[SOLVED] New gaming build, budget flexible, use €2000 as orientation

[horstp]

I've just moved into a second home and because there is 1,000km between my two homes now, I feel I need a whole new build, as hauling my rig around seems unreasonable. Also, my other PC is 10 years old at this point and even though it has been updated to cope with what I use it for, a 10-year-old main board poses certain limitations.

My budget is flexible, I think staying below €2,000 would be reasonable, but if I could get a significant boost in performance for a couple hundred more, I'd probably do that.

My primary uses for the PC will be gaming and internet surfing. I have a bad habit of opening thousands (literally!) of tabs when surfing and the game that I will probably be playing for the foreseeable future (and certainly the most demanding in terms of gaming performance) is Total War: Warhammer 2. So ideally my new build could run that game on maximum settings (ultra unit scale, first and foremost) and handle an unreasonable amount of open tabs.

Approximate Purchase Date: soon, i.e. I will buy parts as soon as I have all the info I need

Budget Range: flexible, ideally below €2,000

System Usage from Most to Least Important: surfing, watching movies, gaming (Total War: Warhammer 2)

Are you buying a monitor: Yes


Parts to Upgrade:Completely new build

Do you need to buy OS: Yes (and I despise Windows 10 so either Win7 compatibility or help in tweaking Win10 to effective become Win7 would be greatly appreciated)

Preferred Website(s) for Parts: Don't care. Last time I built a PC, I bought parts from various websites

Location: EU, Germany / Croatia

Parts Preferences: I don't care.

Overclocking: Probably not. I'd rather just buy better parts than reduce life expectancy of my build. If it can be done without harming parts, sure, but you'd have to tell me how.

SLI or Crossfire: I don't know what that is.

Your Monitor Resolution: I don't know what's common here. My current PC has 1920x1080, I think that's enough?

Additional Comments: A quiet PC would be much preferred.

And Most Importantly, Why Are You Upgrading: Not really upgrading, but my current PC slows down significantly during large battles in TW: Warhammer 2.


Please let me know if you need any more info from me!

 

[jeremyj_83]

PCPartPicker Part List

CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 3700X 3.6 GHz 8-Core Processor (€293.99 @ Mindfactory)
CPU Cooler: be quiet! Shadow Rock 2 51.4 CFM Rifle Bearing CPU Cooler (€50.18 @ ARLT)
Motherboard: MSI MPG X570 GAMING EDGE WIFI ATX AM4 Motherboard (€204.89 @ Alternate)
Memory: G.Skill Aegis 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR4-3200 CL16 Memory (€121.89 @ Alternate)
Storage: Crucial P1 500 GB M.2-2280 NVME Solid State Drive (€58.90 @ Mindfactory)
Storage: Western Digital Blue SN550 1 TB M.2-2280 NVME Solid State Drive (€132.91 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Video Card: XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT 8 GB THICC III Ultra Video Card (€427.99 @ Mindfactory)
Case: Fractal Design Define S ATX Mid Tower Case (€79.98 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Power Supply: Corsair RM (2019) 650 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply (€98.89 @ Alternate)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Pro OEM 64-bit (€40.00 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Case Fan: Fractal Design X2 GP-14 (Black) 68.4 CFM 140 mm Fan (€16.76 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Monitor: Philips 345B1C/00 34.0" 3440x1440 100 Hz Monitor (€458.99 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Total: €1985.37
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2020-06-14 17:00 CEST+0200
The 500GB SSD is for the OS & Applications while the 1TB is for games.

 

[horstp]

Thank you! Do you feel any individual part could be swapped out to save a significant amount without really losing performance? I was thinking maybe the monitor was rather top of the line, for example? (And that statement is based solely on the fact that I have never in my life paid more than €200 for a monitor)

Regarding SSD and HD, how significant is the difference in perfomance between installing a game on the SSD or the HD? I was under the impression that it was significant, but I may well be mistaken. I tend to only really play one (large) game at a time, so I could swap them out.

