Question Help me choose the right components (CPU first)

robakeryk

Prominent
Oct 15, 2017
6
0
510
0
I don't have a great pc right now and I wanted to ask what cpu should I buy?
The specs that I use right now are :
CPU: AMD FX(tm)-6100 Six-Core Processor, 3300MHz
GPU: Gtx 970 4gb
PSU: Corsair cx750
RAM: 24GB ddr3

I will use this pc mostly for pc gaming.
I play currently games like Dayz, Rainbow6 siege, Rust and Battlefield 4.
My budget is around 500 euro, but the max I can pay is like 1000 euro.
The only thing that I want to stay in my pc is the gpu, the other components are what I want to upgrade.
Any suggestions for a good / average gaming build?
Location The Netherlands
 
Last edited:

WildCard999

Titan
Herald
This is a solid system to pair with that GTX 970.

Edited for location.

PCPartPicker Part List

CPU: AMD - Ryzen 5 2600 3.4 GHz 6-Core Processor (€134.90 @ Megekko)
Motherboard: ASRock - B450 Steel Legend ATX AM4 Motherboard (€112.00 @ Megekko)
Memory: G.Skill - Ripjaws V Series 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3200 Memory (€87.67 @ Megekko)
Storage: Intel - 660p Series 1.02 TB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive (€106.00 @ Megekko)
Case: Phanteks - ECLIPSE P350X ATX Mid Tower Case (€69.95 @ CD-ROM-LAND)
Power Supply: SeaSonic - FOCUS Plus Gold 550 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply (€84.99 @ Megekko)
Total: €595.51
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2019-07-15 22:58 CEST+0200
 
Last edited:
Reactions: rigg42

Cioby

Reputable
Jun 26, 2015
696
13
5,365
126
Depending on how much it costs in your country or how cheap you can get, I'd rather recommend you get an Intel CPU since not even the latest (very much more expensive 3rd generation) Ryzen beats the Intel in overclocking and GAMING PERFORMANCE.
Secondly I would rather get a Samsung SSD since Intel seems to be more expensive and not really good in any way compared to the Samsung. My first SSD was an Intel and it was meh. My second 2 SSDs outperform it, have a nice app to monitor everything and are clearly better an cheaper atm.
Third I'd recommend a stronger PSU maybe a 850 or let's say 650 if you don't think you will ever get dual GPUs or monster GPUs in your system, but from EVGA gold or higher. They have 10 year warranty and superb quality and you won't be changing that anytime soon. You will mostly be changing the GPU since it's the single most important and cost efficient performance boost you can ever get, especially with the card you still have.

As for CPU recommendations, since I haven't named any, see how cheap you can get a 8600k if you really only care about games, this is for you. If you want something a bit more solid and future proof, 8700k or even 9700k depending on the offers you get in your country. My 8700k was 1700 compared to the 1500 for the 2700x so it was an easy choice.

Otherwise, if you don't care about 144 fps or higher resolutions, if you game simply on 1080p 60 fps, there won't be a huge gain from the Intel in some games. (to make it simple, the Intel could give you 150 fps compared to 120 on an AMD, but if your monitor can't handle that, it's all the same and the AMD is a little better in workloads)
 

jeremyj_83

Respectable
Aug 23, 2017
1,317
160
1,990
101
Depending on how much it costs in your country or how cheap you can get, I'd rather recommend you get an Intel CPU since not even the latest (very much more expensive 3rd generation) Ryzen beats the Intel in overclocking and GAMING PERFORMANCE.
Secondly I would rather get a Samsung SSD since Intel seems to be more expensive and not really good in any way compared to the Samsung. My first SSD was an Intel and it was meh. My second 2 SSDs outperform it, have a nice app to monitor everything and are clearly better an cheaper atm.
Third I'd recommend a stronger PSU maybe a 850 or let's say 650 if you don't think you will ever get dual GPUs or monster GPUs in your system, but from EVGA gold or higher. They have 10 year warranty and superb quality and you won't be changing that anytime soon. You will mostly be changing the GPU since it's the single most important and cost efficient performance boost you can ever get, especially with the card you still have.

As for CPU recommendations, since I haven't named any, see how cheap you can get a 8600k if you really only care about games, this is for you. If you want something a bit more solid and future proof, 8700k or even 9700k depending on the offers you get in your country. My 8700k was 1700 compared to the 1500 for the 2700x so it was an easy choice.

