Is it better to change i7 for i5?

[goncalomatos97]

Hi, this is the current setup i'm planning to use on my PC and I would like to know, what i5 would be equivalent to this i7. My plan is to lower my budget and I've read only that it's not worth to have an i7 for gaming.

Components:
1.CPU:i7-6700k 4GHz 8MB Cache (6th Gen) ---------------------------- 364,90€
2.GPU: Gigabyte GeForce GTX1070 Windforce OC 8GB GDDR5 ------------- 519,90€
3.Motherboard: MSI Z170-A PRO LGA1151 DDR4 ------------------------- 115,90€
4.RAM: Kingston 16GB HyperX Fury Black 2x8GB DDR4 2400MHz ---------- 113,25€
5.Disc1: Samsung 250GB 850 EVO SSD SATA3 --------------------------- 99,90€
6.Disc2: WESTERN DIGITAL CAVIAR BLUE 3TB 5400RPM 64MB SATA III 3.5 - 106,00€
7.Case: CORSAIR OBSIDIAN SERIES 450D WINDOW ------------------------ 130,00€
8.PSU: SEASONIC G-SERIES GM 650W 80PLUS GOLD------------------------ 120,00€
9.CPU Cooler: CRYORIG H5 UNIVERSAL --------------------------------- 50,90€


TOTAL ~1600€

 

[Dunlop0078]

Do you plan on overclocking? If so go for the i5 6600k with a Z170 board, if kaby lake is not more expensive where you live you could also get a Z270 board with an i5 7600k.

If you dont plan on overclocking I would get an i5 6600 non k with an H170 motherboard, or for kaby lake an i5 7600 non k with an H270 motherboard.

 

[velocityg4]

No need to do that. You can save save over £300 just by shopping around and making some changes.

The EVGA Supernova G2 is excellent quality and built by Super Flower.

The Samsung SM961 is a massive upgrade over the 850 Evo.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i7-6700K 4.0GHz Quad-Core Processor (£295.00 @ Aria PC)
CPU Cooler: CRYORIG H5 Universal 65.0 CFM CPU Cooler (£51.03 @ CCL Computers)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z170XP-SLI ATX LGA1151 Motherboard (£99.99 @ Amazon UK)
Memory: Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory (£99.99 @ Amazon UK)
Storage: Samsung PM961 256GB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive (£82.03 @ CCL Computers)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 3TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive (£78.00 @ Aria PC)
Video Card: Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1070 8GB Windforce OC Video Card (£385.91 @ More Computers)
Case: Corsair 450D ATX Mid Tower Case (£94.94 @ Amazon UK)
Power Supply: EVGA SuperNOVA G2 650W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply (£87.67 @ Amazon UK)
Total: £1274.56
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-02-19 13:10 GMT+0000

Total £1274.56


Don't switch to an i5. Depending on the game an i7 can make a difference in your maximum FPS. Considering how fast the GTX 1070 is. The difference would be most noticeable at lower resolutions. Such as 1920x1080. The i7 makes a difference in CPU intensive, heavily multi-threaded games. That list of games is growing.

Although an i5-6600K is still good. You will regret not buying the i7. Simply because you wanted one and cheaped out to save £100.
“The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten” – Benjamin Franklin

 

[SgtScream]

It used to be roughly ten years ago, games were only optimized for dual core processors.
Up until recently, games really were only optimized for 4 physical cores and most of them still are.
You have to ask yourself this question. What games do you play now and do you plan to play newer games on ultra settings, high resolution, at a respectable frame rates, when they come out.
You'll start to see modern triple A titles via direct x 12 start to utilize more than four cores, in the near future.
If you want to keep your new build for a good solid 5 years, i'd going with an intel core i7 or Ryzen equivalent (Expected to launch next month).
Don't think about now, think about how your computer is going to perform in the future.
I'm already seeing cpu intensive games like Witcher 3 and GTA V run at more stable fps utilizing an i7 and these are games that came out two years ago.
For example, its the first time i'm seeing this with Battlefield 1:
The minimum system requirements for the game is an intel core i5 6600k! That cpu came out a year ago and it's already only meets the minimum system requirements??!?
The times are changing and you'll likely see the benefits of utilizing more than 4 physical cores, more and more as newer games come out.
If you're going to lower your budget, drop down to a gtx 1060. That will at least be an easy upgrade.