 

[jeremyj_83]

Thank you! Do you feel any individual part could be swapped out to save a significant amount without really losing performance? I was thinking maybe the monitor was rather top of the line, for example? (And that statement is based solely on the fact that I have never in my life paid more than €200 for a monitor)

Regarding SSD and HD, how significant is the difference in perfomance between installing a game on the SSD or the HD? I was under the impression that it was significant, but I may well be mistaken. I tend to only really play one (large) game at a time, so I could swap them out.

The monitor is something that not skimping on is nice. About 2 years ago I got a Samsung C34F791, which is what this Phillips panel is based on, and I have not been sad. Before then I hadn't spent more than $150 on a monitor. 2 years later I would never use a standard dual monitor setup ever again. At work I have 4x 1080p monitors but with this I can replace 3 of them.

With the SSD vs HDD question right now it deals more with load times and 99th percentile frames. Gaming with SSD will give a more stable and predictable performance. As more games are written for the PS5 & Xbox Next Gen, SSD will become more important to overall gaming performance. Having an OS/Application drive separate from everything else is ideal. That way if something happens to the OS and a reinstall is needed all you lose is the OS & things like Chrome.

 

[horstp]

In terms of losing data, games would be no big concern to me. They are quickly reinstalled and they usually place their savegames on the system drive by default anyway, right? All my other data would on the HD, definitely.

I guess in terms of the operating system, there is no way to build a Win7-friendly system that can compete nowadays?

Is there a specific reason you went for AMD / Radeon as opposed to Intel?

RE: the monitor, I'd have to see if that model is feasible. The jump from a single 24" to a 34" is rather big and I guess I'd have to get a completely different desk in order to be able to sit far enough from such a monster

 

[Flayed]

PCPartPicker Part List

CPU: Intel Core i7-10700K 3.8 GHz 8-Core Processor (€406.99 @ Mindfactory)
CPU Cooler: be quiet! Dark Rock Pro 4 50.5 CFM CPU Cooler (€81.79 @ Mindfactory)
Motherboard: MSI Z490-A PRO ATX LGA1200 Motherboard (€176.80 @ Alza)
Memory: Crucial Ballistix RGB 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3600 CL16 Memory (€105.90 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Storage: Sabrent Rocket Q 1 TB M.2-2280 NVME Solid State Drive (€119.99 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Video Card: Gigabyte GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER 8 GB WINDFORCE OC 3X Video Card (€537.80 @ Mindfactory)
Case: Phanteks Eclipse P300A Mesh ATX Mid Tower Case (€61.60 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Power Supply: SeaSonic FOCUS 750 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply (€119.00 @ ARLT)
Total: €1609.87
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2020-06-15 11:32 CEST+0200

 

[horstp]

PCPartPicker Part List

CPU: Intel Core i7-10700K 3.8 GHz 8-Core Processor (€406.99 @ Mindfactory)
CPU Cooler: be quiet! Dark Rock Pro 4 50.5 CFM CPU Cooler (€81.79 @ Mindfactory)
Motherboard: MSI Z490-A PRO ATX LGA1200 Motherboard (€176.80 @ Alza)
Memory: Crucial Ballistix RGB 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3600 CL16 Memory (€105.90 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Storage: Sabrent Rocket Q 1 TB M.2-2280 NVME Solid State Drive (€119.99 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Video Card: Gigabyte GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER 8 GB WINDFORCE OC 3X Video Card (€537.80 @ Mindfactory)
Case: Phanteks Eclipse P300A Mesh ATX Mid Tower Case (€61.60 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Power Supply: SeaSonic FOCUS 750 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply (€119.00 @ ARLT)
Total: €1609.87
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2020-06-15 11:32 CEST+0200

This config is missing OS, Monitor and Case Fan, right?

 

[Flayed]

For OS you can use Windows 10 without a key, just click I don't have a product key button during install. I'm not up to date with monitors so leave that up to you. Yes probably need some case fans as the case only comes with one exhaust I think.

 

[jeremyj_83]

In terms of losing data, games would be no big concern to me. They are quickly reinstalled and they usually place their savegames on the system drive by default anyway, right? All my other data would on the HD, definitely.

I guess in terms of the operating system, there is no way to build a Win7-friendly system that can compete nowadays?

