs. ATX 3.1 improves the reliability of the connector and adds even more resilience to sudden power spikes, benefiting extreme use cases and further safeguarding against power-related crashes.



For most PC builders and gamers, both standards will serve you well. If you’re on the cutting edge, ATX 3.1 offers peace of mind that you have the latest spec. Otherwise, an ATX 3.0 PSU from a reputable brand already covers the vast majority of needs for current and upcoming hardware. In either case, these standards represent a positive development: they are ensuring that PSUs keep up with the fast pace of GPU and CPU advancements, delivering stable and safe power for your gaming adventures.

A beginner-friendly article that clearly explains the differences between ATX 3.0 and ATX 3.1 standards, with a focus on real-world implications for PC users and builders.

ATX 3.0 vs ATX 3.1 The Most Comprehensive Explanation That You Will Ever Need

When building a gaming PC on a tight budget, many players tend to maximize their GPU spending while opting for an entry-level CPU. Is this combination really worth it? Is a GPU the only critical component for a gaming rig? 

 conducted real-world testing using a low-end CPU paired with a high-end GPU, utilizing the i3-12100F and i9-12900KS with an RTX 3080 as their testing platform.

 compared to the i3-12100F, representing nearly a 

. This clearly shows that a high-end CPU is necessary to fully unleash the potential of a high-end GPU.

↑ Rainbow Six: Siege 1080P FPS Performance (Source: 

, the performance gap starts to narrow, but there is still an average FPS difference of 17, translating to nearly a 

↑ Rainbow Six: Siege 2K FPS Performance (Source: 

, the performance difference between the high-end and low-end CPUs becomes negligible, primarily because the GPU becomes the bottleneck, limiting further FPS gains.

↑ Rainbow Six: Siege 4K FPS Performance (Source: 

, even in Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla, the minimum FPS sees a 

↑ Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla 1080P FPS Performance (Source: 

↑ Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla 2K FPS Performance (Source: 

Similar to Rainbow Six: Siege, as the resolution increases to 

, the performance differences continue to shrink due to GPU limitations.

↑ Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla 4K FPS Performance (Source: 

Is It Worth Using a Low-End CPU with a High-End GPU?

, then pairing a low-end CPU with a high-end GPU is 

, as the GPU will be the main performance limiter. 

However, if your PC is also used for other tasks like streaming, content creation, or multitasking, a 

For first-time DIY builders, here are commonly recommended CPU and GPU pairings:

highly recommended to balance the performance of both components

 to avoid a low CPU, high GPU situation that can prevent your components from reaching their full potential. Balanced pairings will ensure your parts work synergistically rather than bottlenecking each other.





When building a gaming PC on a tight budget, many players tend to maximize their GPU spending while opting for an entry-level CPU. Is this combination really worth it? Is a GPU the only critical component for a gaming rig? 

Japanese media outlet PC Watch conducted real-world testing using a low-end CPU paired with a high-end GPU, utilizing the i3-12100F and i9-12900KS with an RTX 3080 as their testing platform.



Test Platform





Motherboard: Intel Z690



Memory: DDR5-4800 16GBx2



GPU: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080



SSD: M.2 NVMe (PCIe 4.0x4, 1TB)



CPU Cooler: AIO liquid cooler (360mm)



PSU: ATX 1000W (80 PLUS GOLD)



Gaming Benchmark Results





Rainbow Six: Siege

In Rainbow Six: Siege at 1080P with maximum settings, the i9-12900KS delivered 171 FPS higher on average compared to the i3-12100F, representing nearly a 47% increase. This clearly shows that a high-end CPU is necessary to fully unleash the potential of a high-end GPU.





Note: Since the test result images are in Japanese, we have provided a simple English translation for them.





↑ Rainbow Six: Siege 1080P FPS Performance (Source: PC Watch)



At 2K resolution, the performance gap starts to narrow, but there is still an average FPS difference of 17, translating to nearly a 10% performance increase compared to the lower-end CPU.





↑ Rainbow Six: Siege 2K FPS Performance (Source: PC Watch)



When the resolution is increased to 4K, the performance difference between the high-end and low-end CPUs becomes negligible, primarily because the GPU becomes the bottleneck, limiting further FPS gains.





↑ Rainbow Six: Siege 4K FPS Performance (Source: PC Watch)





Note: The test results are from 2022, and Rainbow Six: Siege has now been updated to Rainbow Six: Siege X.







Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla

What about open-world games?

At 1080P, even in Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla, the minimum FPS sees a performance increase of over 30% with the high-end CPU.





↑ Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla 1080P FPS Performance (Source: PC Watch)





↑ Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla 2K FPS Performance (Source: PC Watch)



Similar to Rainbow Six: Siege, as the resolution increases to 2K and 4K, the performance differences continue to shrink due to GPU limitations.





↑ Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla 4K FPS Performance (Source: PC Watch)



Is It Worth Using a Low-End CPU with a High-End GPU?

If your PC is solely for gaming at 4K resolution, then pairing a low-end CPU with a high-end GPU is feasible, as the GPU will be the main performance limiter. 

However, if your PC is also used for other tasks like streaming, content creation, or multitasking, a balanced CPU and GPU pairing is recommended for better overall system performance.



Recommended Pairings

For first-time DIY builders, here are commonly recommended CPU and GPU pairings:



Entry-Level:





Intel: Ultra 5 series CPU + RTX 5060 / 5060 Ti



AMD: Ryzen 5 series CPU + RX 7650 GRE

Mid-Range:





Intel: Ultra 7 series CPU + RTX 5070 / 5070 Ti



AMD: Ryzen 7 series CPU + RX 9060 XT

High-End:





Intel: Ultra 9 series CPU + RTX 5080 / 5090



AMD: Ryzen 9 series CPU + RX 9070 / 9070 XT







Conclusion

When pairing your CPU and GPU, it is highly recommended to balance the performance of both components to avoid a low CPU, high GPU situation that can prevent your components from reaching their full potential. Balanced pairings will ensure your parts work synergistically rather than bottlenecking each other.

Make sure your CPU can fully unleash its performance. As for how it will perform together, let’s break it down for you in one go!

What Happens When You Pair a Low-End CPU with a High-End GPU?

In 2025, gamers looking to upgrade their GPU have their eyes on two major contenders: 

. Both target the high-volume 1080p and 1440p gaming market, and both offer 16GB of VRAM, modern architecture, and compelling price-performance value.

So, which one is the better choice? This article breaks it down across performance, features, pricing, and target users to help you make the smart move.

Both are mid-high tier GPUs perfect for competitive and AAA gaming at 1080p/1440p resolutions.

Based on benchmark tests across popular titles, the RTX 5060 Ti maintains a modest performance lead in most scenarios:

The 5060 Ti benefits more from ray tracing and DLSS 3.5. For non-RT games, performance is nearly neck and neck.

If you value AI features or are into livestreaming, content creation, or ultra-smooth visuals, NVIDIA clearly leads in the software ecosystem.

In many global markets (including the US and EU):

So, while the 5060 Ti may edge out performance, 

the RX 9060 XT offers better price-per-frame

, especially if you don't prioritize ray tracing.

ASUS PRIME GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16GB GDDR7 OC Edition

Conclusion: Both are Excellent, But Serve Different Players

 is a price-performance champion—especially for players who don’t need heavy ray tracing or AI features. Meanwhile, the 

 shines in ray-traced titles and future-proofing, thanks to DLSS 3.5 and broader NVIDIA ecosystem support.

No matter which you choose, make sure you’re getting the 16GB version. That’s the true baseline for next-gen gaming in 2025 and beyond.



(5060 Ti vs. 9060 XT, VIDEOCARDZ)



In 2025, gamers looking to upgrade their GPU have their eyes on two major contenders: NVIDIA’s RTX 5060 Ti and AMD’s RX 9060 XT. Both target the high-volume 1080p and 1440p gaming market, and both offer 16GB of VRAM, modern architecture, and compelling price-performance value.



So, which one is the better choice? This article breaks it down across performance, features, pricing, and target users to help you make the smart move.



Specs at a Glance

Both are mid-high tier GPUs perfect for competitive and AAA gaming at 1080p/1440p resolutions.







Real-World Gaming Benchmarks

Based on benchmark tests across popular titles, the RTX 5060 Ti maintains a modest performance lead in most scenarios:





(VIDEOCARDZ, Source: Etektnix)



The 5060 Ti benefits more from ray tracing and DLSS 3.5. For non-RT games, performance is nearly neck and neck.