 

[Dunlop0078]

It used to be roughly ten years ago, games were only optimized for dual core processors.
Up until recently, games really were only optimized for 4 physical cores and most of them still are.
You have to ask yourself this question. What games do you play now and do you plan to play newer games on ultra settings, high resolution, at a respectable frame rates, when they come out.
You'll start to see modern triple A titles via direct x 12 start to utilize more than four cores, in the near future.
If you want to keep your new build for a good solid 5 years, i'd going with an intel core i7 or Ryzen equivalent (Expected to launch next month).
Don't think about now, think about how your computer is going to perform in the future.
I'm already seeing cpu intensive games like Witcher 3 and GTA V run at more stable fps utilizing an i7 and these are games that came out two years ago.
For example, its the first time i'm seeing this with Battlefield 1:
The minimum system requirements for the game is an intel core i5 6600k! That cpu came out a year ago and it's already only meets the minimum system requirements??!?
The times are changing and you'll likely see the benefits of utilizing more than 4 physical cores, more and more as newer games come out.

If you are going for 1080p 60fps of 1440p 60fps then an i5 is fine for witcher 3 or gta v, an i7 can be helpful if you have a high refresh rate monitor and are shooting for 120fps or 144fps. A modern i5 can easily max out witcher 3 or gta v 1440p 60fps with an adequate gpu.

They also say the min cpu for bf1 on the amd side is a fx 6350 which is 5 years old and and far less powerful than an i5 6600k or even the i3 6100 in a lot of games. The min requirements for bf1 are stupid and dont make sense, if it will run on an fx 6350 it will run on any i5 made in the last 5 years and many i3's as well.

 

[SgtScream]

My point was to not be concerned with how games perform now, but the longevity of the build you are investing a substantial amount of money into.
Here's an example of an intel core i5 6600k paired with a gtx 1070 with a minimum frame rate of 80 fps:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJ6vQFRE-0U
This is absolutely acceptable and very playable now, but this is only 1080p.
At this rate (Using this BF1 video as an example), I can guarantee that when he goes to upgrade his gtx 1070 in the future, his intel core i5 6600k hands down will be the bottleneck.

 

[Crumpet 1]

An i5 is barely enough for 1080p 60fps on GTA V man.. Maybe if you overclock the hell out of it.

(i5 6600 and GTX970 or R9 290 4gb or R9 390 8gb or Rx 4704gb.. Not on the same level of the GTX 1070 but not BAD cards)

Games are starting to use more cores, consoles are actually helping there, and frankly it's about time.

 

[Dunlop0078]

I will just leave this here.

 

[Crumpet 1]

Funny how you can cherry pick benchmark results..

Here's literally the first one I got on google;

 

[goncalomatos97]

It used to be roughly ten years ago, games were only optimized for dual core processors.
Up until recently, games really were only optimized for 4 physical cores and most of them still are.
You have to ask yourself this question. What games do you play now and do you plan to play newer games on ultra settings, high resolution, at a respectable frame rates, when they come out.
You'll start to see modern triple A titles via direct x 12 start to utilize more than four cores, in the near future.
If you want to keep your new build for a good solid 5 years, i'd going with an intel core i7 or Ryzen equivalent (Expected to launch next month).
Don't think about now, think about how your computer is going to perform in the future.
I'm already seeing cpu intensive games like Witcher 3 and GTA V run at more stable fps utilizing an i7 and these are games that came out two years ago.
For example, its the first time i'm seeing this with Battlefield 1:
The minimum system requirements for the game is an intel core i5 6600k! That cpu came out a year ago and it's already only meets the minimum system requirements??!?
The times are changing and you'll likely see the benefits of utilizing more than 4 physical cores, more and more as newer games come out.
If you're going to lower your budget, drop down to a gtx 1060. That will at least be an easy upgrade.