Is there a specific reason you went for AMD / Radeon as opposed to Intel?

RE: the monitor, I'd have to see if that model is feasible. The jump from a single 24" to a 34" is rather big and I guess I'd have to get a completely different desk in order to be able to sit far enough from such a monster

Using Steam you can decide where you want the games to be installed by default. Even during the install of programs you can easily decide where you want to program to be installed. Whenever possible it is best practice to have a separate OS drive. Most people will never do that on their desktop/laptop but in the server world that is common practice. For one it allows for more flexibility of the system. If you aren't installing games onto the OS drive then you will almost always be sure that you will always have enough space for updates and other applications.

There is no reason to build a Win 7 system any more. If you need Win 7 for something you can run it as a VM on Win 10 Pro with Hyper-V or download VMware Workstation Player and use that. Not only has Win 7 been out of support since January, none of the new CPUs have drivers to work on the system.

The reason for the AMD/Radeon was price/performance. The RX5700XT has about 95% the performance of the 2070 Super but costs 75% as much. The Ryzen CPUs offer single threaded performance close to the Intel CPUs but typically better multi-threaded performance. In gaming the 3700X performs about 3-5% slower than the 9900K when gaming at 1080p with a 2080Ti. As you turn the resolution to 1440p & 4k the performance difference disappears. Not to mention the Ryzens use A LOT less power. The 3700X is a 65W TDP chip that will use at max 88W, where as the 9900K is a 95W TDP CPU that will use up to 200W depending on the work being done. The 10th Gen Intels are even wore with the 10700K having a max draw of 225W and the 10900K 250W. In the AMD build I suggested, I added a CPU cooler to it but the AMD chips come with decent coolers. The main reason to change the cooler is because they are too loud for you.

 

[jeremyj_83]

The 34" monitor isn't a big as you would expect. Since it is an Ultrawide, the physical height is the same as a 27" 16:9 monitor. The overall dimensions of my 34" monitor are as follows: 31.8"W x 20.3"H x 12.2"D That takes up a good bit less space than a traditional 2x 24" 1080p monitor setup, all while giving 89.5% the pixel width but 133% the pixel height. The curve of the monitor also helps in how you view the screen. For work I sit about 3ft from my monitor without any issues. If you sit closer the pixel density of 110PPI is higher than a 24" 1080p so the text remains clear when you sit closer. I have yet to talk to someone who went with an Ultrawide monitor who would ever go back to a traditional 16:9 regardless of the resolution of the 16:9.

 

[Flayed]

The 9900k/10700k will have much higher minimum fps in Total War: Warhammer 2 compared to 3700x at 1080p

 

[helper800]

Personally This is what I would do:

PCPartPicker Part List

CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 3700X 3.6 GHz 8-Core Processor (€293.99 @ Mindfactory)
CPU Cooler: Corsair H100x 57.2 CFM Liquid CPU Cooler (€94.90 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Motherboard: MSI X470 GAMING PRO MAX ATX AM4 Motherboard (€131.80 @ Alza)
Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws V 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR4-3600 CL16 Memory (€176.89 @ Alternate)
Storage: Western Digital Blue SN550 1 TB M.2-2280 NVME Solid State Drive (€132.91 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Video Card: Sapphire Radeon RX 5700 XT 8 GB NITRO+ Video Card (€456.90 @ Alza)
Case: Fractal Design Meshify C ATX Mid Tower Case (€96.31 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Power Supply: Corsair RM (2019) 650 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply (€99.89 @ Alternate)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Pro OEM 64-bit (€40.00 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Case Fan: Corsair ML120 75 CFM 120 mm Fans (€24.90 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Case Fan: Corsair ML120 75 CFM 120 mm Fans (€24.90 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Monitor: Philips 345B1C/00 34.0" 3440x1440 100 Hz Monitor (€458.99 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Total: €2032.38
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2020-06-15 14:44 CEST+0200

Win10 can basically be made to be Win7+ if you turn off all the Cortana features. You can easily make both the start menu and the lower taskbar also look and function similarly. I remember also dreading the WIn7 > Win10 switch, however, I have learned that it is basically just better and can be made to look and function similarly to Win7.