Ray Tracing & AI Upscaling: DLSS vs FSR

If you value AI features or are into livestreaming, content creation, or ultra-smooth visuals, NVIDIA clearly leads in the software ecosystem.







Price & Value

In many global markets (including the US and EU):





RTX 5060 Ti 16GB sells around $429 USD



RX 9060 XT 16GB starts around $349 USD

So, while the 5060 Ti may edge out performance, the RX 9060 XT offers better price-per-frame, especially if you don't prioritize ray tracing.



Who Should Buy Which?





Buying Tips



(ASUS PRIME GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16GB GDDR7 OC Edition)







Go for 16GB models – Avoid 8GB versions. Upcoming games are more VRAM-hungry, even at 1080p.



Check live pricing – If the 5060 Ti is only $30–$50 more, it may be worth it for the DLSS + RT extras. But a $70+ gap makes RX 9060 XT hard to ignore.



Conclusion: Both are Excellent, But Serve Different Players



(GIGABYTE Radeon RX 9060 XT GAMING OC 16G)



The RX 9060 XT is a price-performance champion—especially for players who don’t need heavy ray tracing or AI features. Meanwhile, the RTX 5060 Ti shines in ray-traced titles and future-proofing, thanks to DLSS 3.5 and broader NVIDIA ecosystem support.



No matter which you choose, make sure you’re getting the 16GB version. That’s the true baseline for next-gen gaming in 2025 and beyond.

A head-to-head comparison of NVIDIA and AMD’s top mid-range GPUs to help you make the right upgrade in 2025.

RTX 5060 Ti vs RX 9060 XT: The Ultimate 2025 Mid-Range GPU Showdown

The two major GPU manufacturers both released their next-generation graphics cards in 2025, along with their latest AI-based image upscaling technologies — 

 are advanced AI-based image upscaling technologies designed to boost gaming performance while preserving visual quality.

These technologies allow games to be rendered at a lower resolution internally and then upscaled to higher resolutions using artificial intelligence. The result is higher frame rates and smoother gameplay — without significantly sacrificing image clarity.

FSR 4 is AMD’s first version to adopt machine learning techniques, likely using convolutional neural networks (CNNs) to enhance image quality.

It upscales lower-resolution frames to higher resolutions and can generate intermediate frames to increase frame rate.

FSR 4 AI-Enhanced Upscaling plus Frame Generation

FSR 4 not only upscales low-resolution images to high resolution but also inserts intermediate frames to boost frame rates.

Offers multiple quality presets — Performance, Balanced, and Quality — to give users control over performance vs. image clarity.

, with AMD aiming to reach over 75 supported titles by the end of 2025.

DLSS 4 uses NVIDIA’s advanced deep learning model, powered by Tensor Cores, which are dedicated AI processing units on RTX 50 series GPUs.

One of DLSS 4’s biggest strengths is its ability to generate entirely new frames, dramatically increasing FPS without overloading the GPU.

DLSS 4 works with NVIDIA Reflex to reduce latency, keeping gameplay responsive even at high frame rates.

, making it more broadly available than FSR 4.

As FSR continues to evolve and potentially adds multi-frame generation in future updates, the gap between AMD and NVIDIA is narrowing — making this an exciting time for PC gamers and developers alike.





The two major GPU manufacturers both released their next-generation graphics cards in 2025, along with their latest AI-based image upscaling technologies — FSR 4 and DLSS 4.



FSR 4 (FidelityFX Super Resolution 4) by AMD and DLSS 4 (Deep Learning Super Sampling 4) by NVIDIA are advanced AI-based image upscaling technologies designed to boost gaming performance while preserving visual quality.







These technologies allow games to be rendered at a lower resolution internally and then upscaled to higher resolutions using artificial intelligence. The result is higher frame rates and smoother gameplay — without significantly sacrificing image clarity.



FSR 4 – AMD’s Approach







Machine Learning Upgrade

FSR 4 is AMD’s first version to adopt machine learning techniques, likely using convolutional neural networks (CNNs) to enhance image quality.







Upscaling + Frame Interpolation

It upscales lower-resolution frames to higher resolutions and can generate intermediate frames to increase frame rate.



FSR 4 AI-Enhanced Upscaling plus Frame Generation

FSR 4 not only upscales low-resolution images to high resolution but also inserts intermediate frames to boost frame rates.







