Feedback on new design

[Marak]

Hey guys, I have decided it's time to upgrade my old bucket.

I'll be buying all fresh parts, (I'll give my old tower to a friend), and I have a habbit of only buying once every 5-6 years, so my budget is going to be between 4-5k.

Aside from some upgrades, I haven't really been keeping up on the latest news(new job pays well, but doesn't give me much time to read articles haha).

So a few things first: the systems primary use is going to be gaming, hmd and 4k. I'm going to spend a bit of time getting the design right before I go out and plonk the cash down.

This is what I have gotten so far:

Mobo: Asus ROG Strict Z270e gaming
CPU: Intel i7-770k
RAM: G.Skill TridentZ 32gb(2x16) x 2
GPU: Gigabyte GeForce GTX1080 Xtreme gaming x 2
HD: Samsung 960 pro 1TB
WD Black 5TB
Case: undecided
PSU: EVGA supernova P2 850w
Cooler: Corsair H115i
Monitor: undecided (im looking for g-sync and 4k)
VR: Rift most likely
KB: undecided
MOUSE: I was going to go with a RAT but I found out they are out of business now, I need to find a similar modular mouse.
Headset(I live in Japan, speakers arnt an option): undecided, might just grab this one from a local store.

So as you can see there are a few holes in the design still, I have been using Newegg for pricing, as not all hardware is easy to get here in Japan, I'll probably order what I need from the states.

Any input would be appreciated, and sorry for any typos, I'm on my phone.

- Marak

 

[Valantar]

• Does your budget include the monitor, HMD, and all peripherals?
• While the 7700K is the best gaming CPU out there currently, I'm iffy on recommending it for a $4-5K rig that's supposed to last 5-6 years. Games are increasingly multi-threaded, and especially at 4K there's little difference even today between it and lower-clocked, higher core count CPUs like the i7-6900K or Ryzen 7 1800X. If I were to gamble (future proofing in computers is a gamble at best), I'd say one of the latter would be quite a lot better for gaming in 5-6 years. Oh, and the latter is half the price of the former while performing pretty much identically (a few percent slower in games, if that).
• When you're already in that price range, not spending the extra $150 per card (same brand and model) for the 1080Ti is downright silly. At ~20-25% faster, it's worth it.
• You're wasting money on your choice of SSD. You won't notice even the slightest difference in gaming between the 960 Pro and Evo (and even compared to a decent SATA SSD, real-world differences will be negligible). Go for the Evo, and use the $150 difference to pay for one of the 1080Ti upgrades. Or go for a 1TB SATA SSD, and pay for both of your GPU upgrades with money to spare. Your choice.
• Other than that, the build looks fine. Motherboard choice depends on CPU choice. 32GB of RAM is more than enough. The PSU will more than likely be fine even with a HEDT CPU and twin 1080Tis - with light overclocks you'll still not be reaching 100% PSU load even under power virus loads (~200W CPU, ~250-300W per GPU). Gaming loads are far lower. Not to mention that that is a great PSU. For me to suggest a case, you'd have to say something about your preferences. Size, style, features, so on.

 

[DaveSimmons]

> I have a habit of only buying once every 5-6 years, so my budget is going to be between 4-5k.

Can you stand to wait 3 months to see what Intel's Coffee Lake is like? You might get a 6-core / 12-thread CPU that will have the single-core speed of the 7700K but the 2 extra cores for future-proofing.

Do you need 6 TB? I'd rather have pure SSD storage. I keep Steam and Origin installs on a separate storage drive from the OS so I currently have a 256 GB Samsung EVO boot drive and a 750 GB EVO games drive. For you perhaps a 512 GB EVO boot drive and a 2 TB EVO game installs SSD?

 

[Marak]

• Does your budget include the monitor, HMD, and all peripherals?
• While the 7700K is the best gaming CPU out there currently, I'm iffy on recommending it for a $4-5K rig that's supposed to last 5-6 years. Games are increasingly multi-threaded, and especially at 4K there's little difference even today between it and lower-clocked, higher core count CPUs like the i7-6900K or Ryzen 7 1800X. If I were to gamble (future proofing in computers is a gamble at best), I'd say one of the latter would be quite a lot better for gaming in 5-6 years. Oh, and the latter is half the price of the former while performing pretty much identically (a few percent slower in games, if that).
• When you're already in that price range, not spending the extra $150 per card (same brand and model) for the 1080Ti is downright silly. At ~20-25% faster, it's worth it.
• You're wasting money on your choice of SSD. You won't notice even the slightest difference in gaming between the 960 Pro and Evo (and even compared to a decent SATA SSD, real-world differences will be negligible). Go for the Evo, and use the $150 difference to pay for one of the 1080Ti upgrades. Or go for a 1TB SATA SSD, and pay for both of your GPU upgrades with money to spare. Your choice.
• Other than that, the build looks fine. Motherboard choice depends on CPU choice. 32GB of RAM is more than enough. The PSU will more than likely be fine even with a HEDT CPU and twin 1080Tis - with light overclocks you'll still not be reaching 100% PSU load even under power virus loads (~200W CPU, ~250-300W per GPU). Gaming loads are far lower. Not to mention that that is a great PSU. For me to suggest a case, you'd have to say something about your preferences. Size, style, features, so on.