 

[helper800]

The 9900k/10700k will have much higher minimum fps in Total War: Warhammer 2 compared to 3700x at 1080p

We are recommending a 1440p 21:9 monitor because he uses lots and lots of tabs on the net. Also at 1440p, the difference between Intel and AMD CPUs is only a couple fps but gain more speed in everything else for 1/3rd less cost.

 

[helper800]

The 34" monitor isn't a big as you would expect. Since it is an Ultrawide, the physical height is the same as a 27" 16:9 monitor. The overall dimensions of my 34" monitor are as follows: 31.8"W x 20.3"H x 12.2"D That takes up a good bit less space than a traditional 2x 24" 1080p monitor setup, all while giving 89.5% the pixel width but 133% the pixel height. The curve of the monitor also helps in how you view the screen. For work I sit about 3ft from my monitor without any issues. If you sit closer the pixel density of 110PPI is higher than a 24" 1080p so the text remains clear when you sit closer. I have yet to talk to someone who went with an Ultrawide monitor who would ever go back to a traditional 16:9 regardless of the resolution of the 16:9.

Personally I go with one 27' 16:9 1440p gaming monitor and one 32' 16:9 4k productivity and show watching monitor. I do however have a large L desk.

 

[jeremyj_83]

The 9900k/10700k will have much higher minimum fps in Total War: Warhammer 2 compared to 3700x at 1080p

Here are the minimums from PCGamer from the 3700X launch review for Total War: Warhammer 2 - 67.9 (9900K) vs 62.3 (3700X) at 1080p with a 2080Ti That shows a 5fps difference and both are already over 60fps. Average fps 107.7 (9900K) vs 98.6 (3700X). Once you aren't using a 2080Ti that will be a lot closer same as it would be at higher resolutions. Throw in the added cooling requirements for the 9900K/10700K and those 5 extra fps cost quite a bit.
https://www.pcgamer.com/amd-ryzen-7-3700x-review/

 

[jeremyj_83]

Personally I go with one 27' 16:9 1440p gaming monitor and one 32' 16:9 4k productivity and show watching monitor. I do however have a large L desk.

Gaming at 21:9 1440p is amazing. The added field of view makes things very nice.

 

[horstp]

I guess I'll have to payy my 4 foot wide desk on to my wife then and buy a bigger one

I don't think I'd go for two screens again, if only for appearances. To the people around me having two screens just screams "gamer" and I want to keep up appearances at least a litte bit

But yeah, 5 fps when above 60 already would not be worth a lot to me.

What happens on such a ultra wide monitor when playing older games? A lot of the time I play old stuff from the 90s....

 

[jeremyj_83]

I guess I'll have to payy my 4 foot wide desk on to my wife then and buy a bigger one

I don't think I'd go for two screens again, if only for appearances. To the people around me having two screens just screams "gamer" and I want to keep up appearances at least a litte bit

But yeah, 5 fps when above 60 already would not be worth a lot to me.

What happens on such a ultra wide monitor when playing older games? A lot of the time I play old stuff from the 90s....

I have played games that don't have the resolution support for 3440x1440. What I end up doing is playing at 2560x1440 instead and just have black bars on the side. The monitor can support most game resolutions up to 3440x1440.

 

[Flayed]

Would get better performance at WQHD with less CPU and more GPU:
PCPartPicker Part List

CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 3600 3.6 GHz 6-Core Processor (€174.99 @ Mindfactory)
CPU Cooler: ARCTIC Freezer 34 eSports DUO CPU Cooler (€42.75 @ Aquatuning)
Motherboard: MSI X470 GAMING PRO MAX ATX AM4 Motherboard (€131.80 @ Alza)
Memory: Patriot Viper Steel 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3600 CL17 Memory (€81.89 @ Alternate)
Storage: Western Digital Blue SN550 1 TB M.2-2280 NVME Solid State Drive (€132.91 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Video Card: EVGA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER 8 GB XC GAMING Video Card (€744.00 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Case: Phanteks Eclipse P300A Mesh ATX Mid Tower Case (€67.79 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Power Supply: Corsair RM (2019) 650 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply (€99.89 @ Alternate)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Pro OEM 64-bit (€40.00 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Case Fan: ARCTIC Arctic F14 PWM 77.3 CFM 140 mm Fan (€8.49 @ Aquatuning)
Case Fan: ARCTIC Arctic F14 PWM 77.3 CFM 140 mm Fan (€8.49 @ Aquatuning)
Monitor: Philips 345B1C/00 34.0" 3440x1440 100 Hz Monitor (€458.99 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Total: €1991.99
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2020-06-15 15:28 CEST+0200