Otherwise, if you don't care about 144 fps or higher resolutions, if you game simply on 1080p 60 fps, there won't be a huge gain from the Intel in some games. (to make it simple, the Intel could give you 150 fps compared to 120 on an AMD, but if your monitor can't handle that, it's all the same and the AMD is a little better in workloads)
For any workload the Ryzen 3000 series has made the Intel CPU invalid. While the Ryzen 3000 series might not give you really any overclocking room or 5% less FPS with a 2080Ti at 1080p, the difference is 250FPS vs 245FPS. In gaming with a GTX 970 you will not see any difference between them. The cost of the 2600 right now is so much more worth it than any Intel CPU and the longevity of the added threads at the price means you will get more out of it for longer. If you can afford the 3600 that is even better as it will give you almost identical gaming performance as the 8700K for a lot less money.

The Intel 660p is the best price/performance SSD you can get right now. While in absolute benchmarks the Samsung is faster, you will pay as much for a 500GB Samsung as you will a 1TB 660p and your actual user experience will be almost identical.

As long as you aren't going to go multi GPU there is no reason to go more than 650W. The Seasonic Focus Plus Gold or EVGA SuperNova G3 are both high quality PSUs that give long warranties. Go with whichever is cheaper and you will be set on your PSU for years to come.
 
Reactions: WildCard999

Cioby

Reputable
Jun 26, 2015
696
13
5,365
126
For any workload the Ryzen 3000 series has made the Intel CPU invalid. While the Ryzen 3000 series might not give you really any overclocking room or 5% less FPS with a 2080Ti at 1080p, the difference is 250FPS vs 245FPS. In gaming with a GTX 970 you will not see any difference between them. The cost of the 2600 right now is so much more worth it than any Intel CPU and the longevity of the added threads at the price means you will get more out of it for longer. If you can afford the 3600 that is even better as it will give you almost identical gaming performance as the 8700K for a lot less money.

The Intel 660p is the best price/performance SSD you can get right now. While in absolute benchmarks the Samsung is faster, you will pay as much for a 500GB Samsung as you will a 1TB 660p and your actual user experience will be almost identical.

As long as you aren't going to go multi GPU there is no reason to go more than 650W. The Seasonic Focus Plus Gold or EVGA SuperNova G3 are both high quality PSUs that give long warranties. Go with whichever is cheaper and you will be set on your PSU for years to come.
Any workload except streaming apparently. Or many "highly qualified unbiased" reviewers haven't gotten the hang of the settings of the Ryzen yet.

Also he uses the PC for "gaming mostly" which means some movies and music and the rest is gaming. Secondly the CPUs in my country got a lot cheaper while the new Ryzen will probably be more expensive even than the 9900k (tho the 3900x is already more expensive even in the US judging by prices shown by reviewers). Third "reliable multi threads", that's not what reliable means, by that logic you would tell him to buy that OLD 10 core AMD cause it's future proof (oh wait it wasn't cause the Intel with 2 cores was stronger than it), what I call reliable is a CPU that works for years like my old 4770k that still works and was overclocked the entire 7-8 years, the only problem was my motherboard was starting to give in (in my opinion and tests) so I wouldn't call a Ryzen, especially the third generation MORE RELIABLE. Same reason I went for a 8700k and not a 9 series, since it came out a while it was very good and never heard people complain about it. The Ryzen 3 already had it's first burnt reviewer CPU. Very reliable.
Last but not least, in previous researches I made even for lower tier GPUs, I've seen differences like 110 to 140 fps in AMD vs Intel at 1080p in Fortnite, which is a lot more than your 250 vs 245 which is a bullshit comparison that applies to like 1-2 games that are limited by the engine itself or game. I will not provide proof since you can youtube 8700k vs 2700x or 8600k vs 2600 and see for yourself, I thought it was general knowledge by now
 

xravenxdota

Prominent
Aug 26, 2017
245
24
715
9
Any workload except streaming apparently. Or many "highly qualified unbiased" reviewers haven't gotten the hang of the settings of the Ryzen yet.