I agree with you. Buying an i5 now could be save me money, but in 2/3 years I might regret the choice. Now it brings up another question, is it really worth taking the i7-6700k? First, i don't think I'll overclock it, at least for now. Second, I'll only build this PC by end of May/beginning of June, so maybe wait for a next CPU to be launched or is there any i7 better, within the same price? (350-400 Eur). As far as i got you, in the future it will matter the number of cores my CPU has

 

[SgtScream]

It used to be roughly ten years ago, games were only optimized for dual core processors.
Up until recently, games really were only optimized for 4 physical cores and most of them still are.
You have to ask yourself this question. What games do you play now and do you plan to play newer games on ultra settings, high resolution, at a respectable frame rates, when they come out.
You'll start to see modern triple A titles via direct x 12 start to utilize more than four cores, in the near future.
If you want to keep your new build for a good solid 5 years, i'd going with an intel core i7 or Ryzen equivalent (Expected to launch next month).
Don't think about now, think about how your computer is going to perform in the future.
I'm already seeing cpu intensive games like Witcher 3 and GTA V run at more stable fps utilizing an i7 and these are games that came out two years ago.
For example, its the first time i'm seeing this with Battlefield 1:
The minimum system requirements for the game is an intel core i5 6600k! That cpu came out a year ago and it's already only meets the minimum system requirements??!?
The times are changing and you'll likely see the benefits of utilizing more than 4 physical cores, more and more as newer games come out.
If you're going to lower your budget, drop down to a gtx 1060. That will at least be an easy upgrade.

I agree with you. Buying an i5 now could be save me money, but in 2/3 years I might regret the choice. Now it brings up another question, is it really worth taking the i7-6700k? First, i don't think I'll overclock it, at least for now. Second, I'll only build this PC by end of May/beginning of June, so maybe wait for a next CPU to be launched or is there any i7 better, within the same price? (350-400 Eur). As far as i got you, in the future it will matter the number of cores my CPU has

What existing build do you have now? I would absolutely wait until Ryzen has launched and the benchmarks have been proven.

 

[goncalomatos97]

No need to do that. You can save save over £300 just by shopping around and making some changes.

The EVGA Supernova G2 is excellent quality and built by Super Flower.

The Samsung SM961 is a massive upgrade over the 850 Evo.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i7-6700K 4.0GHz Quad-Core Processor (£295.00 @ Aria PC)
CPU Cooler: CRYORIG H5 Universal 65.0 CFM CPU Cooler (£51.03 @ CCL Computers)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z170XP-SLI ATX LGA1151 Motherboard (£99.99 @ Amazon UK)
Memory: Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory (£99.99 @ Amazon UK)
Storage: Samsung PM961 256GB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive (£82.03 @ CCL Computers)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 3TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive (£78.00 @ Aria PC)
Video Card: Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1070 8GB Windforce OC Video Card (£385.91 @ More Computers)
Case: Corsair 450D ATX Mid Tower Case (£94.94 @ Amazon UK)
Power Supply: EVGA SuperNOVA G2 650W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply (£87.67 @ Amazon UK)
Total: £1274.56
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-02-19 13:10 GMT+0000

Total £1274.56


Don't switch to an i5. Depending on the game an i7 can make a difference in your maximum FPS. Considering how fast the GTX 1070 is. The difference would be most noticeable at lower resolutions. Such as 1920x1080. The i7 makes a difference in CPU intensive, heavily multi-threaded games. That list of games is growing.

Although an i5-6600K is still good. You will regret not buying the i7. Simply because you wanted one and cheaped out to save £100.
“The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten” – Benjamin Franklin

Thank you for your help, I'll go with i7. Just on thing, I'm not from the UK, so i don't those prices apply to me, but thanks anyway

 

[goncalomatos97]

It used to be roughly ten years ago, games were only optimized for dual core processors.
Up until recently, games really were only optimized for 4 physical cores and most of them still are.
You have to ask yourself this question. What games do you play now and do you plan to play newer games on ultra settings, high resolution, at a respectable frame rates, when they come out.
You'll start to see modern triple A titles via direct x 12 start to utilize more than four cores, in the near future.
If you want to keep your new build for a good solid 5 years, i'd going with an intel core i7 or Ryzen equivalent (Expected to launch next month).
Don't think about now, think about how your computer is going to perform in the future.
I'm already seeing cpu intensive games like Witcher 3 and GTA V run at more stable fps utilizing an i7 and these are games that came out two years ago.
For example, its the first time i'm seeing this with Battlefield 1:
The minimum system requirements for the game is an intel core i5 6600k! That cpu came out a year ago and it's already only meets the minimum system requirements??!?
The times are changing and you'll likely see the benefits of utilizing more than 4 physical cores, more and more as newer games come out.
If you're going to lower your budget, drop down to a gtx 1060. That will at least be an easy upgrade.

