[SOLVED] Need help choosing the components for my gaming PC

[Jussinen]

Hi
Thanks already for the answers. I'm planning to purchase a new PC around Black Friday. Instead of talking about a budget (which could be something like 2300 € in total without OS), I'd say that the parts that I've already thought about are just about as expensive as I'm willing to pay for them. However, I could swab a component for a much better one if it doesn't have a significant impact on the total cost.

Monitor is not included, I'll buy it separately or at least I'll think about it later.

I may end up overclocking the CPU and/or GPU one day, when they're not up for their task, but that's a big may. I might buy a better GPU (like RTX 3090) one day though, and possibly CPU (something better from the same 5000-series). It's not going to happen in any near future, but I like to leave that option open. So that's good to remember when choosing the motherboard.

So this is what I've been thinking of so far:

CPU: Ryzen 5600X
GPU: Asus Rog Strix 3060 Ti OC
RAM: Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 3200 MHz
Motherboard: B550 MSI Gaming Edge Wifi
SSD: M.2 Samsung 970 Evo Plus (500gb and 1tb)
PSU: Seasonic PX850
Case: Fractal Design Meshify 2
Cooling: I'm willing to spend some 200-300 €, but need some help with what to get.

I'm not really planning to reconsider my CPU here.
GPU-wise it's really Asus Rog Strix 3060 Ti OC or MSI 3060 Ti Gaming Z Trio. I'd be happy to buy a Radeon 6700XT too, but it's currently unavailable.
RAM seems to be just about the best alternative. There are other good options too, but I guess I'll make the final decision on Black Friday based on what's on discount and for how much.
Motherboard: I just want a good motherboard that can meet up with the requirements that I listed above (components, overclocking, future upgrades). Whether it costs 170 € or 230 € is not that important.
SSD: Is there any reason why I shouldn't use 2x m.2? Difference in price between m.2 and 2,5" is really small. I was thinking of buying that 500GB for OS and 1TB for everything else.
PSU: There are few good options here and I'll look at what's on discount on Black Friday. Energy efficiency is a good thing, but obviously there's no point in paying a huge sum of money just to save an euro or two in electricity bill.
Case: There are other options too, but Fractal Design's Meshify 2 is my number 1 choise right now. I don't think that I'll change my mind on that one anymore, unless someone can convince me that NZXT H710i is a great option aswell.
Cooling: I'll probably open a new thread because there's just so much to it, but I'm thinking of going with 3x 140mm in front, 1x 140mm rear, 1x 140mm bottom, 360mm AIO on top.

How does all of this sound to you? Is it a decent gaming PC or is something horribly wrong about it? Computers are ridiculously expensive these days so I just want to make sure that I get it "right" before I invest all that money on it. I've already asked about some of these parts elsewhere but I just want to see what people think about the whole package.

EDIT:
Thanks everyone for the answers so far. I asked for help choosing the components for my gaming PC and this is what I ended up with:

CPU: Ryzen 5600X
GPU: Asus Rog Strix 3060 Ti OC
RAM: Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 3600 MHz
Motherboard: B550 MSI Gaming Edge Wifi
SSD: M.2 Samsung 970 Evo Plus (500gb and 1tb)
PSU: Seasonic PX850
Case: Fractal Design Meshify 2
Cooling: Most likely Arctic Freezer 34 eSport Duo for CPU
2x Arctic BioniX F140 PWM PST fans on top of the case (or alternatively Arctic Liquid Freezer II 360 on top, for CPU)
3x Fractal Design Prisma AL-14 PWM in front intake
1x Fractal Design Prisma AL-14 PWM for rear exhaust

Now I only really need a gaming monitor (curved or not? if curved, then only slightly), which I wasn't sure if I wanted to buy now. But I may aswell use this same thread for that. So... I've read about monitors, but it's all still blurry... Too much info. I would like a 27" 1440p monitor (for some future proofing at least, in case I ever end up upgrading the CPU and GPU). Price range around 300-400 € (or less...). It's a gaming PC so I would like a monitor mostly for gaming, but it doesn't have to be the best best. I've played with regular non-gaming monitors for years and they've been okay. But something that is gentle to one's eyes would be good, my current monitor sure isn't. I noticed that most gaming monitors are in the worst possible energy class and I've read some pretty confusing and contradictory reviews and comments on their energy efficiency and power consumption. With how things are developing with the energy prices, I think good energy efficiency would be much preferable. No need for integrated speakers or headphone inserts, but other than that, I am not entirely sure what I need. Computer world has changed so much since I bought my last computer.

 

[Aeacus]

Well, XMP mode enables everything up to 5100 MHz

That is, if given the RAM is actually built to reach those speeds. You can't OC e.g 3600 Mhz RAM to 5100 Mhz. For one, there is no such XMP option in the BIOS and for two, RAM will die long before you'll ever reach 5100 Mhz frequency. Most likely, OC won't hold and reverts back to default speeds.

XMP travels with the RAM sticks, and not with MoBo.

Though 3600 MHz is said to be the "optimal" speed for 5600X, I believe.

Not quite.

3600 Mhz is the fastest cost effective speed. Going with any faster RAM, greatly diminishes the cost vs performance gain ratio.