Also he uses the PC for "gaming mostly" which means some movies and music and the rest is gaming. Secondly the CPUs in my country got a lot cheaper while the new Ryzen will probably be more expensive even than the 9900k (tho the 3900x is already more expensive even in the US judging by prices shown by reviewers). Third "reliable multi threads", that's not what reliable means, by that logic you would tell him to buy that OLD 10 core AMD cause it's future proof (oh wait it wasn't cause the Intel with 2 cores was stronger than it), what I call reliable is a CPU that works for years like my old 4770k that still works and was overclocked the entire 7-8 years, the only problem was my motherboard was starting to give in (in my opinion and tests) so I wouldn't call a Ryzen, especially the third generation MORE RELIABLE. Same reason I went for a 8700k and not a 9 series, since it came out a while it was very good and never heard people complain about it. The Ryzen 3 already had it's first burnt reviewer CPU. Very reliable.
Last but not least, in previous researches I made even for lower tier GPUs, I've seen differences like 110 to 140 fps in AMD vs Intel at 1080p in Fortnite, which is a lot more than your 250 vs 245 which is a bullshit comparison that applies to like 1-2 games that are limited by the engine itself or game. I will not provide proof since you can youtube 8700k vs 2700x or 8600k vs 2600 and see for yourself, I thought it was general knowledge by now
And your not biased? Removed There are no value in buying an intel at the moment.It's your word against all the reviewers.You can have a ryzen 5 2600 for as low as 130 usd.Closest intel cpu you can get are around 200 usd.You can get a 9400F which are a great budget option But......It's still more expensive than the 2600 and its as fast as a 2600 non x so that's not worth it.You blame people for being biased yet you are biased yourself.And you know in the 2000's amd was faster than intel and intel paid companies not to buy amd.At least amd doesn't have to be scaly.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

WildCard999

Titan
Herald
I think @jeremyj_83 was talking about the 3rd gen vs Intel. The difference is nearly non existent even at lower resolutions such as 1080P and is noticebly cheaper if you avoid the X570 boards. However there's been a few BIOS issues with the B450/X470 boards for using the 3rd gen so until those are smoothed out I'd hold off and for the budget the Ryzen 2600 is a good choice and leagues better then there FX 6100. Once the OP comes back with an exact location then we can fine tune there budget for the best choice, I just start off with Deutschland when I think of Euro's.
 

Cioby

Reputable
Jun 26, 2015
696
13
5,365
126
I think @jeremyj_83 was talking about the 3rd gen vs Intel. The difference is nearly non existent even at lower resolutions such as 1080P and is noticebly cheaper if you avoid the X570 boards. However there's been a few BIOS issues with the B450/X470 boards for using the 3rd gen so until those are smoothed out I'd hold off and for the budget the Ryzen 2600 is a good choice and leagues better then there FX 6100. Once the OP comes back with an exact location then we can fine tune there budget for the best choice, I just start off with Deutschland when I think of Euro's.
Wrong. You got it the other way around. It's at 4K that CPUs don't really matter. I've seen several AMD biased reviews where the CPUs run at "base clocks" or hell one guy was dumb enough to force both CPUs at 4 Ghz (thus making the Intel weaker basically) since people "asked for this?" (umm okay). At lower resolutions the difference between Intel and AMD is higher, even without overclocking. I'd love to prove you wrong but I don't own a Ryzen and won't waste money on a second system just to explain to slightly delusional people that the Ryzen isn't as good as advertised. Hell Linus himself even said in HIS TITLE "I am not much for AMD but ..." while he has been on the hype train for months, made several videos previous to the release in which he said you should buy AMD stock and also said AMD is gonna wipe the floor with Intel with 0 proof, just the words of some lady talking which in my experience the past years, AMD usually lies a little and then disappoints. So go ahead and believe all the reviewers. Maybe they are all just trying to get Intel to lower their prices, I don't know.

@xravenxdota you're not in dota here, you can't use that type of language, especially when you have 0 proof and basically are just an angry little kid crying that your toy isn't as good as you think it is. And about that pricing, I got my 8700k at 1700 while the 2700x was 1500, I would've bought the more reliable chip that I know for years, to the rushed "please give me money or we will bankrupt" AMD stuff they have been selling lately, did you even see their GPUs? Not gonna waste time on you. Bottom line, if you can get a decent price Intel that can OC, it will always beat a Ryzen in gaming and still does even in the third generation which is much more expensive. Unless you will never game at higher than 60 fps or above 1080p, then yes go for the Ryzen. Otherwise what are you clowns trying to sell someone a WORK CPU to people that just wanna GAME. Not to mention all the hassle and pain to install and make your Ryzen work properly. My old and my new i7 ran out of the box instantly with base drivers installed. And overclocks itself far beyond what the AMD can. And you can manually OC to 4.9 or even above 5 Ghz. And my new 8700k runs at 65 degrees max, while also streaming and losing little to 0 fps in performance. YES INTEL IS TOTALLY IRRELEVANT. I'd love a private message in which you show me your clocks and voltages and fps in games cause the only fool that has a Ryzen I know, won't even overclock or show me stuff, since he knows he'd lose bad compared to my new CPU. And that's a fact, not made up insults like your entire useless comment.
 

