ZyrtX

OP didnt say what games he want to run, so I assume it's the latest demanding games. 
 
Looking at 4K 144Hz IPS screen, no TN. There isnt 'seperate monitors' at first (or I just missed it)
 
also, is this Austrailian dollars?
 
That comes from 8700k, mid range Z370 motherboard (looking at MSI SLI Plus), 360mm AIO (Corsair H150i Pro) and 16GB DDR4 3000.
 
As for using slow RAM, that will hurt minimum frame rates quite significantly, especially important when it comes to high refresh rate gaming. Checking prices, 2400MHz kits arent saving much money anyway compared to 3000.
I check au.pcpartpicker.com
At first I thought it's 4K 144Hz in the same, later turns out to be 4K 60Hz and unknown resolution at 144Hz. I'm against 1080p 144Hz, because the resolution is too much lower than 4K monitor beside it and will look bad in side by side comparsion.

FX 9590 should do the trick. 
 
 

You should be able to use DSR to play at resolutions higher than your display to see how the games perform before you spend a ton of money on the 4k display.
 
I will warn you though that windows is pretty bad on a 4k display. So unless you sit fairly close to it, you'll need scaling, and windows scaling is... well its quite crap.

That's not true, as long as you're willing to lower the settings a little bit a 1080 or even a 1070 (or either of the Vega cards) is enough. My r9 fury runs doom 2016 at 4k with pretty high settings, a 1080 would have no problems even with newer titles than that.
I also recommend buying used, if the card hasn't been abused (you can generally tell) they're pretty much as good as new. If you want to know how scaling affects your image quality, I have a link in my signature to a thread I made that explains it.

I had post this at another thread, maybe below comparison can let you know the differences.
 
The reduce of 10 PPI really not make any huge impact on clarity to me.
But if 1080p on 32" wide wise then it is pretty bad as it only 69 PPI which is reduce of 23 PPI compare with 24".
 
Unless you already cannot accept 1080p 24" where the PPI is 92, then you should get a 27" 2160p (4K) monitor which will give you 163 PPI. In this extra of 71 PPI then I believe they might give a huge differences on clarity and sharpness.
 
Below is comparison which I take the photo very near to show out not much different in 34" vs 24" for 1080p.
 
This is 34" UltraWide 2560x1080 (LG 34UC79G) - 82 PPI

 
This is 24" Wide 1920x1080 (ViewSonic VP2468) - 92 PPI

 
I own this two monitors and I use it everyday side by side, means my distance for both monitors is same and I seat in normal distance because I don't move my keyboard and if I seat too far then impossible I can reach the keyboard anymore.
 
LG 34UC79G (34" 2560x1080, 82 PPI) and ViewSonic VP2468 (24" 1920x1080, 92 PPI)

 
Before I change to above, I am using the 1440p ViewSonic VX3209-2K monitor. All in total of 3 is similar sharpness to me, the only I miss is the 1440p had better and bigger workplace and it is much better for internet browsing as less scrolling required, but all this is solved after I attached another monitor as portrait mode for internet browsing or doing doc when required.
 
ViewSonic VX3209-2K (32" 2560x1440, 92 PPI)

You can judge how much the pixelation matters to you by looking at a regular 16:9 27" 1080p monitor. Ppi (pixel per inch) is the same for 1920x1080/27" and 2560x1080/34".
 
Visit a store, where they have a regular 27" on display and then decide based on how it looks to you

Sorry for the confusion, I meant you are not able to directly dial in specific +mV, as you could on previous gen cards.
 
You can set up this curve in Precision OCX as well, as demonstrated in the JayzTwoCents oc guide I linked above.

^ this.
 
Also, if you do decide to go for a 4k monitor, don't buy a 24". That's just a complete waste imo..

i would say that 1440p high refresh or 1440p ultrawide high refresh is the way to go right now

Yea, I guess it's better for safety sake, if you have the option.

I have always used a single rail and never had any issues (currently on 1080).

Exactly.
 
 
Even though the games you play are less intensive, they are still competitive games, where having 144Hz refresh rate can give you an edge. From there it depends how much you care for said edge. If you don't care too much and the main purpose is productivity, then get a 1440p 60hz monitor. The extra screen real estate will be priceless.

For reference, the pixelation is the same as on 1080p 16:9 27" monitors. If you have the option, I would go and visit a store to check it out for yourself. Shouldnt be too hard to find a store that sells a 27" basic 1080p display.
 
Personally, I wouldn't go with a 34" 1080p monitor either, as I had a 1080p 27" in the past and was not very satisfied with it. If you're on a tight budget get a 60-75hz 34" 1440p (with freesync if you have an AMD gpu).

Dearest Linus,

Very nice video.

Now, please make a video on how to adjust my CPU Clock for Daylight Savings.

I asked my friend and he just stared at me blankly.

When the clocks spring backwards do I underclock or overclock to compensate?

Thanks
- Chunk

1) PCI is an obsolete technology which as been replaced with PCIe.
 
2) You do not buy a "PCIe" that is what the slots on your motherboard are called. You cannot buy more slots.
 
Just because an SSD uses PCIe does not mean it is NVME.

Okay, first of all, you should open up the case and listen to the fans to figure out which one is making all that noise. NZXT CAM doesn't show case fan RPM.

I agree. Also, as Squinty said, it's most likely just poorly optimized. Unless you get similarly poor performance in other AAA titles, upgrade might not be necessary at all for now.

My thoughts? Pretty good. It’s not without its faults but it’s a good phone.
 
Would I buy one? No, not because it’s expensive, but because being the biggest iPhone redesign in years, it’s bound to have early teething pains, as usual for the tech industry.
 
I’d wait for next year, where they’ll refine it and polish some of the rough edges. Heck, it might even be cheaper.

I don't know who he is but if this wanna be savvy is the one who helped you put together that pcpartpicker list on the Original Post he knows shit about PCs.

Image Above Provided by: LittleCarrot

Welcome to the Brand New Update for the Modding FAQ Post
This has been quite the work giving the FAQ a new look from the old text based version and I hope everyone here enjoys it and find it useful. The old version however is not gone, for anyone who still wants to view it with the same up to date info I will leave a link to it HERE.
 
This thread will go over some of the most common mods, contain information on sleeving, painting components, templates, modding, and more with detailed instructions for all the mods.
 

 
If there is anything you want to see added, or contribute let me know by either posting below or messaging me I'm always open to new ideas.
 
 
General Wiring
 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
Modding
 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
Painting
 

 

 

 

 

 

It's the CPU imo rather than the graphics card, as he said he has trouble maintaning 60 fps. GTX980TI should be well on par with 1070. Buying a used i7+decent mobo from one of the newer generations should do the trick (skylake or maybe even broadwell-e).
 
Ignore what I said, it seems that AC:O stresses out the GPU much more than the CPU. I watched a few videos of AC:O gameplay with the same specs as OP, where the cpu usage fluctuates between 50-70%, while the GPU runs at 95%+ constantly.

This looks about as good as it gets, and you can still save a couple bucks on the case/buying some of the stuff used (gpu, monitors, case?), which would get you down to about 850$ or even less.

Ummm. 16GB isn't luxury. 8GB is "I'm really poor and don't have money for 16GB". 16GB is Standard. 32GB is luxury.,
 
imho