Shahnewaz

Here's my interpretation of their HD series:
 
First digit (HD5xx) is the range, higher number means higher end:
2xx, 3xx and 4xx are fairly cheap, closed-back and all-purpose. I believe the "Pro" variants have a fairly flat frequency response curve and can be used as a low-cost reference model. 5xx: Their mid-range, 'sweet spot' segment. I suppose one could call these the entry-level in the high-end headphone market. Very open and fun-soudning with excellent soundstage, quite an airy sound. Easy to drive at 50 Ohm. 6xx: A step over the 5xx line, warmer in the sound signature and supposedly more detailed. Also much harder to drive at 300 Ohms. 7xx: Somewhere between the 6xx and 8xx series. The only model currently is the HD700 which is sort of like a budget HD800 although the sound signature is said to be a little different (and actually better according to certain peoples' tastes) than their bigger brother. Half the price and half the impedance (150 Ohm) compare to the HD800. 8xx: Their flagship line. Need I say more? Second digit (HDx5x) indicates position in the line, there isn't any definite naming scheme but it varies from range to range. Higher number means a higher model.
There's also some differences between different models in terms of sound signature. The HD558 is said to have more bass compared to the HD598 which has a more neutral bass response.
 
Third digit (HDxx8) isn't really relevant above the 5xx range as everything ends with a 0 and their older models where they use both the last numbers (HDx80) to indicate range. In their current line however it seems to indicate revision. For example they replaced the HD555 with the HD558, the number bump indicating it's a newer version of the HD55x.
 
Once again, this is just my interpretation and it's indeed bit fuzzy as they seem to have changed the way their naming scheme works a few years ago. I think the HD580 used to be the top of the HD5xx range (with the HD280 and HD380 being on top of the HD2xx and HD3xx lines respectively) before they replaced it with the HD590 and then the HD595. I might be entirely wrong on this though, so forgive me if some facts are incorrect.

So for anyone who has the same issue I went digging around on the internet and found this. 
 
I am using the same Joystick, a Logitech 3D Pro. It seems having a USB joystick or a controller like an Xbox One/360 controller will stop your display from shutting off. 
 
That is really dumb. Why MS hasn't fixed it is beyond me. 
 
But that's how you fix it. 
 
https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows_10-other_settings/windows-10-screen-wont-turn-off-after-specified/51ede8de-2899-4d0c-a5cb-a45529396d2b

Time to follow this thread. 😄

Time to follow this thread. 😄

CPUs have overheat protection nowadays.
 
Anyways, good on you for going used route. Always make sure you can test the part yourself before you buy it from a seller.
That automatically rules out eBay.

"Future proofing" is really a dumb thing. Nobody can predict the future. Just buy what you need and what you know you'll need in the future.
You sure you need 12 cores? Then get 12 cores. You need 802.11ax? Then get that. There's no way you can guarantee you will need it or use it few years down the line.
 
I recommended the 3900X because I thought your work software will benefit from it. If you need fast internet connectivity, just go wired.
 
Don't chase this rabbit hole of "future proofing". Time and time again this has led to buyer's remorse. Buy what you need. Simple.

I go by Notebookcheck's recommendations.
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Notebookcheck-s-Top-10-Multimedia-Notebooks.98608.0.html

With a build like this you're better off buying used. Fair to say this won't last long and paying full price for all of this would be a terrible rip-off.
 

For now and only in gaming, and I wonder how much. You'll pay dearly in the future:
No SMT
Drastically smaller cache
Mandatory platform change
Security flaws

This is exactly what high-end Ryzen and Threadripper chips are meant for.
Yep. As someone else said, you're clearly stuck in the past.
It is unfounded. There's no peripheral or software I've ever known that refuses to work in a "not-Intel" platform. Peripherals are peripherals. Software is software, unless your software specifically mentions Intel-specific optimizations. Whatever makes it run faster wins.
Developers and programmers don't have the time or luxury to stay current on brand new releases and platforms. Trust me, AMD has more than caught up. I'd love to give you professional outlet reviews regarding this but I will have to know exactly what kind of CPU you're looking for.
Things do move slowly in engineering but that doesn't mean you have to buy a computer to match. You buy what's the best for you in the market.
There is no inherent bottleneck of the platform solely being AMD. As everyone has said, AMD is unequivocally faster in productivity.
You should ask your co-workers for their reasoning. You don't want to waste your hard earned money.
For now. In the future, when your software gets updated and multi-core support is implemented, the AMD offering will run in circles.
But for now, you'll hardly see a benefit going Intel because the single-thread advantage is almost nil. All they have left is clock-speed advantage.
PCPartPicker Part List: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/n7YmL2
CPU: AMD Ryzen 9 3900X 3.8 GHz 12-Core Processor  ($493.84 @ Amazon)
CPU Cooler: be quiet! Dark Rock 4 CPU Cooler  ($69.98 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: Asus TUF GAMING X570-PLUS (WI-FI) ATX AM4 Motherboard  ($194.89 @ B&H)
Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws V 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR4-3600 Memory  ($134.99 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: EVGA SuperNOVA G3 550 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply  ($86.98 @ Newegg)
Total: $980.68
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2019-12-26 21:14 EST-0500

Thanks ! Cheers!

stuck in the past.

Any reason you're stuck on Intel platform?

Selective bias? What will annoy you more? 140 vs. 160FPS? Or 160FPS with occasional stuttering or 140 with no stuttering?
This will only get worse in the future as you play games with more demanding CPU requirements. The 3600 will handle it fine whereas the 9600K will choke.
CPU upgrades aren't a drop-in option with Intel.

For now and only in gaming, and I wonder how much. You'll pay dearly in the future:
No SMT
Drastically smaller cache
Mandatory platform change
Security flaws

Well awesome! Thanks so much for your help! for the past hour or so I have been problem free.  Is the Channel important or just leave it to auto?  
 
Also, where can I learn all this?  Like I want to know what all the encrypt modes abbreviations mean.  
 
Thanks!

Literally no outlet has recommended a 9600K over a 3600 or anything else for the matter. I don't know what argument you're bringing here, the 3600 is the overall better option now and in the future.
EDIT:
 

For now and only in gaming, and I wonder how much. You'll pay dearly in the future:
No SMT
Drastically smaller cache
Mandatory platform change
Security flaws

OK. Then I'll wait. Thanks for all the information.

I currently have everything. ?
But yeah why not.

Since you're editing 4K video I'd swap the GPU to an Nvidia one since you can utilize CUDA acceleration.

The best of the best. A12x25 PWM for 120mm and A14 PWM for 14mm.
A12x25 fans give you the best of both.
Don't be like me and try to save money by going for the Redux models. There's a reason they're Redux and cheap (they have a poor overall noise profile).

You can run them slower which will push more air than the bequiet fans at the same RPM.

No.
Yes.

Is it unequivocally safe? No, you're running it out of spec and voiding warranty.
That being said, given OP's conditions, it sounds safe as long as he's not pushing too high voltages and does proper testing.
I did say yes.