Question Is this an efficient build?


Jul 30, 2017
I'm going for a pretty powerful system for gaming, streaming, recording, and editing for programs like after effects. Heres my build

I chose the i9 because its only ~$100 more than the i7 for a lot better performance. I know 32 GB of ram isn't necessary but I would like that breathing room. If you have any recommendations for a different motherboard I am open to suggestions I just need one that has a decent amount of USB ports, an ethernet port, LGA1151 chipset, at least 3 Sata 6gb (for my storage),PCIe x16 (for graphics card), preferably 4 ram slots, and preferably have SLI capability. I would prefer the liquid cooling CPU especially since I am interested in overclocking. I am thinking of upgrading my graphics card later (probably to a 2070) but if you think I will have bottlenecking issues with the i9 and GTX 960 please let me know.

If you have any recommendations here are my requirements.
CPU: i9 (or i7 if you really think I don't need i9; must be intel)
GPU: my current 960 and a later upgrade to a 2070 (must be Nvidia)
Motherboard: 4 ram slots, LGA1151, SLI (preferable), ethernet,wifi (preferable), SATA 6: at least 3, PCIe x16 (for current graphics)
Ram: 32GB(preferably), DDR4, (preferably>2400mhz)
CPU Fan: liquid cooling (preferable; not too complicated I don't have enough knowledge to continually maintain it)
My storage, power, graphics, and case is in the pc part picker link.

Budget: Preferably less than $1500 (<$1000 not including graphics card)
-I don't care much for aesthetic so RGB is not necessary.
-Highest intensity games I will be running:
*R6 Siege

-Highest intensity programs I will be running
*After Effects (with lots of effects and minimal RAM preview time)
*Cinema 4D
*Unreal Engine

-I will be running some of these apps at the same time
-Capability of streaming and recording at 1080p 60fps with ultra/high graphics settings

Will take any recommendations into consideration or if you think my build looks good let me know :)


Jul 30, 2017
its just preference, I prefer the Nvidia cards over AMD (especially because of GeForce Experience) and I would like to have the option to have SLI if I later choose to get another card (which is probably not very likely but again its having that extra option)


Well, that does limit our ability to optimize performance-per dollar.

SLI is Nvidia. Crossfire is AMD. But, frankly, neither of those are worth putting into the decision-making process. They're dying technologies.


Jul 2, 2015
You are limiting yourself quite a bit when ignoring Ryzen. It is undoubtably the king of work especially when comparing the 9900k and the 3900x. The 9900k may be slightly faster for gaming now, but in the future, the 3900k is expected to be much faster. 12 cores vs 8 cores for around the same cost is hard to argue with.


Apr 23, 2008
Also the SLI and Crossfire is pretty bad support wise, it doesn’t work for all games and to call it inconsistent is an understatement. I remember a buddy of mine years ago building a high end SLI gaming machine and he ended up taking them out of SLI due to all the issues he was having and quite honestly it doesn’t seem to have improved every time I try to look into it again as I do like the concept but it just fails in execution.

I would argue that saving your money from whatever you were going to spend to leave that option open for better parts now or in the future is a wiser investment.

A lot of people here would argue a lot of reasons for Ryzen over Intel right now and I let them do that but I would highly recommend looking into the security issues Intel is having right now with their CPU’s before making the jump with them. I’m not to well versed in this subject so I won’t bother going into details but it’s worth some research if you haven’t read up on it lately.
Reactions: King_V