Modes

Offers multiple quality presets — Performance, Balanced, and Quality — to give users control over performance vs. image clarity.







Hardware Support

Currently limited to AMD’s Radeon RX 9000 series.



Game Support

Works only with games that support FSR 3.1, with AMD aiming to reach over 75 supported titles by the end of 2025.







DLSS 4 – NVIDIA’s Latest Evolution







Deep Learning Core

DLSS 4 uses NVIDIA’s advanced deep learning model, powered by Tensor Cores, which are dedicated AI processing units on RTX 50 series GPUs.



Multi-Frame Generation

One of DLSS 4’s biggest strengths is its ability to generate entirely new frames, dramatically increasing FPS without overloading the GPU.







Reflex Integration

DLSS 4 works with NVIDIA Reflex to reduce latency, keeping gameplay responsive even at high frame rates.







Wider Adoption

Already supported by over 100 games, making it more broadly available than FSR 4.



Key Differences at a Glance

As FSR continues to evolve and potentially adds multi-frame generation in future updates, the gap between AMD and NVIDIA is narrowing — making this an exciting time for PC gamers and developers alike.





AI-based image upscaling technologies developed by AMD and NVIDIA to improve gaming performance while maintaining image quality close to native resolution.

FSR 4 vs. DLSS 4 - AI-based Image Upscaling Technology

While many modern games come with built-in benchmarks to help you instantly assess whether your system runs the game smoothly or if settings are too high or too low, not everyone buys a PC just for gaming. For productivity or professional use, third-party benchmarking tools are a better way to measure your system's performance through detailed data.

Developed by Maxon, Cinebench R23 is a free CPU benchmarking tool that evaluates both single-core and multi-core performance using the Cinema 4D rendering engine to simulate real 3D scene rendering. It’s one of the most widely used benchmarking standards in the industry and among DIY enthusiasts. Bonus: It also supports macOS!

Created by CPUID, CPU-Z is a popular tool for viewing detailed hardware information. It also includes a built-in benchmark module that tests both single-core and multi-core performance using compute-heavy tasks. Unlike Cinebench, it doesn’t simulate real-world scenarios but provides quick and simple performance data.

3DMark is a professional-grade benchmarking tool for testing GPU and overall system performance. It can simulate gaming scenarios, heavy graphics rendering, ray tracing, and more—providing a performance score based on your hardware.In addition to GPU tests (like ray tracing and DirectX 12), it can also evaluate CPU performance. 3DMark is an all-in-one solution, but it comes with a price tag.

FurMark is a stress-testing tool specifically for GPUs. It pushes your graphics card to its limits with a highly demanding "furry donut" rendering, helping you test stability, temperature, and cooling efficiency. This type of testing is often referred to as a “burn-in test.” Thanks to its signature rotating donut graphics, FurMark is jokingly nicknamed "the donut test."





While many modern games come with built-in benchmarks to help you instantly assess whether your system runs the game smoothly or if settings are too high or too low, not everyone buys a PC just for gaming. For productivity or professional use, third-party benchmarking tools are a better way to measure your system's performance through detailed data.



Recommended CPU Benchmark Tools

Cinebench R23 – Free

Developed by Maxon, Cinebench R23 is a free CPU benchmarking tool that evaluates both single-core and multi-core performance using the Cinema 4D rendering engine to simulate real 3D scene rendering. It’s one of the most widely used benchmarking standards in the industry and among DIY enthusiasts. Bonus: It also supports macOS!







CPU-Z Benchmark – Free

Created by CPUID, CPU-Z is a popular tool for viewing detailed hardware information. It also includes a built-in benchmark module that tests both single-core and multi-core performance using compute-heavy tasks. Unlike Cinebench, it doesn’t simulate real-world scenarios but provides quick and simple performance data.







Recommended GPU Benchmark Tools

3DMark Benchmark – Paid

3DMark is a professional-grade benchmarking tool for testing GPU and overall system performance. It can simulate gaming scenarios, heavy graphics rendering, ray tracing, and more—providing a performance score based on your hardware.In addition to GPU tests (like ray tracing and DirectX 12), it can also evaluate CPU performance. 3DMark is an all-in-one solution, but it comes with a price tag.







