High spec gaming build

[saur0]

Ok so after several years on my current set up, I want to build a new gaming rig, but after weeks of research I find i'm going around in circles over cpu, gpu, choices, and that before I get started on ram and monitor. 

 

Obviously frame rate is important, but i'm keen to get the highest graphics settings I can (4k if possible), I also do some graphic design and media work (as a hobby) mostly using adobe, mostly still photography and digital art, but also some 4k video editing. Budget isn't a huge issue providing I don't waste money on overspec components i.e. 64 gig of 4000 ram that can't/wont be used.

 

i'm also planning on overclocking and water cooling, and getting into VR. 

 

CPU: My initial instinct was to go Intel, not that i'm fussed either way having had both Intel and AMD rigs in the past. But having done some research, I can't decided between i9 or TR. The next gen Intel chips still seem to far off to make it worth waiting (I want to build this year), but the current Intel chips edge it over TR in gaming performance, but then i'm not sure edging it is enough given the price difference? AMD chips look like good value in comparison but I can't work out if the 1920x is worth the extra over the 1900x?   

 

GPU: Obviously nvidia have just launched the RTX cards, they are expensive and new tech needs time to bed in, only a couple of game currently make full use of the new features, so it might be worth waiting for 3rd party RTX cards produced in a year or two before making the switch? In which case dual ASUS ROG Strix 1080's seems like a good choice but is it worth bumping them up to Ti's?

 

Monitor: ROG Swift PG279Q Monitor seems like the obvious choice, unless anyone has another suggestion? At one point I was considering the 34"ASUS ROG SWIFT PG348Q but 100hz and 4k gaming on a 34"!!!

 

 

[TechMan2175]

The i9 and TR will not be as good at games because of there lower single core performance, I would recommend the i7 8700k

[Thinkfreely]

So lets start simple, what is your overall budget?

[lmeneses]

4 minutes ago, saur0 said:

CPU: My initial instinct was to go Intel, not that i'm fussed either way having had both Intel and AMD rigs in the past. But having done some research, I can't decided between i9 or TR. The next gen Intel chips still seem to far off to make it worth waiting (I want to build this year), but the current Intel chips edge it over TR in gaming performance, but then i'm not sure edging it is enough given the price difference? AMD chips look like good value in comparison but I can't work out if the 1920x is worth the extra over the 1900x?   

 

GPU: Obviously nvidia have just launched the RTX cards, they are expensive and new tech needs time to bed in, only a couple of game currently make full use of the new features, so it might be worth waiting for 3rd party RTX cards produced in a year or two before making the switch? In which case dual ASUS ROG Strix 1080's seems like a good choice but is it worth bumping them up to Ti's?

 

Monitor: ROG Swift PG279Q Monitor seems like the obvious choice, unless anyone has another suggestion? At one point I was considering the 34"ASUS ROG SWIFT PG348Q but 100hz and 4k gaming on a 34"!!!

 

 

The intel chips are set to release in October, and since it seems you want best gaming perfromance, I would stick with getting an i9. Also, I would just choose a 1080 rather than purchasing an rtx, especially since we dont know how it performs. Monitors, idrk 

[saur0]

16 minutes ago, Thinkfreely said:

So lets start simple, what is your overall budget?

The budget is whatever is required to get 60fps on a 34 inch monitor at 4k (failing that a 27 inch), without over specing. I'm happy to swap out parts (i.e. gpu) as part of the upgrade path. My point is I could go out and buy an 18 core i9, but that would be silly considering my use case and a waste of money.  I'm just trying to avoid saying I have an unlimited budget and everyone saying well just buy the most expensive components. 

 

If you want to put a figure on it the current build is about £7k but that is with the following...

 

Intel Core i9-7900X Ten Core (3.30GHz @ up to 4.6GHz)

ASUS ROG RAMPAGE VI EXTREME: DDR4, 6Gb/s, CrossFireX/SLI, WIFI - RGB Ready

32GB Corsair VENGEANCE DDR4 3200MHz (4 x 8GB)

2 x 11GB ASUS ROG STRIX GEFORCE GTX 1080 Ti - DVI, HDMI, DP

1TB INTEL 760p M.2 NVMe PCIe SSD (upto 3230MB/sR | 1625MB/sW)

CORSAIR 1000W RMx SERIES™ MODULAR 80 PLUS® GOLD, ULTRA QUIET

3 x ASUS PG279Q 27" IPS G-Sync ROG Swift

 

but as I said, i'm not sure the i9 is worth it over the TR 1900x, I don't think the RAM will be used effectively and could probably drop to 16GB, and can't decide if the Ti cards are worth it or if I should just suck it up and get a single RTX?

[saur0]

34 minutes ago, lmeneses said:

The intel chips are set to release in October, and since it seems you want best gaming perfromance, I would stick with getting an i9. Also, I would just choose a 1080 rather than purchasing an rtx, especially since we dont know how it performs. Monitors, idrk 

I'm pretty much convinced the same with regards to the RTX. the Cannon Lake chips are delayed until 2019, and I think the new chips are only an incremental improvement on the existing architecture and won't have any significant improvement i.e. more pcie lanes. Although hopefully the price of the current chips might take a knock  

 

Quote

Intel is rumored to be introducing its 9th generation processors in October. While Intel’s 10nm Cannon Lake chips have been delayed until 2019, this year’s refresh will be based on improvements to the existing 14nm process. 

