shotsfired

Constructive comments are very welcome. Debate is reasonable. 
 
I chose the 9800X because I wanted a rig that could handle x2 M.2 drives, a full water block, quad channel memory (because it looks amazing, that's all), and it needed to be able to handle x2 1080 TIs in SLI. I also love overclocking, need something with fast enough cores to game supremely while also having enough cores to handle my rendering and production. And, well, I enjoy being overkill. 
 
Threadripper's 1900x almost got my purchase, but the single core performance is not good enough. Same for Ryzen. I almost got a 7th gen X processor, but the 9th gen came out a week before I was ready to buy. Didn't go with a 9900k because I wanted a quad channel memory setup, and I don't want my cards running on 8x/4x because of my M.2 drives. So I bought the 9800X. 

So the preview 3rd gen Ryzen 8 core part just edges out a stock 9900k in Cinebench.

@Eastman51 Sir, you are a blessing, I didn't have enough time this morning before work to check the system so it just kept going for roughly 14 hours. This is the longest the system has been stable @ 23 hours. I think this is the solution. Although my next step is attempt to get the ram higher than it's auto setting of 2133MHz... I appreciate your speedy response and help. Also thank you @shotsfired @nick name @JRzoid @samcool55 @gbergeron @badreg @Radium_Angel for all of your quick responses and informative help. A great helpful community I think I will stick around!!! 

Good suggestions. 

I had an almost identical issue when I put together my Ryzen build. I too have an Asus board, though not an identical one.
My issue ended up being that I had Asus AI Suite III installed, which was causing these freezes to happen. If you have that installed, uninstall it and see if the issue persists.
I would also update your BIOS and you could also try reinstalling Windows. 

Sweeeeet, gonna be a hell of a machine.

Check it out... 

There’s plenty of lanes in the chipset for 2x M.2 drives, the chipset itself has 4 lanes to the CPU and unless you raid the M.2 (which would only get you transfer speed not latency improvement) it doesn’t matter too much especially if you don’t do thunderbolt/10GbE transfers.
 
I don’t think 4x is supported anymore for pascal anyways so as a precaution it is reasonable since it would be annoying if it was screwing with the cards. Right now I only have one M.2 and it doesn’t cause any issues on my Z270 board and diskmark performamce is within 0-10% of what I see it benchmarked on with proper pcie lanes.
 
Quad channel does look very cool especially when you have 8 dimms , those dummy dimms are such a genius product.
 
1900X is pretty eh. I looked at it as well early on But got it out of my head that I needed it. If 16vs8x made a huge deal I might have gone for it or if 3x/4x sli was a thing ..... Maybe.......

Are you only wanting to getting a Surface device? 

That 5GHz is at 1.4v.  I run it 24/7 at 4.8GHz @ 1.3v.  I am interested to see what you are going to be able to get out of your chip.

I've been eyeballing the same CPU for my own reasons as well. I've been considering the ASRock X299 Fatal1ty i9 XE. With the massive VRM heatsinks. Any reason that's not one up for consideration?

Thanks, mod. ? This was getting a little out of control for a second... 

Silicon degradation is also not an opinion. 

Not true, unsafe high temps can lead to degraded silicon, and early failure. Of course, if you sustain the temp. Hitting it and then coming down soon after isn't a big deal. 

70c is completely fine for a Ryzen chip. Is it overclocked? It seems higher than normal IF it's stock clocks, but. 
 
What cooler are you using?

Will V64 ever become better than a 1080ti in most games, no (Its already faster in a couple though, Forza 7) But you're also paying $200 more for the 1080ti so it should be expected that it would be faster. Will it eventually overtake the 1080 though, Id be willing to say probably

Thank you. This was very informative. 

Vega 64 performs clock for clock the same as vega 56 in games https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3053-vega-64-vs-vega-56-clock-for-clock-shader-differences , performance wise you are buying an overclocked vega 56 for 500$. Vega 64 will probably never come close to a 1080 ti in games,
but you will draw a lot of power if you try. If you have a freesync monitor and really dont care about the power draw it might make sense for 500$,
but at around the same pricepoint a 1070 ti makes a lot more sense otherwise (overclocks nicely it seems). If course if you really want all the performance you can get go for a 1080 ti.

1080Ti all the way. It's performance is consistent, whereas the Vega cards are hit and miss. I know if it was my money, I wouldn't be spending it on a card that may or may not perform great on a title I want to play.

I wouldn't count on finewine letting Vega catch the 1080 Ti. Max OC to Max OC, the 1080 Ti actually has slightly more Flops

If you are doing just gaming then 1080 Ti will serve you better but if you are doing anything related to professional work then Vega 64 is way to go.

actually the cooler a processor the less power it consumes.
 
So you could shave 10W or more just by keeping it really cool.

Huh? E-ATX is 7. It's just a slightly wider ATX board
 
RIVBE: http://content.hwigroup.net/images/products/xl/202549.jpg
7 Slots
 
G1.Sniper 5: http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/917/3dek.jpg
7 Slots
 
ASUS P9X79E-WS: https://www.asus.com/media/global/products/URUof6qXVyn9iQUL/vCJa6Z0zz8Tz8Mvh_500.jpg
7 Slots