I got a Phanteks case, and it's been awesome. Plenty of room. Very well made. Lots of cable management. Great airflow. And I love the look.

https://www.amazon.com/Phanteks-Mid-..._t1_B07TYR1P1G

Looking at going with


Ryzen 7 3700x

Asus ROG Strix B550 MB

NZXT Kraken 280mm AIO

GSkill Trident Z 3400 2x8 Ram

Crucial 1TB NVME

Either 3060 TI or 3070

850W power supply 80+ Gold

Lian Li Lancool 215

Probably get some case fans as well



Might switch some parts out but that is my initial list, not sure if my CPU will get switched to newer generation

That's damn nice. It will fly even if you don't switch to Zen 3.

If you wanted Intel, you could actually get an equivalent Intel Core i5-9600K for which would still actually allow for higher CPU speed and OC potential beyond the AMD option for less that $200+.

Here's a Intel Core i5-9600K Desktop Processor 6 Cores up to 4.6 GHz Turbo unlocked LGA1151 300 Series 95W for $199.99.
Here's a mobo to hold it for $119.99

VS.

AMD Ryzen 7 3700X 8-Core $338.67
ASUS ROG Strix B550-F Gaming (WiFi 6) AMD AM4 Zen 3 Ryzen 5000 & 3rd Gen Ryzen ATX Gaming Motherboard (PCIe 4.0, 2.5Gb LAN, BIOS Flashback, HDMI 2.1 for Price: $203.98

Here's a direct performance comparison between the two CPUs, check this out: https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compar...00X/4031vs4043

So, you're looking at an Intel system that benchmarks better via single core performance for $320 vs. an AMD system with more cores but lower/comparable performance for $540. Check the gaming performance link, they're very comparable for gaming. Current games have multi-core support, but when you break it down multi-core performance isn't really that much of a difference maker with current games. The additional cores aren't really doing much for you. Even 4 cores can outperform an 8 core system for DirectX.
For example, here's a chart:

https://www.gamingscan.com/wp-conten...for-gaming.png

6 cores still currently running better than 8 cores.

And this is before potential overclocking. Me, I'm currently running an Intel i5-9600K CPU that is factory clocked at 3.7Ghz. But it's so easily overclocked, that I'm running it at 135% with very little additional temp. I'm running my Intel i5-9600K 3.7Ghz CPU at 5.0Ghz, and maintaining under 40° idle temps. You cannot OC the AMD chips that easily.

Granted, these numbers will vary per machine. But this should still show that the AMD advantage isn't really quite what they make it out to be for current gaming when considering price. Because short term, this is by far the best value for performance. Especially considering the Intel's typically OC much easier than the AMDs of equal capability. I went with the i5-9600K over the i7 and i9 versions specifically because the i5-9600K is a very well established OC compatibility champ compared to newer versions for a considerable price difference. With serious cooling, lots of people are OC'ing this chip to 5.0/5.3 Ghz range with no problems. I've OC'd mine from 3.7Ghz easily to 5.0Ghz, and still running at ~32° idle temp. With a cheap $25 air cooler.

AMD might be a much better price value per core at the moment. But if you're looking for true gaming performance for price and have an interest in overclocking, Intel is still champ by an easy margin. Power requirement be damned...

So my list has been updated with a 9600K and an appropriate MB, thanks to Fish

Spend a little extra and get 32gb ram. You won't regret it

Rereading my post from last night (was pretty drunk), I think I should add a few caveats. I feel I was a little Intel biased. The Ryzen setup would be more future proof. Because they've been using the same chipset socket the entire time. So when a new Ryzen chip is released in the future, you likely won't need a new mobo to use it. Intel changes their CPU socket nearly every damn time they release a new version. So you have to replace everything (CPU, mobo, and sometimes RAM). Intel also doesn't include a CPU fan. You can get a very decent one for ~$25-40. But that should be included in the price.

AMD is a very capable setup. Not trying to dog it. It provides quite a few more CPU cores, which is going to be an advantage more in the future. I just wanted to point out that if price was a factor, and you're just looking for gaming performance, the Intel is a good value consideration. More expensive to upgrade though. Either one would be a really nice capable setup.

Cheers!

If you're still choosing, here's another good comparison between the 2 chips, with both overclocked about as much as is possible for the 2. Good comparison of performance if you maxed out both:

<iframe width="1080" height="1920" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/A79X_Tp8Sf0" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I built a barn in my spare time. :D


https://i.etsystatic.com/16635760/r/...18409_7e83.jpg

That roof is going to leak.

I designed my first PCB for some house lighting stuff I've been working on, it is being drilled and cut today. First real geek thing I've done in a while.

I think I need to buy some Flex Seal! :thumb:

95C temps for 5000 Ryzen CPU is normal (under load) according to AMD


https://www.pcgamer.com/amp/amd-view...and-by-design/

https://www.theverge.com/platform/am...ma-rgb-concept



Anyone need a mask