I agree with you. Buying an i5 now could be save me money, but in 2/3 years I might regret the choice. Now it brings up another question, is it really worth taking the i7-6700k? First, i don't think I'll overclock it, at least for now. Second, I'll only build this PC by end of May/beginning of June, so maybe wait for a next CPU to be launched or is there any i7 better, within the same price? (350-400 Eur). As far as i got you, in the future it will matter the number of cores my CPU has

What existing build do you have now? I would absolutely wait until Ryzen has launched and the benchmarks have been proven.

At the moment don't have any Desktop, I'm building one from scratch. All the components are on the top of the page

 

[SgtScream]

It used to be roughly ten years ago, games were only optimized for dual core processors.
Up until recently, games really were only optimized for 4 physical cores and most of them still are.
You have to ask yourself this question. What games do you play now and do you plan to play newer games on ultra settings, high resolution, at a respectable frame rates, when they come out.
You'll start to see modern triple A titles via direct x 12 start to utilize more than four cores, in the near future.
If you want to keep your new build for a good solid 5 years, i'd going with an intel core i7 or Ryzen equivalent (Expected to launch next month).
Don't think about now, think about how your computer is going to perform in the future.
I'm already seeing cpu intensive games like Witcher 3 and GTA V run at more stable fps utilizing an i7 and these are games that came out two years ago.
For example, its the first time i'm seeing this with Battlefield 1:
The minimum system requirements for the game is an intel core i5 6600k! That cpu came out a year ago and it's already only meets the minimum system requirements??!?
The times are changing and you'll likely see the benefits of utilizing more than 4 physical cores, more and more as newer games come out.
If you're going to lower your budget, drop down to a gtx 1060. That will at least be an easy upgrade.

I agree with you. Buying an i5 now could be save me money, but in 2/3 years I might regret the choice. Now it brings up another question, is it really worth taking the i7-6700k? First, i don't think I'll overclock it, at least for now. Second, I'll only build this PC by end of May/beginning of June, so maybe wait for a next CPU to be launched or is there any i7 better, within the same price? (350-400 Eur). As far as i got you, in the future it will matter the number of cores my CPU has

What existing build do you have now? I would absolutely wait until Ryzen has launched and the benchmarks have been proven.

At the moment don't have any Desktop, I'm building one from scratch. All the components are on the top of the page

If you can't wait for Ryzen price to performance benchmarks (And I totally understand if you can't, since you don't have a pre-existing build), going i7 would be a wise choice.

 

[goncalomatos97]

It used to be roughly ten years ago, games were only optimized for dual core processors.
Up until recently, games really were only optimized for 4 physical cores and most of them still are.
You have to ask yourself this question. What games do you play now and do you plan to play newer games on ultra settings, high resolution, at a respectable frame rates, when they come out.
You'll start to see modern triple A titles via direct x 12 start to utilize more than four cores, in the near future.
If you want to keep your new build for a good solid 5 years, i'd going with an intel core i7 or Ryzen equivalent (Expected to launch next month).
Don't think about now, think about how your computer is going to perform in the future.
I'm already seeing cpu intensive games like Witcher 3 and GTA V run at more stable fps utilizing an i7 and these are games that came out two years ago.
For example, its the first time i'm seeing this with Battlefield 1:
The minimum system requirements for the game is an intel core i5 6600k! That cpu came out a year ago and it's already only meets the minimum system requirements??!?
The times are changing and you'll likely see the benefits of utilizing more than 4 physical cores, more and more as newer games come out.
If you're going to lower your budget, drop down to a gtx 1060. That will at least be an easy upgrade.

I agree with you. Buying an i5 now could be save me money, but in 2/3 years I might regret the choice. Now it brings up another question, is it really worth taking the i7-6700k? First, i don't think I'll overclock it, at least for now. Second, I'll only build this PC by end of May/beginning of June, so maybe wait for a next CPU to be launched or is there any i7 better, within the same price? (350-400 Eur). As far as i got you, in the future it will matter the number of cores my CPU has

What existing build do you have now? I would absolutely wait until Ryzen has launched and the benchmarks have been proven.