FurMark Benchmark – Free

FurMark is a stress-testing tool specifically for GPUs. It pushes your graphics card to its limits with a highly demanding "furry donut" rendering, helping you test stability, temperature, and cooling efficiency. This type of testing is often referred to as a “burn-in test.” Thanks to its signature rotating donut graphics, FurMark is jokingly nicknamed "the donut test."





Get to Know the 4 Most Popular Benchmarking Tools for Testing CPUs and GPUs Today.

Recommended Software for Testing CPU and GPU Performance

Build Guides                                                    

When shopping for a graphics card, after selecting the right one based on your budget and needs, you might find multiple models from the same manufacturer within the same tier. For example, MSI offers both the RTX 4060 Ti VENTUS and the RTX 4060 Ti GAMING X TRIO, both of which are part of the RTX 4060 Ti series, yet there is a $100 price difference. Why is this the case? It turns out that even within the same model, there are entry-level (sometimes called "base models") and flagship variants, which have some key differences.

| Differences Between Entry-Level and Flagship Graphics Cards |

 The design is usually more understated and minimalistic, typically without RGB lighting effects.

The design tends to be more stylish and is often equipped with RGB lighting that can be customized via software.

These cards use more basic materials, which results in average cooling performance, keeping the cost lower.

 Higher-quality materials are used, and additional optimizations are made for better cooling, offering stronger thermal performance but at a higher price.

Due to the simpler cooling materials, the base clock speeds are generally lower to match the cooling capabilities.

 Flagship cards are optimized for cooling, allowing higher base clock speeds even if they generate more heat, without the risk of overheating.

| Graphics Card Tier Breakdown for the Three Major Manufacturers |

| Should I Choose an Entry-Level or Flagship Graphics Card? |

If you're on a tight budget and care about performance-to-price ratio, it's a good idea to go for an entry-level card from a higher-tier series. On the other hand, if you have a more generous budget and care about the aesthetics, you can go for a flagship model that suits your budget. You'll get great performance and a visually appealing design!





When shopping for a graphics card, after selecting the right one based on your budget and needs, you might find multiple models from the same manufacturer within the same tier. For example, MSI offers both the RTX 4060 Ti VENTUS and the RTX 4060 Ti GAMING X TRIO, both of which are part of the RTX 4060 Ti series, yet there is a $100 price difference. Why is this the case? It turns out that even within the same model, there are entry-level (sometimes called "base models") and flagship variants, which have some key differences.



| Differences Between Entry-Level and Flagship Graphics Cards |

Design

Entry-Level: The design is usually more understated and minimalistic, typically without RGB lighting effects.

Flagship: The design tends to be more stylish and is often equipped with RGB lighting that can be customized via software.







Cooling

Entry-Level: These cards use more basic materials, which results in average cooling performance, keeping the cost lower.

Flagship: Higher-quality materials are used, and additional optimizations are made for better cooling, offering stronger thermal performance but at a higher price.







Clock Speeds

Entry-Level: Due to the simpler cooling materials, the base clock speeds are generally lower to match the cooling capabilities.

Flagship: Flagship cards are optimized for cooling, allowing higher base clock speeds even if they generate more heat, without the risk of overheating.



| Graphics Card Tier Breakdown for the Three Major Manufacturers |





Flagship: ASUS ROG / Gigabyte AORUS / MSI SUPRIM



Upper Mid-Tier: ASUS TUF / Gigabyte Gaming and Eagle / MSI Gaming X Trio



Entry-Level: ASUS DUAL / Gigabyte WINDFORCE / MSI VENTUS



| Should I Choose an Entry-Level or Flagship Graphics Card? |

If you're on a tight budget and care about performance-to-price ratio, it's a good idea to go for an entry-level card from a higher-tier series. On the other hand, if you have a more generous budget and care about the aesthetics, you can go for a flagship model that suits your budget. You'll get great performance and a visually appealing design!





When it comes to graphics cards, aside from performance levels, there is often a noticeable difference between entry-level and flagship models within the same tier.

Entry-Level vs. Flagship Graphics Cards: How to Choose

As an enthusiast of games and computer DIY in this age, we, darkFlash, feel proud and grateful for keep thinking how to develop impressive and extraordinary products with high-end facilities by assembling and using the PC cases, CPU coolers, case fans, and even gaming chairs and tables in person.

Our goal is to create products that could extremely exert its effect by every user.