Back in the day, when Intel 6th gen was latest, highest cost effective frequency was 3000 Mhz. Now, for Intel, it's 3200 Mhz. When speaking about DDR4 RAM.
DDR5 RAM frequency is double or even tripe of DDR4, while also costing a fortune.

Fastest optimal for 5600X would be 3200 Mhz, since 3600 Mhz is overclocked frequency. Also, CPU itself can use up to 3200 Mhz speeds. The extra 400 Mhz is utilized by MoBo and other components.

For example, my i5-6600K uses RAM speed as 2133 Mhz. I have 3000 Mhz RAM. When looking on CPU perspective, any faster RAM than 2133 Mhz, wouldn't be needed nor optimal. For CPU alone. But since there are other hardware that uses RAM as well, the 3000 Mhz RAM does help.

That means that Meshify 2 is a pretty good case with bad fans, sadly!

Most cases are like so, where case itself can be good but is combined with poor fans. Those cheap fans cost case manufacturers little, if any at all. So, they usually include them. You can look it as bloatware, that you get for free when buying prebuilt PC with OS installed.

 

[5900x]

The Antec DF700 Flux is pretty good for a cheaper option and its practically noiseless almost in my experience.

 

[Jussinen]

XMP travels with the RAM sticks, and not with MoBo.

Well yea, I didn't suggest that I can make 3200 MHz RAM work like 3600 MHz RAM, but even if I bought 3600 MHz RAM it only works on that speed if my motherboard supports that speed, or did I get something wrong? 3200 MHz still seems to be the highest RAM speed that is officially supported by that Gaming Edge motherboard without overclocking. Not saying that I shouldn't go with a higher speed RAM though. It seems that a lot of people do.

Most cases are like so, where case itself can be good but is combined with poor fans. Those cheap fans cost case manufacturers little, if any at all.

Yes. They also use preferably their own fans so if the case manufacturer doesn't make good fans, you won't get good fans. But NZXT actually performed well with the stock fans too, so it seems like they're using real Aer 2 fans there. But are they PWM? I don't know. And even then I'd rather use 140 mms than the stock 120 mms.

The Antec DF700 Flux is pretty good for a cheaper option and its practically noiseless almost in my experience.

There are real good cheap cases out there. Meshify 2 and H710i aren't best value cases for sure. But I like their looks and their performance is not too bad. Above average I would say.

 

[Aeacus]

but even if I bought 3600 MHz RAM it only works on that speed if my motherboard supports that speed, or did I get something wrong?

Not quite.

When you buy 3600 Mhz RAM and first install it, it most likely will work on default standard speed, 2133 Mhz. You have to manually enable XMP for it to run 3600 Mhz.

Also, all RAM sticks have to support JEDEC default speeds and even if RAM is advertised as faster, you can still switch between default speeds: 1866/ 2133/ 2400/ 2667/ 2800/ 2933/ 3000/ 3066/ 3200 MHz by JEDEC. Of course, when RAM is advertised as 2400 Mhz then it can't operate at faster speeds, despite the faster speeds being also part of the JEDEC standard.

so it seems like they're using real Aer 2 fans there.

Not quite either.

NZXT uses "Aer F case version" fans in H710i. It is different from the regular Aer F fan. Just like Corsair using AF140L in the 760T case, not the AF140 it sells separately.

But are they PWM?

No. They are 3-pin fans.
But they do have fluid-dynamic bearing, aka rifle bearing.

Some Google-fu:

Fan specs are:

• manufacturer: NZXT
• warranty: 2 years from the date of purchase at the seller's website
• type: fan
• type of cooling: active
• application: housings (120 mm)
• max speed: 1200 ± 200 RPM
• speed regulation: yes
• maximum volume: 28 dB
• Max airflow CFM: 50.42
• amperage: 0.16A
• dimensions of the fan WxDxH: 120 x 120 x 26 mm
• black colour

And even then I'd rather use 140 mms than the stock 120 mms.

Yeah. Though, H710i comes with 3x 120mm and 1x 140mm fan.

 

[Jussinen]

Okay, not the same specs on stock and regular fans. Stock are indeed worse.

Yeah. Though, H710i comes with 3x 120mm and 1x 140mm fan.

Yes, it does. That's why I'd rather have 2x 140 mm for intake. What a waste...

When you buy 3600 Mhz RAM and first install it, it most likely will work on default standard speed, 2133 Mhz. You have to manually enable XMP for it to run 3600 Mhz.

Also, all RAM sticks have to support JEDEC default speeds and even if RAM is advertised as faster, you can still switch between default speeds: 1866/ 2133/ 2400/ 2667/ 2800/ 2933/ 3000/ 3066/ 3200 MHz by JEDEC. Of course, when RAM is advertised as 2400 Mhz then it can't operate at faster speeds, despite the faster speeds being also part of the JEDEC standard.

MSI B550 Gaming Edge Wifi:
Supports DDR4 1866/ 2133/ 2400/ 2667/ 2800/ 2933/ 3000/ 3066/ 3200 MHz by JEDEC
Supports DDR4 2667/ 2800/ 2933/ 3000/ 3066/ 3200/ 3466/ 3600/ 3733/ 3866/ 4000/ 4133/ 4266/ 4400/ 4466/ 4533/ 4600/ 4866/ 5000/ 5100 MHz by A-XMP OC MODE
I'm guessing that Corsair Vengeance RGB PRO 3600 MHz 2x 8GB will run at 3600 MHz when overclocked, but I may just as well buy 3200 MHz versions.