 

[seon123]

12 minutes ago, saur0 said:

I'm pretty much convinced the same with regards to the RTX. the Cannon Lake chips are delayed until 2019, and I think the new chips are only an incremental improvement on the existing architecture and won't have any significant improvement i.e. more pcie lanes. Although hopefully the price of the current chips might take a knock  

 

 

The 9700K is supposed to have 8/8 c/t and the 9900K is supposed to have 8/16 c/t, according to the rumours. And some c/t changes to the I5 as well. 

[saur0]

I blame Linus for my processor confusion, having watched these i'm much less enthusiastic about paying the extra £300 for the intel chip.

 

 

[brob]

Based on the described usage it seems pretty clear that at present the i7-8700K would be the optimal choice. In gaming an lightly threaded applications like Photoshop it offers the highest performance. Really the only use in which a different cpu might be better is video editing. Even there, the i7-8700K will be fine for light usage.

 

[saur0]

Ok so thats another vote for i7 8700, and that makes sense, whenever i've built a new pc i've always aimed to go for the highest spec cpu I could afford, given that it governs the motherboard choice, and using future proofing as justification. 

 

However today I can afford a i9 but they just don't seem to offer enough over the i7 to justify the expense given my requirements. The same can be said for the TR 1900x. 

 

Intel Core i7-7800K advantages

• Base frequency of this processor is higher than the frequency of the Intel i9-7900X microprocessor, as a result the Intel Core i7-7800K has better performance in multi-threaded tasks.
• Based on current official prices, the processor is 61% cheaper.

Intel Core i9-7900X advantages

• More CPU cores on the Core i9-7900X help to handle multiple applications or heavily multi-threaded programs.
• The processor has higher memory bandwidth, owing to faster supported DDR4-2666 memory. Higher memory bandwidth is very beneficial to applications, that deal with large data sets. Performance gains in non-memory bound programs will be lower.
   

 

[forregacc02]

Here's a pretty modest system build. I chose the 8086k because it's only ~$50 more expensive than the 8700k and it's basically a binned chip. 100% chance of hitting 5GHz all core at reasonable voltage.

 

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel - Core i7-8086K 4GHz 6-Core Processor  ($394.99 @ Amazon) 
CPU Cooler: EVGA - CLC 280 113.5 CFM Liquid CPU Cooler  ($109.89 @ OutletPC) 
Motherboard: EVGA - Z370 Classified K ATX LGA1151 Motherboard  ($159.99 @ Amazon) 
Memory: G.Skill - Trident Z RGB 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4-3000 Memory  ($297.98 @ Newegg) 
Storage: Samsung - 970 Evo 1.0TB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive  ($337.99 @ Amazon) 
Video Card: EVGA - GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 11GB Black Edition Video Card  ($669.99 @ Amazon) 
Case: EVGA - DG-76 Matte Black ATX Mid Tower Case  ($78.13 @ Newegg Marketplace) 
Power Supply: EVGA - SuperNOVA P2 650W 80+ Platinum Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply  ($95.98 @ Newegg) 
Total: $2144.94
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2018-09-13 03:19 EDT-0400

[saur0]

Ok so this is what i've got so far, cooling will be via a custom loop using EK - https://www.ekwb.com/custom-loop-configurator/shared/oW5b9abe328a9a4

 

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel - Core i7-8086K 4GHz 6-Core Processor  (£379.98 @ Amazon UK) 
Motherboard: Asus - ROG STRIX Z370-E GAMING ATX LGA1151 Motherboard  (£235.18 @ PC World Business) 
Memory: Corsair - Vengeance RGB 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4-3000 Memory  (£328.47 @ Scan.co.uk) 
Storage: Western Digital - Black NVMe 1TB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive  (£289.98 @ Ebuyer) 
Video Card: Asus - GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 11GB STRIX GAMING Video Card (2-Way SLI)  (£789.98 @ Aria PC) 
Video Card: Asus - GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 11GB STRIX GAMING Video Card (2-Way SLI)  (£789.98 @ Aria PC) 
Case: be quiet! - DARK BASE PRO 900 | BLACK rev. 2 ATX Full Tower Case  (£209.39 @ Amazon UK) 
Power Supply: Corsair - RMx 850W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply  (£118.99 @ AWD-IT) 
Operating System: Microsoft - Windows 10 Pro Full 32/64-bit  (£178.98 @ Ebuyer) 
Monitor: Asus - PG279Q ROG Swift 27.0" 2560x1440 165Hz Monitor  (£683.99 @ Aria PC) 
Monitor: Asus - PG279Q ROG Swift 27.0" 2560x1440 165Hz Monitor  (£683.99 @ Aria PC) 
Monitor: Asus - PG279Q ROG Swift 27.0" 2560x1440 165Hz Monitor  (£683.99 @ Aria PC) 
Total: £5372.90
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2018-09-13 21:28 BST+0100

[brob]

Looks good.