jeremyj_83

Respectable
Aug 23, 2017
1,317
160
1,990
101
Any workload except streaming apparently. Or many "highly qualified unbiased" reviewers haven't gotten the hang of the settings of the Ryzen yet.

Also he uses the PC for "gaming mostly" which means some movies and music and the rest is gaming. Secondly the CPUs in my country got a lot cheaper while the new Ryzen will probably be more expensive even than the 9900k (tho the 3900x is already more expensive even in the US judging by prices shown by reviewers). Third "reliable multi threads", that's not what reliable means, by that logic you would tell him to buy that OLD 10 core AMD cause it's future proof (oh wait it wasn't cause the Intel with 2 cores was stronger than it), what I call reliable is a CPU that works for years like my old 4770k that still works and was overclocked the entire 7-8 years, the only problem was my motherboard was starting to give in (in my opinion and tests) so I wouldn't call a Ryzen, especially the third generation MORE RELIABLE. Same reason I went for a 8700k and not a 9 series, since it came out a while it was very good and never heard people complain about it. The Ryzen 3 already had it's first burnt reviewer CPU. Very reliable.
Last but not least, in previous researches I made even for lower tier GPUs, I've seen differences like 110 to 140 fps in AMD vs Intel at 1080p in Fortnite, which is a lot more than your 250 vs 245 which is a bullshit comparison that applies to like 1-2 games that are limited by the engine itself or game. I will not provide proof since you can youtube 8700k vs 2700x or 8600k vs 2600 and see for yourself, I thought it was general knowledge by now
Here is a benchmark of the 2600 vs 7600K with a GTX 1080. https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2362?vs=2261 At $130 for the 2600 the only Intel CPU at that price is the i3-9100 with is a 4c/4t CPU with a 3.6GHz base an 4.2 GHz boost clock, the 7600K is 4c/4t with 3.8/4.2 clocks and the IPC between the 9th Gen and 7th Gen is the same. Therefore the performance should be a bit higher on the 7600K due to the higher base clock and TDP.

As you can see the performance difference between the 2600 and 7600K is negligible. Now since the AMD is 6c/12t it will be more useful for gaming and normal use for more years than the 7600K and therefore the i3-9100.

Here is the 3700X vs the 9900K https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2520?vs=2263 again the difference is negligible.
 

jeremyj_83

Respectable
Aug 23, 2017
1,317
160
1,990
101
Wrong. You got it the other way around. It's at 4K that CPUs don't really matter. I've seen several AMD biased reviews where the CPUs run at "base clocks" or hell one guy was dumb enough to force both CPUs at 4 Ghz (thus making the Intel weaker basically) since people "asked for this?" (umm okay). At lower resolutions the difference between Intel and AMD is higher, even without overclocking. I'd love to prove you wrong but I don't own a Ryzen and won't waste money on a second system just to explain to slightly delusional people that the Ryzen isn't as good as advertised. Hell Linus himself even said in HIS TITLE "I am not much for AMD but ..." while he has been on the hype train for months, made several videos previous to the release in which he said you should buy AMD stock and also said AMD is gonna wipe the floor with Intel with 0 proof, just the words of some lady talking which in my experience the past years, AMD usually lies a little and then disappoints. So go ahead and believe all the reviewers. Maybe they are all just trying to get Intel to lower their prices, I don't know.