That was supposedto say ti, sorry fat thumbs. Thanks for the feedback, when I get a chance I'll go mthrough and update the post.

 

[Marak]

> I have a habit of only buying once every 5-6 years, so my budget is going to be between 4-5k.

Can you stand to wait 3 months to see what Intel's Coffee Lake is like? You might get a 6-core / 12-thread CPU that will have the single-core speed of the 7700K but the 2 extra cores for future-proofing.

Do you need 6 TB? I'd rather have pure SSD storage. I keep Steam and Origin installs on a separate storage drive from the OS so I currently have a 256 GB Samsung EVO boot drive and a 750 GB EVO games drive. For you perhaps a 512 GB EVO boot drive and a 2 TB EVO game installs SSD?

I'm actually thinking of getting a small sad for Windows, keeping the large sad for games and dumping the spinny. As for the cpu, I probably will wait to see what the reviews say, I still have a lot of checking Todo (still figuring out case etc).
I'm not rushing this build, so 3 month wait isn't an issue.

 

[lehtv]

That makes sense on your budget. I'd suggest 960 EVO 256GB or 512GB for the OS drive (can also fit some games), and a 850 EVO 1TB or MX300 1050GB for general storage.

5-6 year upgrade cycle is fine for everything except the graphics card. You'll want to upgrade that once or twice during those 5-6 years in order to stay on top of the game . However, if I had a 5k budget just for the PC parts in a 5-6 year span, I'd rather spend 3k now then upgrade in 3 years with another 2k - if needed. It may be you don't have to spend anywhere close to your maximum budget to get 5-6 years out of the system (not counting graphics card upgrades).

 

[Marak]

Honestly I have no issue in a few years dropping another 1.5k on new duals, I'll pass these onto a mate.

I need to update the main post about my monitor etc, just stuck at work for another 5 hours

 

[Valantar]

However, if I had a 5k budget just for the PC parts in a 5-6 year span, I'd rather spend 3k now then upgrade in 3 years with another 2k - if needed. It may be you don't have to spend anywhere close to your maximum budget to get 5-6 years out of the system (not counting graphics card upgrades).

If that 5k budget includes a HMD (~$800), quality keyboard and mouse (~$250) and a monitor ($500-$infinite), that takes a sizeable chunk out of the budget. Especially since monitors are a long-lasting investment, it makes sense to splurge for any and all features you'd want even a little ahead of time. As the OP says, they want 4k G-Sync, I'd add HDR to that list - HDR monitors look absolutely amazing, and upcoming games are going to make good use of it. There are only a few monitors fitting that description on the market, though, and they're not cheap. Buying a monitor without HDR now and figuring out in a year or two that you want it is rather silly.

As for your storage suggestion, I agree 100%. The only big decision left is the CPU/platform. For longevity I would say buy Ryzen now (6c12t or 8c16t), wait a month or two for X299 (6c12t or 8c16t with better IPC and better overclocking, but probably far more expensive), or another couple of months for Coffee Lake (Z370? (up to 6c12t with the highest available IPC and probably vet high clocks too)).



Edit: AMD-positive autocorrect

 

[lehtv]

If that 5k budget includes a HMD (~$800), quality keyboard and mouse (~$250) and a monitor ($500-$infinite), that takes a sizeable chunk out of the budget. Especially since monitors are a long-lasting investment, it makes sense to splurge for any and all features you'd want even a little ahead of time.

Monitors are long-lasting, sure, but you also pay a massive premium to be an early adopter of the latest and greatest features. I would rather buy a midrange monitor and upgrade that to a high end one in 2-3 years when the cost comes down, than a high end one and keep it for 5-6 years. You're likely to get better features and more mature technology with the upgrade, and end up paying less overall

 

[Valantar]

Monitors are long-lasting, sure, but you also pay a massive premium to be an early adopter of the latest and greatest features. I would rather buy a midrange monitor and upgrade that to a high end one in 2-3 years when the cost comes down, than a high end one and keep it for 5-6 years. You're likely to get better features and more mature technology with the upgrade, and end up paying less overall

I would argue that 5-6 years is a short lifespan for a monitor. 2-3, even if you sell it or give it away, is really really bad. While I do at some point want a curved ultrawide with HDR and Freesync, I don't plan on replacing my trusty Dell U2711 (2011-model) until it dies. Don't see any real reason to. Unless Nvidia abandons G-Sync in the coming years, I don't see why a 27-32" 4k HDR monitor should last any less than ten years. Not that a non-HDR monitor would last shorter either, but chances of the lack of HDR nagging you and triggering a completely unnecessary and wasteful upgrade are very real.