 

[Jussinen]

3600 MHz it shall be then, thank you.

Now I only really need a non-curved gaming monitor (curved or not? if curved, then only slightly), which I wasn't sure if I wanted to buy now. But I may aswell use this same thread for that. So... I've read about monitors, but it's all still blurry... Too much info. I would like a 27" 1440p monitor (for some future proofing at least, in case I ever end up upgrading the CPU and GPU). Price range around 300-400 € (or less...). It's a gaming PC so I would like a monitor mostly for gaming, but it doesn't have to be the best best. I've played with regular non-gaming monitors for years and they've been okay. But something that is gentle to one's eyes would be good, my current monitor sure isn't. I noticed that most gaming monitors are in the worst possible energy class and I've read some pretty confusing and contradictory reviews and comments on their energy efficiency and power consumption. With how things are developing with the energy prices, I think good energy efficiency would be much preferable. No need for integrated speakers or headphone inserts, but other than that, I am not entirely sure what I need. Computer world has changed so much since I bought my last computer.

Aeactus, you already recommended MSI Optix MAG272CQR on another thread, I believe? MSI also has Optix MAG274R2 which is 50 € cheaper.
https://www.msi.com/Monitor/Optix-MAG274R2

There aren't too many monitors in that price range sadly.
There's Asus 27" TUF Gaming VG27BQ though

TUF Gaming VG27BQ｜Monitors｜ASUS Global

TUF Gaming monitors are ideal for competitive gamers on a budget, delivering a carefully selected set of high-end gaming features at palatable prices. Immaculate visuals are now within reach.

www.asus.com

I got to say that I am a bit lost with all these monitors. They seem to be even more complicated than any PC component! 240 hz refresh is better than 75 hz, I get that much. But is there a point where some average joe that isn't a professional gamer doesn't really notice a big difference in anything other than the price? Like with the audio codec. At some point you only hear a difference in sound quality if you have very expensive headphones, preferably studio headphones, and also very good ears.

EDIT: Energy efficiency.. Samsung 32" Odyssey G5 is said to be using 49 kWh/10,000h. So if you use computer 8h a day, every single day, that's 2920 hours a year. If that monitor uses 49/1000 kWh per hour, it uses 0,048 x 2920 kWh per year, which is 143 kWh? That's not so much.. and 8h a day is alot for me these days.

 

[Aeacus]

MSI also has Optix MAG274R2 which is 50 € cheaper

Yes, MSI offers loads of monitors nowadays, even my monitor is from MSI, MAG241CR (specs).

Now, MAG274R2 may be cheaper, but it's also 1080p, IPS panel monitor, with poor contrast ratio of 1000:1,
specs: https://www.msi.com/Monitor/Optix-MAG274R2/Specification

What i suggested elsewhere, is 1440p, VA panel monitor with good contrast ratio of 3000:1, albeit it's curved monitor,
specs: https://www.msi.com/Monitor/Optix-MAG272CQR/Specification

---

When choosing a monitor, many people doesn't know the criteria. But there are actually many, like:

Response time: 1ms
Contrast ratio: min 3000:1
TN, VA or IPS: VA
Color Gamut: never considered that
Size: 24", 27" or 32" (1080p does well on 24" and 27", 1440p does well with 27" and 32")
Ultrawide: No
Refresh rate: 144 Hz (or up)
Curvature: 1500R or less
VESA mount: Yes. Preferably 100mm and 120mm all in one
Input port: Display Port
HDR: I don't mind it
Internal speakers: Don't need them
How many USB ports: Don't use monitor USB ports, so, i don't care
Headphone out: Don't use that either
G-Sync: Neat thing if you have Nvidia GPU but increases monitor price considerably
Price: If it's good, i'm willing to pay premium price
Brand: MSI, Asus

Note: These above are my personal preferences and may not align or even match yours. Take them as a guideline to look for a monitor.

---

Also, to pick a monitor, it's good when you know more about different monitor panel types. There are 3x kinds of monitor panels: TN, VA and IPS. Actually there are more (variations of the main three) but i focus on these main ones.

TN panel is oldest of the three and also cheapest. Where TN panel excels is it's performance, most notably response time (1ms).
Though, TN panel also has it's downsides. Prominent ones are: poor color accuracy (washed out colors), very narrow view angle and poor contrast ratio (max 1000:1).

Gaming wise, TN panel monitor is best suited for fast-paced games (FPS, racing etc), where you don't care as much about pretty colors as you do about smoothness of movements.

IPS panel has been around for some time and is also the most expensive of the three.
Where IPS panel excels is it's color accuracy, which is the best of the three. Also, it has widest viewing angles of the three.
But where IPS panel falls short is response time. IPS technology by design can't be any faster than 4ms (compared to the 1ms most TN panels are). Unless some software utilization is made within monitor itself. Another area where IPS panel falls short is it's poor contrast ratio which is equal to a TN panel (max 1000:1), despite it's great color accuracy. This is most prominent when looking at black image and where black isn't black but instead gray or some form of blue. Refresh rates aren't IPS panel strong side either and many IPS panels are 60Hz, especially on higher resolutions. There are some 1440p 165Hz and 4K 120Hz IPS panel monitors out there but they are few and far apart, also costing a fortune.