@xravenxdota you're not in dota here, you can't use that type of language, especially when you have 0 proof and basically are just an angry little kid crying that your toy isn't as good as you think it is. And about that pricing, I got my 8700k at 1700 while the 2700x was 1500, I would've bought the more reliable chip that I know for years, to the rushed "please give me money or we will bankrupt" AMD stuff they have been selling lately, did you even see their GPUs? Not gonna waste time on you. Bottom line, if you can get a decent price Intel that can OC, it will always beat a Ryzen in gaming and still does even in the third generation which is much more expensive. Unless you will never game at higher than 60 fps or above 1080p, then yes go for the Ryzen. Otherwise what are you clowns trying to sell someone a WORK CPU to people that just wanna GAME. Not to mention all the hassle and pain to install and make your Ryzen work properly. My old and my new i7 ran out of the box instantly with base drivers installed. And overclocks itself far beyond what the AMD can. And you can manually OC to 4.9 or even above 5 Ghz. And my new 8700k runs at 65 degrees max, while also streaming and losing little to 0 fps in performance. YES INTEL IS TOTALLY IRRELEVANT. I'd love a private message in which you show me your clocks and voltages and fps in games cause the only fool that has a Ryzen I know, won't even overclock or show me stuff, since he knows he'd lose bad compared to my new CPU. And that's a fact, not made up insults like your entire useless comment.
Not everyone want to overclock their CPUs and with Intel unless you spend upwards of 20% more for the CPU plus another 50% more for the motherboard, you cannot overclock the Intel CPU. Your assertion that there is a huge hassle and pain to install and make your Ryzen work correctly is laughable at best. My HTPC runs on a Ryzen 2400G and I did exactly the same thing as you did for your Intel, it works out of the box with generic drivers. Now before you say I am biased, my desktop is an i7-4770k. My previous post with benchmarks already refuted your 60fps BS statement.
 

rigg42

Prominent
Oct 17, 2018
552
165
640
14
There's also the cost of a aftermarket cooler.
Forgot about that extra cost for every K series CPU, well that is for any Intel CPU since their included cooler is only marginally better than the user blowing on the CPU to keep it cool.
To be fair the 2600 (x), 2700, and 3600(x) need a better cooler as well. Still if you want to overclock a current Intel part you better pony up $80-$100 for a cooler where as the ryzen 5 and 7 stuff only needs a $30-40 cooler to get the most out of them. Pretty much any b450 board with vrm heatsinks will give an R5 all it's got on ambient cooling. So you'll need to spend $125 more on an 8700k vs 3600x, $60 more (at least) on a motherboard, and $60 more on a cooler to hopefully get it to 5ghz. Then you still need enough money left over to get a good enough GPU and monitor to realize the advantage of the clock speed increase. $245 is a pretty good amount of budget to up the GPU and RAM on the Ryzen build. The only way to value compete with ryzen on the intel side is to buy the non k chips with high turbos, budget mobos, air coolers, and slow memory. This is only going to work up to a point. If you start trying to throw a 9700 or 9900 on a b365 board you are inevitably going to run into bios or vrm limitations that limit performance.
 
Last edited:

WildCard999

Titan
Herald
The stock non X Ryzen aftermarket coolers are quite good and will handle a modest overclock. The only real issue with them is that they can get a bit audible but besides that they work well. The X variants typically come with a better cooler but with either I would recommend trying them out before replacing as we all have different preferences to noise.
 

rigg42

Prominent
Oct 17, 2018
552
165
640
14
The stock non X Ryzen aftermarket coolers are quite good and will handle a modest overclock. The only real issue with them is that they can get a bit audible but besides that they work well. The X variants typically come with a better cooler but with either I would recommend trying them out before replacing as we all have different preferences to noise.
I disagree. The stealth cooler is terrible. The spire is pushed to its limits with a 2600x (85 c or more stress temps stock settings) and my stock 3600 is barely able to be kept in check by a 125w TDP Be Quiet pure rock slim cooler. My 3600x hits the mid 70's on a 240mm AIO in stress tests with an aggressive fan profile. I was getting mid 70's stress temps from a DRP4 on the 3700x stock as well. Sure the prism and spire are pretty good stock coolers but I think they are inadequate for these CPU's. The Prism is fine for a 2700x/3700x IMO but I doubt it would cool a 3800x/3900x/3950x to what I would consider acceptable temps. They won't hurt your performance that bad but they're loud and probably not good for your CPU in the long term if you load them heavily and are hitting 85c consistently. I'd set a temp cap at 80c or lower in the advanced PBO settings with any of the stock coolers.
 