 

[Marak]

Monitors are long-lasting, sure, but you also pay a massive premium to be an early adopter of the latest and greatest features. I would rather buy a midrange monitor and upgrade that to a high end one in 2-3 years when the cost comes down, than a high end one and keep it for 5-6 years. You're likely to get better features and more mature technology with the upgrade, and end up paying less overall

Honestly I'm considering popping my budget a little for the monitor I'm looking at, it's only 1200.

 

[lehtv]

I would argue that 5-6 years is a short lifespan for a monitor. 2-3, even if you sell it or give it away, is really really bad.

2-3 years can't be bad for any piece of consumer electronics. Hell, some people upgrade their smartphone every year.

I've upgraded each monitor I've owned in about 2-3 years, in that time technology has gone forward just the right amount to warrant an upgrade, and the old monitor still fetches a good price in the used market.

Not that a non-HDR monitor would last shorter either, but chances of the lack of HDR nagging you and triggering a completely unnecessary and wasteful upgrade are very real.

It's not going to be wasteful when it saves you money. In 2-3 years, there's no longer any early adopter tax on HDR monitors.

 

[Valantar]

2-3 years can't be bad for any piece of consumer electronics. Hell, some people upgrade their smartphone every year.

I've upgraded each monitor I've owned in about 2-3 years, in that time technology has gone forward just the right amount to warrant an upgrade, and the old monitor still fetches a good price in the used market.



It's not going to be wasteful when it saves you money. In 2-3 years, there's no longer any early adopter tax on HDR monitors.

A) Money is an arbitrarily defined social construct, and as such an infinitely renewable resource. For someone with sufficient access to money to afford a $5000 PC, wasting money should be the least of their concerns. Plain and simple. There exists a world beyond the ultra-consumerist PCMR upgrade cycle, after all. And consumer electronics are a HUGE pollutant. As such: spending a bit more to reduce waste is a very, very sensible choice. Thinking ahead to avoid unnecessary replacements, even at a higher total cost, is the opposite of wasteful.

B) Saying that 2-3 years can't be bad for any product category because upgrade cycles are ~1 year in the field where progress has arguably been the fastest in recent years is just plain illogical. Not to mention that the average smartphone lifespan is extending rather dramatically these days. By the same logic, do you replace your entire PC each time you want a GPU upgrade? Do you replace your fridge every time there's a new "smart" version out? We all gain from once in a while tempering our immediate tech lust, planning ahead, and making conscious long-term choices rather than silly short-term impulse purchases.

 

[lehtv]

A) Money is an arbitrarily defined social construct, and as such an infinitely renewable resource. For someone with sufficient access to money to afford a $5000 PC, wasting money should be the least of their concerns. Plain and simple.

It doesn't follow that if you can afford a $5000 PC, wasting money isn't a concern. Why is that not true of a person who can afford a $3000 PC or a $1000 PC? Wasting money is relative to who's buying. I don't know why you're making assumptions about what the OP considers wasting.

There exists a world beyond the ultra-consumerist PCMR upgrade cycle, after all.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

And consumer electronics are a HUGE pollutant. As such: spending a bit more to reduce waste is a very, very sensible choice.

Pollutant or waste? Two different things.

Whether consumer electronics is a pollutant is utterly irrelevant to the discussion, but let me just point out a glaring flaw in your logic: if you upgrade your monitor and sell the old one to another user, that other user won't be buying a new monitor. Net pollution is the same since the same number of monitors have been manufactured, while net cost for both users is lower.

Thinking ahead to avoid unnecessary replacements, even at a higher total cost, is the opposite of wasteful.

That makes no sense to me. If the total cost is higher, it is wasteful. That is the definition of "wasteful".

B) Saying that 2-3 years can't be bad for any product category because upgrade cycles are ~1 year in the field where progress has arguably been the fastest in recent years is just plain illogical.

I didn't say smart phones have an upgrade cycle of 1 year, I said some people upgrade their smart phone every year. There's a difference. I'm still using a Samsung S4 - it seems I upgrade monitors more often than smart phones. But that's just me.

Not to mention that the average smartphone lifespan is extending rather dramatically these days. By the same logic, do you replace your entire PC each time you want a GPU upgrade?

By what same logic? I don't see how upgrading the entire PC along with a GPU upgrade is in any way analogous to just upgrading the smart phone or just upgrading the monitor.

Do you replace your fridge every time there's a new "smart" version out? We all gain from once in a while tempering our immediate tech lust, planning ahead, and making conscious long-term choices rather than silly short-term impulse purchases.

Exactly why I would advise against paying the early adopter's fee on a new technology. It's better to wait until the technology gets a bit cheaper. Of course, I don't know how much a 4K HDR GSync monitor is going to cost when it comes out vs. 2-3 years later, but based on how these things typically go, there's going to be a pretty substantial price premium for early adopters, and the technology won't be as mature as later on.