Gaming wise, IPS panel monitor is best suited for slow-paced games (RPG, strategy etc), where you have time to see all those pretty colors and where smoothness of movements isn't that important.

VA panel is the newest of the three and price wise, it falls between TN and IPS. VA panel was created to take the best of both worlds (TN and IPS) and combine them.
Where VA panel excels is it's contrast ratio (min 3000:1), where you'd see the deepest and richest blacks. Also, it doesn't fall short on other aspects as well. VA panel color accuracy isn't as good as it is for IPS panel but it's close to the levels of IPS panel (considerably better than TN panel). It's viewing angle is also a notch smaller than that of an IPS panel but again, considerably better than that of a TN panel. Refresh rate wise, VA panel is more capable on different resolutions than IPS panel. Response time is another area where VA panel does good. While VA panel can't naturally be any faster than 4ms (just like IPS panel), it can achieve the magical 1ms response thanks to the software solution in it.
With VA panel monitors making waves lately, there aren't any major downsides of them. Availability used to be issue but not anymore.

Gaming wise, VA panel monitor is suited for all kinds of games. VA panel is like Jack of all trades but master of none.

---

Edit:

To me, contrast ratio is important since i need to have blacks as blacks. Also, good contrast ratio (e.g 3000:1) will make images (everything actually) look a lot better, than poor contrast ratio (1000:1). Even superb color accuracy isn't as important as contrast ratio is. That's why i prefer VA panels and also have one right now. Before that, i had 10+ years a 1000:1 TN panel monitor and it's like night and day between the two. Sure, IPS panel has best color accuracy but same level of contrast as TN panel, which isn't that good.

Here's further reading about contrast ratio: https://www.cnet.com/news/contrast-ratio-or-how-every-tv-manufacturer-lies-to-you/

---

And about curved panels;
Like i said, i had TN panel monitor before and that was flat panel monitor. My current one is curved. It took a bit time to get used to the curvature but overall, it does help with immersion, both in games and also in movies. When i now look flat panel monitors (e.g my missus has flat panel monitor), i get a sensation that her monitor bulges out from the middle.
Oh, curved monitor also helps reading text, especially when it's from edge to edge since the curvature follows the curved vision humans have and i find it easier for my eyes to read text on curved monitors.

Oh, the smaller the curvature rating, the more curved the monitor is. E.g i have 24" 1500R monitor. Larger monitors can have 1800R curvature since for them, optimal viewing distance is further away than for smaller monitors.

 

[Jussinen]

Also, to pick a monitor, it's good when you know more about different monitor panel types. There are 3x kinds of monitor panels: TN, VA and IPS. Actually there are more (variations of the main three) but i focus on these main ones.

So I read a bit more about them... Viewing angles are a bit irrelevant to me. It's not a TV that I'm looking for. I'll be sitting right infront of my monitor. I actually think that I would be just fine with a good quality TN monitor. I mean, if you don't know what better colours look like, you're not really going to miss them . But... When you upgrade your monitor once a decade, you may aswell get something significantly better and more modern.

There are some 1440p 165Hz and 4K 120Hz IPS panel monitors out there but they are few and far apart, also costing a fortune.

https://www.msi.com/Monitor/Optix-G273QF
MSI Optix G273QF is an ISP and does have 1ms (gtg?) respond time and 165 Hz 1440p. I don't know if that respond time is acchieved with one of those softwares or such that you mentioned. It is actually the same price as MSI Optix MAG272CQR that is VA. Now, the VA model still has that better contrast ratio that you spoke of, but that aside, would you think that the ISP model is worth a consider?

Then there's ofcourse freesync and g-sync. That particular VA model comes with a freesync and ISP model with a g-sync. And since I'm going to get a 3060 Ti, g-sync is probably preferable. But who really knows what GPU I will be using in 4-5 years? And I don't want to change my monitor all the time. Does g-sync and freesync really matter that much?

Also, what disadvantages would a curved monitor have? Flat monitors aren't actually all that common amongst gaming monitors. Not in where I'm going to get my monitor anyway.

Well, here are some monitors that I saw.

HUAWEI MateView GT 27-inch Standard Edition Specifications – HUAWEI Global

Experience a bigger vision on the HUAWEI MateView GT 27-inch Standard Edition curved screen with 2K resolution, gaming-level 165-Hz refresh rate, and cinematic color.

consumer.huawei.com

1500R, 165 Hz, VA, 4000:1 contrast

https://www.gigabyte.com/Monitor/G27QC#kf
1500R, 165 Hz, VA, 3000:1 contrast ...

https://www.asus.com/Displays-Desktops/Monitors/TUF-Gaming/TUF-Gaming-VG32VQ1BR/techspec
Again, 1500R, 165 Hz, VA, 3000:1... but 31,5" or something. Bigger.

Asus TUF VG27AQ

TUF Gaming VG27AQ - Tech Specs｜Monitors｜ASUS Global

TUF Gaming VG27AQ HDR G-SYNC Compatible Gaming Monitor â 27 inch WQHD (2560x1440), IPS, 165Hz (above 144Hz), Extreme Low Motion Blur Sync G-SYNC Compatible, Adaptive-Sync, 1ms (MPRT), HDR10

www.asus.com

(Black Friday sale)

I may end up buying the monitor from a different website, but here's a Finnish site selling PC stuff, in this case monitors:
https://www.jimms.fi/en/Product/List/000-1D3/oheislaitteet--naytot--25-27?ob=4&fq=1440
I filtered it for 27" 1440p monitors.