jeremyj_83

Respectable
Aug 23, 2017
1,317
160
1,990
101
I disagree. The stealth cooler is terrible. The spire is pushed to its limits with a 2600x (85 c or more stress temps stock settings) and my stock 3600 is barely able to be kept in check by a 125w TDP Be Quiet pure rock slim cooler. My 3600x hits the mid 70's on a 240mm AIO in stress tests with an aggressive fan profile. I was getting mid 70's stress temps from a DRP4 on the 3700x stock as well. Sure the prism and spire are pretty good stock coolers but I think they are inadequate for these CPU's. The Prism is fine for a 2700x/3700x IMO but I doubt it would cool a 3800x/3900x/3950x to what I would consider acceptable temps. They won't hurt your performance that bad but they're loud and probably not good for your CPU in the long term if you load them heavily and are hitting 85c consistently. I'd set a temp cap at 80c or lower in the advanced PBO settings with any of the stock coolers.
Anandtech did their entire benchmark of the 3700X & 3900X with the Wraith Prism coolers and it didn't really hurt performance. https://www.anandtech.com/show/14605/the-and-ryzen-3700x-3900x-review-raising-the-bar/5
 

WildCard999

Titan
Herald
When you say stress temps do you mean like gaming loads or actual benchmarking? I ask only because benchmarking is more stressful on the CPU then you'll see in most real world use. Also ambient temps have a large impact on your CPU temps, with a 21C ambient temp I never saw above 52C in gaming on Ryzen 2600 and never above 68C with stress testing (Prime95, Small FFT's for 1 hour) with the stock cooler. With a mild overclock (4ghz) the benchmarking got up to 76C which is still safe for that CPU but at that temp the cooler was loud which is why it was replaced with the CM EVO 212 Black RGB.
 

rigg42

Prominent
Oct 17, 2018
552
165
640
14
When you say stress temps do you mean like gaming loads or actual benchmarking? I ask only because benchmarking is more stressful on the CPU then you'll see in most real world use. Also ambient temps have a large impact on your CPU temps, with a 21C ambient temp I never saw above 52C in gaming on Ryzen 2600 and never above 68C with stress testing (Prime95, Small FFT's for 1 hour) with the stock cooler. With a mild overclock (4ghz) the benchmarking got up to 76C which is still safe for that CPU but at that temp the cooler was loud which is why it was replaced with the CM EVO 212 Black RGB.
Benchmarking/stress testing. I agree that that's a really good temp for a stealth and 2600 at 4ghz. That must be one hell of a CPU since I could only get 2 different 2600x to stay below 85c with stock settings in an hour of 26.6 small FFT. That was with a -100 mv offset, in a well ventilated case, using the spire cooler. I had to manually overclock them to 4 ghz to achieve mid 70's in the same test.
 
Last edited:

robakeryk

Prominent
Oct 15, 2017
6
0
510
0
I don't have a great pc right now and I wanted to ask what cpu should I buy?
The specs that I use right now are :
CPU: AMD FX(tm)-6100 Six-Core Processor, 3300MHz
GPU: Gtx 970 4gb
PSU: Corsair cx750
RAM: 24GB ddr3

I will use this pc mostly for pc gaming.
I play currently games like Dayz, Rainbow6 siege, Rust and Battlefield 4.
My budget is around 500 euro, but the max I can pay is like 1000 euro.
The only thing that I want to stay in my pc is the gpu, the other components are what I want to upgrade.
Any suggestions for a good / average gaming build?
To all the people that wan to know my location I live in The Netherlands,
Thanks for the reply's
 

jeremyj_83

Respectable
Aug 23, 2017
1,317
160
1,990
101
PCPartPicker Part List

CPU: AMD - Ryzen 5 2600 3.4 GHz 6-Core Processor (€134.90 @ Megekko)
Motherboard: ASRock - B450M PRO4 Micro ATX AM4 Motherboard (€78.95 @ Megekko)
Memory: Corsair - Vengeance LPX 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3200 Memory (€81.00 @ Megekko)
Storage: Crucial - BX500 240 GB 2.5" Solid State Drive (€33.95 @ Megekko)
Storage: Intel - 660p Series 1.02 TB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive (€106.00 @ Megekko)
Case: Fractal Design - Focus G ATX Mid Tower Case (€54.90 @ CD-ROM-LAND)
Power Supply: SeaSonic - FOCUS Plus Gold 650 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply (€96.94 @ Megekko)
Case Fan: ARCTIC - Arctic F12 74 CFM 120 mm Fan (€10.90 @ Megekko)
Total: €597.54
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2019-07-16 14:13 CEST+0200
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY