HungryHamster

The cables that you got should be plenty long enough.
Extensions are a cheaper way of having "pretty cables."

Holy s**t I need that on my TV now.

Some of my favorite screenshots from Stray. I love Unreal Engine games!

Some of my favorite screenshots from Stray. I love Unreal Engine games!

I can assure you you can find somewhere in the backside of this giant case to hide a tiny USB hub. I had one completely hidden in a tiny ITX case.
 

It is not safe. It's literally the entire spec that has the issues so ANY 16pin cable has it.

Your answers are in this video... tl:dr - uncapped FPS > synced FPS. Despite the monitor not being able to refresh fast enough, the information it receives is more recent with lower latency, leading to more consistent performence.

That is my understanding. Even if you run into issues at 6600 MHz you could probably find some middle ground to still get over stock speed but less than the speed that you were having issues at. (But you can definitely run it without XMP if you aren't able to figure out the best settings for yourself or not confident in your selected speeds, the only issue is leaving speed on the table that you paid for. It WILL work at stock speeds.)

Yeah I would cap the frame-rate at just below the monitor's refresh rate at 140 (as sometimes it can still go a few frames over the cap), with RTSS (for stable frame-times, to eliminate micro-stutter). & also enable V-Sync in the Nvidia control panel (as it is required for G-Sync to function properly). 140fps is ~7ms of delay. Lets just say you can achieve double that (280fps) with no frame-rate cap, that is only a ~3.5ms difference. Which is fairly insignificant when playing online games. Most latency comes from ping, or the game server tick-rate. Half decent ping is ~50ms, & a half decent server tick-rate is 60Hz (~16ms).

XMP boost isnt a common name for it btw, just call it XMP or XMP profile
 
6600MHz isnt that high for 13th gen, you should be good.

Nope. There can be times that it is unstable or just doesn't POST if it's a very aggressive XMP, but the biggest risk with that is you have to clear CMOS, re-enable XMP, and lower the frequency 200MT/s at a time until it POSTs and becomes stable. 

There's a solution for that.....
Corsair Is Selling Dummy RAM With RGB Lights | Tom's Hardware (tomshardware.com)

DDR5 on Z690 especially was kinda broken with 4 DIMMs. You could use 4 DIMMs and everything, but it dropped your maximum memory clock down to somewhere in the 5000MT/s range and had other compatibility issues along side crazy long POST times. Those have started being ironed out on Z790 boards and Raptor Lake CPUs, though there is still a roughly 200-400MT/s decrease in max memory speed with 4 DIMMs rather than 2 DIMM configurations for the same number of ranks per channel (6800MT/s is possible on 2x32GB configs, but 6400-6600MT/s is what's possible on 4x16GB configurations). If you don't need 4 DIMMs for something like 128GB of RAM, it's generally a better idea to stick to 2 DIMM configs, just so you don't have to deal with any possible weirdness.

In general more than one module per channel can negatively impact the maximum working frequency. If it works, great, but you might not bother getting the insane high speed kits if you do so.

As with most systems, adding two more DIMM's puts extra strain on the IMC and you may find its harder to maintain the same speed that you could with only two. It absolutely can work but If you can help it, get the capacity you're looking for in two DIMM's for maximum compatibility. 

Pretty sure 4x16 Corsair Vengeance works in my Gigabyte board. Just because they're not selling 4x16 kits yet doesn't mean 4x16 wont work. 

I used Kaspersky for a long time, but nowadays i just stay with the integrated Windows Defender. It's by far the least intrusive solution.

If your monitor's max refresh rate is 144hz, then cap it 144hz and have G-sync enabled, there's no point of burning more electricity and gaining nothing. 

This really depends on your monitor and what "G-sync" tier it falls under. G-sync ultimate monitors have overdrive which effectively has no cap to the smoothness. G-sync compatible monitors have a sweet spot (min and max fps) and some issues arise when you are beyond that frame rate range in either direction. G-sync ultimate is becoming increasingly rare and even more expensive than it used to be, which is a shame bc I have an ultra wide ultimate tier monitor from 2016/2017 era (without HDR) and it's very nice to this day. The biggest drawback is that it locks you into Nvidia, or at least it used to. Not sure if the modern displays are compatible with free sync, but I know mine isn't.
 
Also, I think capping frame rates is the right thing to do, even with variable refresh rate technology. Here is why:
1) Making your GPU and CPU run for extreme frames makes no sense - it's an alarming amount of heat output for hours of game play; it's fun for testing but my 12700k and 3070ti combo can get my mini itx case very hot; it's alarming
2) You are more likely to notice frame drops without a limiter bc you have no headroom
3) The increase in fps over your monitor's max refresh rate might not matter at all depending on the game
4) Uses more electricity than necessary - which matters here where I live bc electricity is expensive
5) Puts way more stress on your PSU as the curves are exponential in nature, and you have to use way more power for the last 10%
6) Let's me enjoy gaming during the hot days when the ambient weather is over 90F
 
I think a few folks above already touched on it, but basically if you're playing tomb raider or assassin's creed, idk if you are going to benefit over 144 Hz. What do you really gain by pushing your GPU to 200 Hz? The latency improvement isn't even required for the gameplay. Even 60 fps is fine for those games. Some competitive e-sport games might have some benefit from higher refresh rates, but I think capping at double your monitor's max refresh rate is a good point to reduce input lag. Of course, you might be way outside the range of G-sync at that point (without overdrive). I play rocket league A LOT and I can assure you that there aren't enough frames on this planet to improve my talent 🙂

GTX 1080 supports DP 1.4 HBR3 but not DSC. Therefore it can achieve 4K 120 Hz 8 bpc. Higher will require chroma subsampling. Newer graphics cards can use DSC to achieve 144 Hz and 10 bpc color depth without chroma subsampling.
 
When powering off a DP monitor with the power button, most monitors are configured such that it is seen as a disconnect event. This means if you  have a multi-monitor setup, your windows/desktop icons will be rearranged onto your remaining monitors. This behavior will depend on exactly how the monitor is designed, however it is quite common for DisplayPort and quite uncommon with HDMI except on TVs.

dp1.4 works with 4k 120hz sdr or 4k 100hz hdr without subsampling, hdmi 2.0 is 4k 60hz iirc, could be wrong on this one, been awhile.
 
if you have no other monitors connected and, i'd use dp. if you have another monitor via dp to ur gpu, i'd use hdmi. Weird disconnects can happen with 2 dp monitors on sleep.

DP has several inherent drawbacks, from what I've read.  Monitor sleep tends to either not work or do wonky things with DP.  So unless there's a DP interface that offers superior refresh or other advantages--I would default to using HDMI every time.

https://linustechtips.com/topic/729232-guide-to-display-cables-adapters-v2/?output=DP
 
"Compatibility" section

It'll work, you just won't be able to run the monitor at 4K 144Hz without things like chroma subsampling. If you stick to 4K60 you should have no problem (IIRC 4K120 should work without chroma subsampling, but not as confident on that. 

To be fair, the game probably has the best graphics of any PC game. It's locked at 30FPS on PS5. The real FPS drain seems to be all those damn rats! I was watching a guy with a RTX 4090 do a playthrough with no DLSS and even with a 4090 he was dropping under 60FPS (in 4k resolution) whenever those mobs of like 1000 rats would spawn. In my personal opinion, I'm fine with the performance considering how amazing the graphics are. I get more displeased when games nerf gfx for people on last gen consoles and stuff like that.