I have a feeling that I'm going for an overkill monitor, lol. Just like with the PC components. 1440p is future I think. I wouldn't necessarely wanto to buy a new monitor anytime soon. But I have a feeling that a good quality TN is still so big improvement to what I have now - along with a computer that is capable of running modern games at reasonable resolution and graphics settings - that I'd probably be amazed of how good it looks. Like I said before, I'm not a professional gamer. I've been using a ~75 Hz (I think) monitor for over a decade and I've been doing pretty well in many FPS games. And I'm not even planning to start playing that kind of games online anymore.

But I do say one thing again. My current monitor is stressing my eyes considerably. I want a monitor that is not doing that.

 

[Aeacus]

MSI Optix G273QF is an ISP and does have 1ms (gtg?) respond time and 165 Hz 1440p.

Yes, it has 1ms GTG,
specs: https://www.msi.com/Monitor/Optix-G273QF/Specification

Btw, i wrote that panel comparison/description text ~2 years ago and at that time, there weren't many 144+ Hz 1440p IPS panel monitors around. Now, of course, time has moved onwards and they are becoming more affordable and with greater selection. Now, there are even news of 500 Hz monitors in the works.

Now, the VA model still has that better contrast ratio that you spoke of, but that aside, would you think that the ISP model is worth a consider?

You have a typo; it's IPS panel, and not ISP panel. Though in IT world, ISP usually means Internet Service Provider.

It comes down on your usage of monitor.

IPS panels are great for color accuracy and great for graphic designers, where they need very accurate color palette display, that is, as long as they aren't working with 50 or 100 shades of gray.
Gaming wise, slow-paced and/or casual games (e.g RPG) look really good on them since you have time to take in all those pretty colors.

VA has really good contrast ratio and for some who works with image editing (where shades of grey matter), it's very good panel type to have. Also, it's color accuracy is also good, not on the level of IPS panel but very close to it, considerably better than TN panel. To give you an example, where 100% would be perfection regarding color accuracy; then IPS panel would be 95-99%, VA panel would be 90% and TN panel would be 70%.
Gaming wise, colors look very good (at least to my eye) and so does the blacks. Downside is that now, i can't cheese the dark parts/nights in the game. Where when i used my TN panel, it wasn't capable of showing nights as dark as they were supposed to be and i was able to see something, making my life easier. Now, with VA panel, i have to endure the nights/dark parts of the game, as they are supposed to be.

After using TN panel, 60 Hz monitor for a decade, and now using VA panel monitor; am i going back to TN panel? Not in a million years.
Sure, newer TN panel monitors are better than the old timer i have, but i love the contrast ratio i now have and for that reason alone, i'll be sticking with minimum of 3000:1 contrast ratio. Also, i like the "purpose" or "idea" of the VA panel, where it is: "Jack of all trades but master of none.". Since i do many different kind of tasks with my PC, this kind of panel is ideal for me. Sure, there are gaming dedicated monitors and graphics design dedicated monitors, among many, but i prefer the "middle-man" to say so.

and ISP model with a g-sync

MSI Optix G273QF? If so, it actually doesn't have G-Sync. What it is, is G-Sync Compatible. There's a difference.
Specs: https://www.msi.com/Monitor/Optix-G273QF/Specification

Article about what the "G-Sync Compatible" is and means,
link: https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/how-to-run-gsync-on-freesync-monitor,6072.html

Does g-sync and freesync really matter that much?

Both are designed to do the same thing - remove screen tearing. Also, there are more than just AMD Freesync and Nvidia G-Sync. The most common and available to all for free is V-sync.

Here's further reading of those different methods that all try to solve screen tearing (note, it's some years old),
link: View: https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapc/comments/4p0q7a/lets_talk_about_vsync_freesync_gsync_adaptivesync/


Now, are they worth it? Yes.
Which one you should use? That's the harder part.
I'm using Adaptive-Sync and i find it good enough. Note: in the link above, adaptive-sync, at that time, 5 years ago, wasn't compatible with Nvidia GPUs, but now, it is.

But I do say one thing again. My current monitor is stressing my eyes considerably. I want a monitor that is not doing that.

That's the hard part since eyesight is individual. If you're able, visit a store and look different monitors when they are operational on display. Look which one seems the most pleasing to the eye (the least amount of strain) and go from there.

One part of eye strain is monitor panel, another part is brightness and light/dark theme. For example, if you'd be pulling all-nighters often (which i do), it is sensible that you use dark theme everywhere, so that your eyes won't strain on the bright white background when you read stuff/ work with PC.

 

[The Gr33k Fre4k]

Hello there,
A little sidenote in your journey of assembling your wishlist components for your future PC is this : https://outervision.com/power-supply-calculator
Here, you can put all your parts and see exactly how many watts you need for your PSU. I'm not expert, but in my opinion you should be fine with a 650 watt 80 plus gold PSU. That way you save up money both in your purchase and in your yearly energy consumption.
Other than that, I have to say that me myself I'm also on the journey of assembling my wishlist components for my future PC and in my surpise reading your list I found many common components, so I'm glad that the research I did and all the comparisons for efficiency vs budget paid off and someone else had the same list, well almost same at least.

Also, when it comes to selecting a monitor, I found out that
MSI Optix G24C4 Curved Gaming Monitor 23.6" FHD 1920x1080 144Hz
is the best vfm monitor in the market right now.

 

[Jussinen]

Hello there,
A little sidenote in your journey of assembling your wishlist components for your future PC is this : https://outervision.com/power-supply-calculator
Here, you can put all your parts and see exactly how many watts you need for your PSU. I'm not expert, but in my opinion you should be fine with a 650 watt 80 plus gold PSU. That way you save up money both in your purchase and in your yearly energy consumption.
Other than that, I have to say that me myself I'm also on the journey of assembling my wishlist components for my future PC and in my surpise reading your list I found many common components, so I'm glad that the research I did and all the comparisons for efficiency vs budget paid off and someone else had the same list, well almost same at least.

Also, when it comes to selecting a monitor, I found out that
MSI Optix G24C4 Curved Gaming Monitor 23.6" FHD 1920x1080 144Hz
is the best vfm monitor in the market right now.

Hey, thanks for the comment! In my case, the GPU choise was mostly out of necessity. Most alternatives had either run out or the price was too high for what I was willing to consider. So I pretty much chose the other components around that GPU, with some future upgrade in mind though. I said earlier that I was maybe going to get Ryzen 5950X and Geforce RTX 3090 one day when they become much cheaper and that's why I chose the 850W power supply, though I admit that it does seem like a total overkill. I've tried many PSU wattage calculators and I usually end up around 450 W recommended PSU. That's very low. I wonder if I'm doing something wrong there or if they do not work properly.

By the way, I think I've read from many sources that bigger PSU doesn't use more energy than smaller ones (though it isn't quite that simple). Basically they only take the energy that is required at the time to run the PC. Otherwise they would create considerable amount of heat. Here's a link to some discussion over it:

Higher power supply wattage uses more electricity?

Does having a super high wattage power supply use more electricity than a less powerful one? Example: 1000 watt power supply vs a 400 watt power supply. Let's say the computer only uses about 350 watt max.

forums.tomshardware.com

I chose the platinum model because of power efficiency, although again it is not quite that straightforward. But in theory platinum is always more efficient than gold. Now the question is though, how many years I would have to use my computer to save in energy bill what I wasted on that power supply? It probably won't pay back, but who knows? Electricity is getting more expensive and will likely continue to do so. Old cheap ways of creating energy aren't very green.

You have a typo; it's IPS panel, and not ISP panel. Though in IT world, ISP usually means Internet Service Provider.

It was midnight and I had just read tons of info in the Internet, lol. What were you expecting? 😁

What comes to different "syncs", well I was just wondering if getting the right (g-sync vs. freesync) is like more important than, say, getting a good refresh rate or response time? 144 Hz g-sync monitor (for my RTX 3060 Ti) vs. otherwise identical monitor but with a 165 Hz and freesync? Are they so important things that you should always change your monitor type if you change your GPU manufacturer? I did read that since 2019 Nvidia cards have been able to use adaptive sync and freesync (well, I don' know exactly what this means but I'm guessing that this is the same as "g-sync compatible. So not perfect, but works at least somehow.)

I just may not have the luxury of choosing what "sync" my future monitor supports, unless I'm willing to sacrifice in quality to get the right one.

 

[Aeacus]

Now the question is though, how many years I would have to use my computer to save in energy bill what I wasted on that power supply? It probably won't pay back, but who knows?

PSU efficiency isn't only about saving few cents on electricity bill. More efficient PSUs also expel less heat and if you use UPS, you get longer runtime out of it as well.

I was just wondering if getting the right (g-sync vs. freesync) is like more important than, say, getting a good refresh rate or response time?

No.

Since you can use many different screen tearing solutions, you do not have to pick monitor based on that.
Nvidia GPUs can use: V-sync, adaptive sync, Freesync (if Freesync monitor is G-Sync compatible) and G-Sync. Now, first three are cost free and doesn't increase monitor price, where the first two are software based and work with all monitors. Only G-Sync adds a lot of cost to monitor since monitor makers have to pay royalties to Nvidia when they add G-Sync to their monitor, hence why G-Sync monitors are more expensive. AMD doesn't ask any royalties when Freesync is added to monitor and due to this, many monitors support Freesync, where monitor price isn't inflated either.

Overall, reducing/eliminating screen tearing is more important to hardcore gamers, who want to have error free image in games. Casual players either doesn't care about the small tearing or aren't even capable of seeing it. (I haven't seen any screen tearing in my games though but i'm also a casual gamer.)

Screen refresh rate is quite important since higher it is, more smoother the movements in game are.
Hardcore gamers would be able to tell clear and huge difference between 60 Hz and 144 Hz. Casual gamers - not so much. When i got my 144 Hz monitor, i did see some improvement in smoothness but not like night-and-day, hardcore gamers say it would be. Then again, my eyes aren't trained to see minute drops in frames per second.

