EVGA has an entire kit for that power supply, but if you only want mobo, CPU and GPU connector, you can buy those separate
https://store.cablemod.com/product/cablemod-e-series-g2-p2-basic-cable-kit/
You are stuck with a cheap cpu for at least 3 years but somehow have money to get a 1440p monitor...
Honestly get your priorities straight, your gaming experience will be quite bad regardless what you get.
If you can grab a RX 570 4GB for a good price go that way but still... 1440P isn't exactly you should aim for on a budget.
Well what else do you expect people to use?
S340 Elite or P400 TG are the best cases, and there aren't any mainstream competitors for such a low price point.
HUE+ is by far the best RGB strips
NZXT X42/52/62 is the best looking AIO in most people's opinion.
NZXT gets money and sales for making components that look nice and aren't overly expensive.
nicely done, not that much of a fan of the looks but its always nice to finish a build, would like to see more pictures or else its more of a status update thing tbh
No, and because you don't typically know how they are measuring response time it isn't very important as long as it isn't higher than 5ms. The much more important number is the refresh rate and whether the panel (pcb) has input lag or not and if so: how much.
FreeSync and GSync are both completely pointless if you're going to have a 1080ti, because they only benefit you when you can't maintain a reasonable FPS and with that card there isn't a game you won't be able to play with good FPS in the next 3-5 years minimum.
This is going to be fairly lengthy so I apologize, but frankly I'm tired of seeing people who say "60hz is good enough"...
First things first: if a monitor is less than 120hz it isn't worth considering for games. I don't want to make this a whole rant but unless you only play single player games then 60hz is complete garbage, and anyone who says different simply hasn't spent any real time playing games on a better monitor. Aside from motion blur and jerky movement the bigger issue with a low response time is poor positional accuracy, which for lack of a better term affects registration in online games.
What I mean is this: let's say you're playing an FPS and an enemy is running across your screen...
60hz: X - - - - - X - - - - - X - - - - - - X - - - - - X
120hz: X - - X - - X - - X - - X - - X - - X - - X - - X - - X
Now let's consider what happens when you aim at and attempt to shoot said enemy. First, you need to aim by placing your crosshair and then you need to shoot and wait for the server to tell your client whether you hit or not. So the reality is that when you aim at the top player model (let's say the second X) the actual position of the player according to the server could be anywhere between the first and third X even without considering latency and input lag.
So the benefit of a higher refresh rate is that not only do you get better information that allows you to more accurately place your crosshair because the information being displayed on your screen is more in line with the server, but you also minimize the impact of latency and input lag. The result? You will get better registration and the game will FEEL better.
Ever played an online FPS like CSGO and you SWEAR you shot the guy before he shot you? A lot of people blame lag for that, and input lag can be to blame, but rarely is ping the problem if you're playing on an appropriate connection. The real issue is that between a slow refresh rate (60hz is 16ms between frames) and input lag (up to 30ms on some panels, particularly a problem with 60hz IPS monitors) they aren't shooting where the server has determined the hit box is.
Keep in mind: even if the model is only a little off it skews the result pretty heavily because if the model is shifted right a few millimeters it means your effective target is much smaller because you are only aiming at the left side of the hit box.
I've been gaming online since the late 90s and I spent a fair amount of time playing competitive CS 1.6 and Source. When I first started playing I was on a nice 19" CRT monitor, and as soon as I switched to an LCD my registration and the overall feel of the game dropped significantly. It wasn't until getting higher refresh rate monitors (and now ULMB) that I finally feel that playing an FPS or other online game is as good as it was on the old CRT monitor.
Speaking of which: ULMB is the absolute "tits" to put it crudely. LCD monitors suffer from what is called frame persistence, meaning that the image that is drawn remains on the screen until a new frame replaces it. That's why the response time isn't very important, because it's a measure of gray to gray and not a full pixel transition... the companies are assuming you're going to be going from frame to frame and not from blank screen to full frame.
What ULMB does is flash the backlight, essentially inserting a "clear" screen and then going to black. It wipes the frame out immediately after it's drawn and forces every frame to be drawn fresh. That may not sound like a big deal... but it is. Frame persistence is what is largely responsible for motion blur and while speeding up the refresh rate lowers the amount you'll get, but clearing the frames pretty much eliminates it. It makes everything that moves on your screen SIGNIFICANTLY more crisp/clear and also is far less fatiguing on your eyes as well. I will never own another monitor without it (as a primary gaming screen anyway).
I know this is long, but if you want my recommendation here is the quick and dirty:
Get something that's 1440p, it's a high enough resolution that you'll be perfectly fine for MANY YEARS since games are still 5+ years from even using native textures over 1080p (everything is currently being post-processed and upscaled from compressed textures). Make sure it is at least 120hz and has ULMB (or an equivalent depending on brand, since ULMB is nVidia's term for what used to be called Lightboost).
If you have the budget the Asus PG279Q is the best monitor out there. While the PG348Q looks sexy I wouldn't personally want to drop back down to 100hz (120hz is 8ms between frames and any slower is bad) or have to give up ULMB just to get the ultra-wide UNLESS you mostly play single player games. In which case... knock yourself out!
So far I can tell you have a very great list, really hard to advise differently... you have super high end components that match perfectly together... the only difference I would make is go with an Asus motherboard because they usually are of higher quality than MSi... The problem with MSi is that they will favour marketing and brand name over actual quality.
All looks pretty good, and regarding a 1080 ti, there is not much of a difference between 2 fans and 3 or each card, so just choose whichever looks good or if you have plenty of money, get the most expensive one for overkill.
Packed with all the latest NVIDIA technologies and supporting fantastic G-SYNC technology for super fluid frame rates in action packed games such as Half Life 3, Fallout 5, Prey, Quake: Champions and Doom, take your gaming experience to the next level with GeForce GTX 1080Ti.
dv8t got a reaction from 8uhbbhu8 in Car Enthusiast Club [Now Motorcycle friendly!] - First thread to 150k! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
