minervx

Consoles are good if you want raw performance to price, and you don't have a high budget. Convenience, plug and play. PC for customization/mods, high framerate, access to thousands of indie titles, game engines, creative applications, etc.

It seems like GPU's demand more wattage than CPU's nowadays, so does that mean its best to do whatever airflow setup is better for the GPU?

What resolution and refresh rate do you intend to game at?

My current setup works fine for games that are a few years old or less demanding esports. Granted, I have become a snob. I would like to play newer single-player games at 4K/60fps high settings and newer multiplayer games at 1440p/144hz. And at some point, I would like to use unreal5 and create my own levels and worlds, and just sandbox around with it. None of this is urgent. I can wait. And I can play older games on my backlogue until then. Also, hardware has aged better in the past decade. A 2017 fares much better in 2023-2024 than a 2010 build did in 2017. It used to be the case that a PC was really outdated in 5 years. Now, 5 years is more like the middle of a lifespan.

Thanks for commenting that. It comes down to mindset. On my end, it's probably OCD - not wanting to waste resources if my current one works acceptably. Your mindset is not wasting time; living your passions to the fullest. Yours is overall better. I will still take at least a month or 2 to work on some goals, but I would like to build sometime this fall. I'll be less rigid on what I need to do before my next build. And not everything needs to be complete; even if slow progress is made, it's still progress.

I have a 7 year old PC. Affording a new one is no issue. I have a good amount of money saved up, though part of reason why because I'm frugal, and that means if I can get another 6-12 months out of this PC before rebuilding, that would feel efficient. There are also goals I have: Update resume. Apply for better jobs. Research different career options / learn marketable skills. Make various doctors appointments. Have more of a social life, and dating Sell things I don't need. Lots of other errands, phone calls, financial stuff and paperwork to do Travel or go on a roadtrip this year Some non-gaming hobbies Even if I had a great build right now, I probably wouldn't use it much the next few months. And it wouldn't feel special to be gaming a lot, knowing that I have other things looming over me. If I can make meaningful progress in the majority of these goals - let's say 5-6 out of 8 goals in the next few months - then reward myself with a PC, it would feel very special.

Well, maybe 4K on games that are a few years older or less demanding. But you'd still have the 4K for streaming/video content, image quality, more screen real estate in general. Most people would probably say 1440p/144 hz is a better sweetspot for gaming than 4K at a lower framerate, and in general I'd agree, though it depends on your preferences. Either way, don't get 1080p.

With this build, you easily be able to do 1440p at 144-165+ hz. Or 4K. RTINGS has reviews on monitors.

^ I 2nd the above comment. Looks good assuming pricing is normal. What monitor framerate and resolution will you be using?

I don't know your exact needs for editing, but 64 GB RAM is probably overkill. With this build, you could easily run a 1440p monitor. You could afford a monitor with good panel/colors. Why spend so much to have good graphics yet limit yourself with a monitor? (And a large size like 32" would be blurry with 1080p; 1440p at 27" would be a better balance between size and density)

This is my bad. I could've worded my original post in a way that was informative to beginners without being controversial or having biases. Its kinda ruined now

Use the stock cooler for now and save that $50+ toward your next build.

Note: I'm not saying people should prioritize frames/performance over all else. If you value silence or aesthetics over a few extra frames in a video game, that's totally fine. I'm just saying that the people who do seek performance should invest more into the CPU, less into the cooler.

@8tg Thermals and acoustics are factors, but it's also the extent. How many less degrees of temperatures and how many less decibels of sound do you get from the $80-90 cooler compared to the $40 cooler? Most tasks aren't demanding; even a lower-end cooler with a fan curve can run quietly for them. And gaming (the task that does require a higher fan speed), you'll have headphones or speakers playing to where fan noise won't be noticeable unless it's extremely loud. You may not want a loud fan when gaming, but you don't need a silent one either. But for recording sound, I totally get it.

This growth seems to be a normal rate. Populations are growing. Technology is advancing in some countries. Numbers are bound to incrementally go up over time.

Cavaet: People have different values. Some people may want to spend more to have a cooler that is very quiet or near-silent. Some people may value aesthetics. Not everyone is solely focused on performance-to-price. But if your main priority is performance-to-price, you may not need to spend more than $50 on cooler. A video from Hardware Canucks compared a $40 air cooler (Thermalright Assassin) to $90-110 air coolers. Not only were the temperature differences marginal, but even having 2 less degrees doesn't seem to meaningfully increase your framerates on games. I've seen other videos with similar points about cooling. (I'm not saying I have expertise in this just because I watched a few videos and if there are test that have found different results, let me know) A common mistake I see are builds with mid-range CPU's but expensive coolers. The CPU is way more important than the cooler. You get better performance from $300 CPU/$50 cooler than $200 CPU/$100 cooler. If have the best CPU possible for your needs (maybe the latest Intel i7/i9 or the highest consumer level Ryzen), and you're an enthusiast that wants to spend an extra $50-100 to get a few more frames in game, then get the $100+ air cooler or AIO. But this probably isn't the majority of people.

It's some asus prime atx motherboard from 2017 or so? I doubt it. But if I'm going with a new build, I want a total change. Plus, this motherboard might fail in a few years from now; it already has had a few bios problems.

My current build is 6 years old and very dated; I'll be building a new one sometime this year. Should I reuse any of the parts? Ryzen 5 1600 + motherboard: obviously replacing 8GBx2 (3200 mhz DDR4) RAM: it's technically possible to reuse this, but games/apps in a few years from now may benefit from DDR5, so i should switch? GTX 1060 (3GB): will replace at some point, but it is possible to use it as a placeholder in my next build and then get a better gpu later Sycthe mugen 5 cooler. Not sure if I could get brackets to just put this on a different CPU? Or reuse the fans on a different heatsink. But I wouldn't mind buying another cooler if possible. EVGA 650w power supply: would be fine if I go for a 4060. 4070, maybe...? But no more than that. SSD's: definitely reusing. i can always add another m.2 ssd later on if i upgrade Noctua & be quiet case silent wings fans: reuse Case. While it would be possible to reuse the same case and then change cases later on, rebuilding and redoing the cables would just be a hassle.

There are ways to save money. And there's ways not to save money. Buying the 3gb version to save like $20? (at the time) definitely wasn't the play. The same money people spend on nice coolers, case fans, storage, etc. they could put into the GPU. And then just upgrade the other parts later

I'm using the 3gb 1060 model as well (ryzen 5 1600). yes, im long overdue for an upgrade. But this card can run esports at 144hz at 1080p (or 1440p with lower settings). can run last-gen games at 4k (30-60 fps), or 60-75 fps at 1440p maybe. I can play some of the last-gen games on my backlog for now before I upgrade.

If you already have it, you can have a decent gaming experience on it until you buy your next one. But I wouldn't go out and buy a GTX 1060 now. You could spend a little bit more for something a lot better.

Any basic audio interface has a DAC.

It'll need to be <$1000. Also, there's sort of a mismatch. What buyer is looking to spend money on 32 GB of RAM but a lower end cpu and gpu?

Just a totally subjective opinion. They sit somewhere between a smartphone and watch, and to me, they feel eclipsed by both. A phone has far more utility. A traditional watch is more convenience. With a smart watch, the time it takes to navigate through the OS on a tiny screen, you could've already done the same via your smartphone. And traditional watches don't need to be charged every few days.

redacted