Now, response time is most important since even casual gamer's untrained eye can see the difference.
Longer response time gives ghosting effects in games or with any moving objects. It looks like a shadow behind moving object. Since i can adjust the response time on my monitor: 4ms, 2ms or 1ms, i tested all of them out in FPS game and ghosting was obvious with 4ms, while still noticeable with 2ms. Only 1ms doesn't produce ghosting, at least to my eye.
To test ghosting on your monitor, you can use this neat online test,
link: https://www.testufo.com/ghosting

So, order of monitor specs, in importance, would be something like this:

1. Screen size
2. Response time
3. Refresh rate
4. Resolution size
5. Panel type

And the rest of features follow in a mixed bag. Price is individual aspect and i can't rate that. For some people, price is #1 while others are willing to pay extra, if given they get the monitor exactly to their needs and preferences.

To start with screen size, you need to look how far are you sitting from the monitor. I'm sitting ~80cm from mine and to me, 24" size is perfect, especially on 1080p reso. Sure, i could've gone with 27" 1080p monitor but from such short distance, i'd be seeing individual pixels of my monitor. Now, 27", 1440p monitor negates that and would look good.
This chart gives a nice idea about the correlation between sitting distance, monitor size and monitor reso,
link: https://stari.co/tv-monitor-viewing-distance-calculator

 

[JinxTheWorld]

This is my rig. It is extremely stable. I can run most games at 4k high/ultra @60FPS. 2k ultra @100-120fps. The 3060Ti can easily push past 1080p. Raw number don't tell the whole story lol.

-ASRock x570 Phantom Gaming 4. (You want at least a x570 for ryzen 5600x. B550 doesn't have native support and most of them lack gen4 support for NVME)
-Ryzen 5 5600x. (If you are just gaming and doing daily tasks this CPU is very solid).
-G-skill Trident Royal Gold 3600mhz x2 16gb (32gb) CL 16 (XMP 2.0 enabled) Remember, Ryzen loves fast RAM and 3600mhz is the sweet spot for the 5600x. Just make sure its CL16 and not CL18.
-PNY RTX 3060Ti. (Primary GPU for main display and running games)
-HP GTX 1660Ti. (Secondary GPU for second monitor, though i am having a tiny problem with it changing its resolution and hz on startup. Easy to fix, just a slight annoyance.)
-Aorus Gen4 NVME M.2 500gb (Boot drive)
-WD Black SN850 Gen4 NVME M.2 1tb (Put my games on it)
-Thermaltake Toughpower 1000w 80+ gold (Solid PSU with plenty of overhead for upgradability)

Total build cost=Between $2000-$2500

My experience so far has been excellent with no issues. Ryzen 5600x is a very solid choice, however with the market as it is the GPU will be far harder to get your hands on, at least for a reasonable price lol. If you are to choose between the B550 and X570 MoBo, get the x570 without a doubt. Even a low end X570 will be far better than even a good B550.

So far temps are very stable across the board with just a 120 EK AIO cooling the 5600x. Stays at a comfy 60-75c while gaming. My comment may lack the technical savvy compared to those above, but it should give a good idea on a solid well performing build would look like.

 

[Jussinen]

Casual players either doesn't care about the small tearing or aren't even capable of seeing it. (I haven't seen any screen tearing in my games though but i'm also a casual gamer.)

I may have seen it, during my ~30 years of gaming, but have I paid any attention to it? No. Did I even know about screen tearing? No. And let's face it. Even though we'd all be perfectly happy having the most expensive gaming PC in the world right now, it's still bad compared to PCs in 2030's. No technology is ever perfect, but we learn to live with it as long as we don't know about anything better!

Hardcore gamers would be able to tell clear and huge difference between 60 Hz and 144 Hz. Casual gamers - not so much. When i got my 144 Hz monitor, i did see some improvement in smoothness but not like night-and-day, hardcore gamers say it would be. Then again, my eyes aren't trained to see minute drops in frames per second.

Precisely. That's why I'd actually be happy with a 144hz monitor.

Now, response time is most important since even casual gamer's untrained eye can see the difference.

Luckily so many mid-range 1440p monitors have that 1ms response time, although... what that 1ms means in some cases may be a bit unclear (like with some IPS monitors, apparentally). But it's actually funny how I read so many reviews on monitors, only to find out that they were almost completely dated in couple of years because IPS monitors too have improved so much.

https://stari.co/tv-monitor-viewing-distance-calculator

That's actually quite interesting, I actually remember when I upgraded to my current monitor, which I believe is something rather humble like... 23 inches maybe? In the 90's afterall, monitors were tiny compared to what they are now. So 23 inches looked big. And indeed, sitting right infront of the screen, I noticed that I can't see the whole screen on one glimpe. I kinda have to move my eyes more than before. It felt strange. But I soon got used to it. Now, 27" might be even more than I need and I actually did take a look at 24" screens too, but the availability wasn't all that impressive.

 

[Jussinen]

This is my rig. It is extremely stable. I can run most games at 4k high/ultra @60FPS. 2k ultra @100-120fps. The 3060Ti can easily push past 1080p. Raw number don't tell the whole story lol.