At the moment don't have any Desktop, I'm building one from scratch. All the components are on the top of the page

If you can't wait for Ryzen price to performance benchmarks (And I totally understand if you can't, since you don't have a pre-existing build), going i7 would be a wise choice.

Ryzen will be released next month, so I guess I'll wait. As I mentioned, I'll only start building on the end of May, so I still have time. Also, why AMD CPU's are way cheaper then Intel? I've read that AMD CPU's have an heating problem, but should i concern about that or consider switching?

 

[Crumpet 1]

By then AMD Ryzen will be out and well tested, and we'll know by then if it's worth the money or not. The top end will literally have twice the amount of cores and threads as the 6700k/7700k.

Thermals will also be an interesting topic as the 7700k seems to be quite warm... Be interesting to see how Ryzen compares there.

In my opinion, and i've explained this in numerous other threads, I think gaming has moved on now to where 4 cores are considered the minimum, and I feel like my i5 has reached a limit, though I wish i'd purchased a K core to be honest as I feel i'm limited by the stock clocks being lower.

From what I've learned since purchasing this i5 until now, is in the future I will ignore turbo clocks when purchasing a processor, and only really look at the stock clock. A single core/thread turbo means nothing to me in gaming or in rendering, so for what I use them for processors will never hit the advertised turbo speeds. Stock clocks however are across all cores, all core turbo seems to usually be somewhere around 200mhz above that.

To explain that, my processor is 3.3ghz stock, 3.9ghz turbo.

I purchased it thinking 3.9, crikey that seems good.

But in reality;

On old games that utilise 2 cores, I get 3.8ghz
On newer games that use all 4 cores, I get 3.5 up to 3.6ghz

In comparison, had I known this previously I would have bought a cheaper motherboard, saved up and put the extra money into getting an i7 6700k purely on the grounds that without overclocking at all, it's base clock across all cores is 4.0ghz. Hell of a step up, plus hyperthreading, 8 threads getting data fed to the cores faster.

So yes, come back to us in a few weeks, and we'll see where everything stands. You might be able to get some of these parts cheaper, or AMD might be a viable route.

 

[SgtScream]

It used to be roughly ten years ago, games were only optimized for dual core processors.
Up until recently, games really were only optimized for 4 physical cores and most of them still are.
You have to ask yourself this question. What games do you play now and do you plan to play newer games on ultra settings, high resolution, at a respectable frame rates, when they come out.
You'll start to see modern triple A titles via direct x 12 start to utilize more than four cores, in the near future.
If you want to keep your new build for a good solid 5 years, i'd going with an intel core i7 or Ryzen equivalent (Expected to launch next month).
Don't think about now, think about how your computer is going to perform in the future.
I'm already seeing cpu intensive games like Witcher 3 and GTA V run at more stable fps utilizing an i7 and these are games that came out two years ago.
For example, its the first time i'm seeing this with Battlefield 1:
The minimum system requirements for the game is an intel core i5 6600k! That cpu came out a year ago and it's already only meets the minimum system requirements??!?
The times are changing and you'll likely see the benefits of utilizing more than 4 physical cores, more and more as newer games come out.
If you're going to lower your budget, drop down to a gtx 1060. That will at least be an easy upgrade.

I agree with you. Buying an i5 now could be save me money, but in 2/3 years I might regret the choice. Now it brings up another question, is it really worth taking the i7-6700k? First, i don't think I'll overclock it, at least for now. Second, I'll only build this PC by end of May/beginning of June, so maybe wait for a next CPU to be launched or is there any i7 better, within the same price? (350-400 Eur). As far as i got you, in the future it will matter the number of cores my CPU has

What existing build do you have now? I would absolutely wait until Ryzen has launched and the benchmarks have been proven.

At the moment don't have any Desktop, I'm building one from scratch. All the components are on the top of the page

If you can't wait for Ryzen price to performance benchmarks (And I totally understand if you can't, since you don't have a pre-existing build), going i7 would be a wise choice.

Ryzen will be released next month, so I guess I'll wait. As I mentioned, I'll only start building on the end of May, so I still have time. Also, why AMD CPU's are way cheaper then Intel? I've read that AMD CPU's have an heating problem, but should i concern about that or consider switching?