[saur0]

Yeah i'm pretty comfortable with the components, just a little unsure about ram speed and monitors. I couldn't find the RAM (CMR32GX4M2C3000C15) on the QVL list for the mobo, although CMR32GX4M4C3000C15 is on the list?

 

https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/LGA1151/ROG_STRIX_Z370-E_GAMING/ROG-STRIX-Z370-E-GAMING-Memory-QVL_20180705.pdf

 

 

[brob]

14 minutes ago, saur0 said:

Yeah i'm pretty comfortable with the components, just a little unsure about ram speed and monitors. I couldn't find the RAM (CMR32GX4M2C3000C15) on the QVL list for the mobo, although CMR32GX4M4C3000C15 is on the list?

 

https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/LGA1151/ROG_STRIX_Z370-E_GAMING/ROG-STRIX-Z370-E-GAMING-Memory-QVL_20180705.pdf

 

 

Intel motherboards are much more tolerant of memory than AMD.

 

If modules are XMP certified, there should be no problem using them in the Strix Z370-E. CMR32GX4M2C3000C15 are XMP 2.0 and should have no issues running in the motherboard.

[Guest]

3 x 1440p monitors is going to be very taxing on the gpu assuming you plan to game across all 3 ? You are pushing 11m pixels there, so way more than 4K which is 8.2m. 

 

With a £5K spend you should at least wait for reviews on the RTX cards and also see if Z390 (i9 9900K) releases in Oct.

[saur0]

yeah 3 x PG279Q is probably taking the piss. Originally I wanted a PG348Q and maybe a PG248Q along side it. But the higher refresh rate lead me to the PG279Q, If i did go with that I would probably only initially buy one. 

 

With regards the RAM I still can't work out if its worth getting anything faster than 3000?

[Guest]

46 minutes ago, saur0 said:

yeah 3 x PG279Q is probably taking the piss. Originally I wanted a PG348Q and maybe a PG248Q along side it. But the higher refresh rate lead me to the PG279Q, If i did go with that I would probably only initially buy one. 

 

With regards the RAM I still can't work out if its worth getting anything faster than 3000?

There are a couple of 34" 3440 x 1440 120Hz G-Sync that would be pretty nice for gaming on. The new Acer X34 Predator and the Dell (Alienware) AW3418DW. Might be worth checking out. A single 1080ti (or wait for the 2080 ti) would do a nice job. Then just have two cheaper side monitors for other stuff if need be.

 

I would aim for 3000 - 3200. Not really worth spending more money for anything faster unless the price is the same/similar. 

[saur0]

How did I miss the PREDATOR X34 that looks sweet, 120 + GSync and about the same price as the PG348Q. Although 

 

 

[Guest]

The new one is the X34P. I typed the wrong one above  

 

https://www.tomshardware.co.uk/acer-predator-x34p-gaming-monitor,review-34388.html

 

The Dell one looks good though as well.

 

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_alienware_aw3418dw.htm

[saur0]

So the question I have now is how much difference do the refresh rate make, and should that dictate monitor choice? or are the more important factors. Obviously comparing 27inch to 34inch doesn't make much sense but the PG279Q has been the go to monitor for gaming since its release. 

 

PG279Q = 165

X34P = 120

AW3418DW = 120

PG348Q = 100

 

 

[Guest]

I would go Ultrawide if it was Me. Not all games support 3440 x 1440 though so maybe check out what games you play first. Obviously older games might not have widescreen support. 

 

If you decide to stick with 2560 x 1440 then obviously the PG279Q would be the one to go with. There are a couple of other 165Hz 1440p as well such as the AOC AG271QG and Acer XB271HU.

[saur0]

yeah i'm keen to go ultrawide, and not too worried about support as you say new games will support the format. The only drawback I can see is the refresh rate, although i think 120 is enough given the spec of the rest of the rig. I'm keen to keep the framerate over 60 if possible 1080 ti's should be able to do that even with a widescreen. 

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, saur0 said:

yeah i'm keen to go ultrawide, and not too worried about support as you say new games will support the format. The only drawback I can see is the refresh rate, although i think 120 is enough given the spec of the rest of the rig. I'm keen to keep the framerate over 60 if possible 1080 ti's should be able to do that even with a widescreen. 

A 120Hz refresh rate should be more than good. You would notice more of a difference going from 60Hz to 120Hz than you would from 120Hz to 165Hz.

[saur0]

yeah I don't want to go120, hence me choosing the PG279Q over the PG348Q. But the other two you mentioned are 120, i've just been doing some digging and found this Smasung which has a 144Hz refresh rate -> https://www.samsung.com/uk/monitors/curved-chg70/LC32HG70QQUXEN/   

 

they also do a 49"  https://www.samsung.com/us/computing/monitors/gaming/49--chg90-qled-gaming-monitor-lc49hg90dmnxza/

 

But they use VA panels as apposed to IPS, the 32" is also half the price of the X34P. From my understanding the only real difference between IPS and VA is the viewing angle performance, with IPS being the better of the two. But I don't know if that is an issue that is worth paying an additional £500 to solve?