-ASRock x570 Phantom Gaming 4. (You want at least a x570 for ryzen 5600x. B550 doesn't have native support and most of them lack gen4 support for NVME)
-Ryzen 5 5600x. (If you are just gaming and doing daily tasks this CPU is very solid).
-G-skill Trident Royal Gold 3600mhz x2 16gb (32gb) CL 16 (XMP 2.0 enabled) Remember, Ryzen loves fast RAM and 3600mhz is the sweet spot for the 5600x. Just make sure its CL16 and not CL18.
-PNY RTX 3060Ti. (Primary GPU for main display and running games)
-HP GTX 1660Ti. (Secondary GPU for second monitor, though i am having a tiny problem with it changing its resolution and hz on startup. Easy to fix, just a slight annoyance.)
-Aorus Gen4 NVME M.2 500gb (Boot drive)
-WD Black SN850 Gen4 NVME M.2 1tb (Put my games on it)
-Thermaltake Toughpower 1000w 80+ gold (Solid PSU with plenty of overhead for upgradability)

Total build cost=Between $2000-$2500

My experience so far has been excellent with no issues. Ryzen 5600x is a very solid choice, however with the market as it is the GPU will be far harder to get your hands on, at least for a reasonable price lol. If you are to choose between the B550 and X570 MoBo, get the x570 without a doubt. Even a low end X570 will be far better than even a good B550.

So far temps are very stable across the board with just a 120 EK AIO cooling the 5600x. Stays at a comfy 60-75c while gaming. My comment may lack the technical savvy compared to those above, but it should give a good idea on a solid well performing build would look like.

Thanks for the comment. I could be wrong, but doesn't B550 Gaming Edge Wifi have gen4 support for one NVME (my NVME are all gen3 though, so in that sense it doesn't matter so much)? I think that's pretty much the standard, if I understood that right. I didn't take a look at the low end boards though. But sure, X570 is an upgrade, X570S even a bigger one. The prices aren't that horrible either, but I don't want to spend a fortune and would love to save somewhere, lol. Not sure if the cheapest X570s are good though. There were huge differences in thermal performance between different B550s, so I'm assuming that there could be differences between X570s too.

1000w PSU is actually something that I considered. It's pretty common amongst higher end PC builds.

But hey, all in all pretty similiar set up there. It's always good to hear that this kind of build works for someone else! RAM-wise I have few options on brands. G.Skill Ripjaws V, G.Skill Trident Z Neo, Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro etc. Corsair is actually a bit frustrating as they have so many Vengeance-models and it's a bit hard to remember and know what is what. But yes, I intend to go on CL 16, maybe 3600 MHz.

 

[Jussinen]

Alright, Black Friday's here...
Apparentally B550 Gaming Edge Wifi's new price is 150 €. Yay!
But so did some other motherboards, including MSI X570S Tomahawk Max Wifi. It is now 230 €. It should be a pretty decent board, just pricy. But is it worth the 80 € more? Better audio codec would actually be nice as Gaming Edge only supports 32 Ohm and Tomahawk supports at least 250 Ohm. I could always use my stereo amplifier for the headphones ofc, but it's a bit more inconvenient to switch between speakers and headphones.
Then there's B550-E Asus Rog Strix motherboard for a very reasonable price too (180 €). Probably better value than Gaming Edge, I just don't care about the looks so much.

I also noticed a hefty -43% drop on Intel 11600K's price, which sure made me thinking...

Well, all the good monitors and GPUs sold out in minutes, lol. Other than that, there wasn't any nice bargains there. It's just the 11600K at half the price of Ryzen 5600X that makes me wonder.

 

[JinxTheWorld]

Alright, Black Friday's here...
Apparentally B550 Gaming Edge Wifi's new price is 150 €. Yay!
But so did some other motherboards, including MSI X570S Tomahawk Max Wifi. It is now 230 €. It should be a pretty decent board, just pricy. But is it worth the 80 € more? Better audio codec would actually be nice as Gaming Edge only supports 32 Ohm and Tomahawk supports at least 250 Ohm. I could always use my stereo amplifier for the headphones ofc, but it's a bit more inconvenient to switch between speakers and headphones.
Then there's B550-E Asus Rog Strix motherboard for a very reasonable price too (180 €). Probably better value than Gaming Edge, I just don't care about the looks so much.

I also noticed a hefty -43% drop on Intel 11600K's price, which sure made me thinking...

Well, all the good monitors and GPUs sold out in minutes, lol. Other than that, there wasn't any nice bargains there. It's just the 11600K at half the price of Ryzen 5600X that makes me wonder.

For AMD there is this x570 on amazon for $159. Looks pretty solid. Though reviews are mixed due to some people getting bad boards. Though Amazon has a decent return policy and usually honors it.

https://www.amazon.com/MSI-X570-Gam...rd&qid=1637910132&sprefix=X570,aps,205&sr=8-2

Yeah it isn't fancy with RGB and 15lb worth of heatsink, but a solid board for standard gaming.
If you are not doing any OC on the CPU and just plan to play games, this is more than enough. My MoBo temps never go above 50c while gaming.

This is what i have:
https://www.amazon.com/ASRock-X570-...10843&sprefix=ASrock+x570+phan,aps,176&sr=8-2

Heres the website for the bios. You will want at least 3.90 and it's the version i am currently on. When i got it, it had version 3.20 on it which has a severe issue. Games that inject shaders or easy anticheat will cause the PC to reboot. So yeah....

Good luck in your search!

 

[Jussinen]

I think I'll close this thread because the build is more or less complete. I think we could argue about the optimal performance cooling for months without finding the best solution. Same would probably be true with the monitor. And maybe even the RAM memory. In the end, it's also a matter of what is available and what isn't available.

Thanks everyone for the answers. I learned a lot about PC components, even though I'm almost more confused now than I was before.