Intel cpu's also have their fair share of heat problems. With exception to my soldiered i5 2500k, all later gens use cheap thermal interface material.

 

[goncalomatos97]

By then AMD Ryzen will be out and well tested, and we'll know by then if it's worth the money or not. The top end will literally have twice the amount of cores and threads as the 6700k/7700k.

Thermals will also be an interesting topic as the 7700k seems to be quite warm... Be interesting to see how Ryzen compares there.

In my opinion, and i've explained this in numerous other threads, I think gaming has moved on now to where 4 cores are considered the minimum, and I feel like my i5 has reached a limit, though I wish i'd purchased a K core to be honest as I feel i'm limited by the stock clocks being lower.

From what I've learned since purchasing this i5 until now, is in the future I will ignore turbo clocks when purchasing a processor, and only really look at the stock clock. A single core/thread turbo means nothing to me in gaming or in rendering, so for what I use them for processors will never hit the advertised turbo speeds. Stock clocks however are across all cores, all core turbo seems to usually be somewhere around 200mhz above that.

To explain that, my processor is 3.3ghz stock, 3.9ghz turbo.

I purchased it thinking 3.9, crikey that seems good.

But in reality;

On old games that utilise 2 cores, I get 3.8ghz
On newer games that use all 4 cores, I get 3.5 up to 3.6ghz

In comparison, had I known this previously I would have bought a cheaper motherboard, saved up and put the extra money into getting an i7 6700k purely on the grounds that without overclocking at all, it's base clock across all cores is 4.0ghz. Hell of a step up, plus hyperthreading, 8 threads getting data fed to the cores faster.

So yes, come back to us in a few weeks, and we'll see where everything stands. You might be able to get some of these parts cheaper, or AMD might be a viable route.

I'll wait for Ryzen to be released and then I'll see if it's worth to change. Appreciate your help

 

[SgtScream]

To further complicate this post:
If Ryzen can compete, I bet intel will counter Ryzen with the next gen x99 equivalent platform.

 

[velocityg4]

Thank you for your help, I'll go with i7. Just on thing, I'm not from the UK, so i don't those prices apply to me, but thanks anyway

Oops, confused the Pound and Euro symbol. Anyways a lot of EU countries appear to have similar prices. I'm sure if you fiddle around with suppliers. You should be able to knock off 100

Here is Germany for example.
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i7-6700K 4.0GHz Quad-Core Processor (€320.48 @ Amazon Italia)
CPU Cooler: be quiet! Dark Rock 3 67.8 CFM Fluid Dynamic Bearing CPU Cooler (€55.75 @ Amazon Italia)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z170XP-SLI ATX LGA1151 Motherboard (€156.80 @ Amazon Italia)
Memory: Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory
Storage: Intel 600p Series 256GB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive (€124.74 @ Amazon Italia)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 3TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive (€104.15 @ Amazon Italia)
Video Card: MSI GeForce GTX 1070 8GB Video Card (€418.99 @ Amazon Italia)
Case: Corsair 450D ATX Mid Tower Case (€115.99 @ Amazon Italia)
Power Supply: SeaSonic 660W 80+ Platinum Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply (€138.99 @ Amazon Italia)
Total: €1435.89
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-02-19 15:47 CET+0100

and Italy

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i7-6700K 4.0GHz Quad-Core Processor (€320.48 @ Amazon Italia)
CPU Cooler: be quiet! Dark Rock 3 67.8 CFM Fluid Dynamic Bearing CPU Cooler (€55.75 @ Amazon Italia)
Motherboard: MSI Z170A SLI PLUS ATX LGA1151 Motherboard (€135.88 @ Amazon Italia)
Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws 4 series 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-2133 Memory (€119.27 @ Amazon Italia)
Storage: Intel 600p Series 256GB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive (€124.74 @ Amazon Italia)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 3TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive (€104.15 @ Amazon Italia)
Video Card: MSI GeForce GTX 1070 8GB Video Card (€418.99 @ Amazon Italia)
Case: Corsair 450D ATX Mid Tower Case (€115.99 @ Amazon Italia)
Power Supply: SeaSonic 650W 80+ Gold Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply (€108.99 @ Amazon Italia)
Total: €1504.24
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-02-19 15:53 CET+0100