 

[helper800]

Would get better performance at WQHD with less CPU and more GPU:

Video Card: EVGA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER 8 GB XC GAMING Video Card (€744.00 @ Amazon Deutschland)

Only 16-20% more performance but 75% more expensive. I would personally have a more balanced computer and if I want to spend more on a GPU later mind as well spend 400 in 2022 for 2x the performance as the 800 euro card now.

 

[horstp]

I tend to agree with that assessment. The top of the line parts are usually disproportionately expensive. And 20% more for almost twice the price would not be something that interests me. That's why I had a hard time defining a budget. I mean, if there was a config that would let me run huge battles with ultra unit scale at 100 fps for 4000, I'd probably do it. But a couple of fps for 500 bucks? No way Jose.

 

[jeremyj_83]

I tend to agree with that assessment. The top of the line parts are usually disproportionately expensive. And 20% more for almost twice the price would not be something that interests me. That's why I had a hard time defining a budget. I mean, if there was a config that would let me run huge battles with ultra unit scale at 100 fps for 4000, I'd probably do it. But a couple of fps for 500 bucks? No way Jose.

About the only thing that might be worth while in changing would be going to the Ryzen 3800X. It is about 8% more expensive but you might get 5% better performance. Reason is it has a higher TDP so it can stay at boost clocks longer and had a higher base clock. The TDP of the 3800X is 105W which might hit 144W in its PL2. Having a cooler than can do 180W+ TDP will keep everything nice and cool. The Shadow Rock 2 cooler is 180W, the Shadow Rock 3 runs 190W. Otherwise if you want an AIO going with a 240mm AIO is plenty. For an AIO I would look at the Arctic Liquid Freezer II. The 280mm has gotten great reviews and the 240mm is the same just with a smaller radiator. They also have a VRM fan to help keep your VRMs cool.
PCPartPicker Part List

CPU Cooler: ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 240 56.3 CFM Liquid CPU Cooler (€79.99 @ Aquatuning)
Total: €79.99
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2020-06-15 21:28 CEST+0200

 

[horstp]

About the only thing that might be worth while in changing would be going to the Ryzen 3800X. It is about 8% more expensive but you might get 5% better performance. Reason is it has a higher TDP so it can stay at boost clocks longer and had a higher base clock. The TDP of the 3800X is 105W which might hit 144W in its PL2. Having a cooler than can do 180W+ TDP will keep everything nice and cool. The Shadow Rock 2 cooler is 180W, the Shadow Rock 3 runs 190W. Otherwise if you want an AIO going with a 240mm AIO is plenty. For an AIO I would look at the Arctic Liquid Freezer II. The 280mm has gotten great reviews and the 240mm is the same just with a smaller radiator. They also have a VRM fan to help keep your VRMs cool.
PCPartPicker Part List

CPU Cooler: ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 240 56.3 CFM Liquid CPU Cooler (€79.99 @ Aquatuning)
Total: €79.99
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2020-06-15 21:28 CEST+0200

I have to admit that about 80% of your post went right over my head. :/

 

[jeremyj_83]

I have to admit that about 80% of your post went right over my head. :/

3800X is about 5% faster than the 3700X for only 8% more money. In Total War: Warhammer 2 that could help with the AI turn times by a little bit.

The 3700X is a 65W CPU whereas the 3800X is a 105W CPU. Due to how boosting works and other things they will use more power than their TDP (Thermal Design Power). AMD uses a Package Power Tracking (PPT) which is the power threshold that is allowd to be delivered to the socket. For the 65W TDP CPUs it is 88W and for the 105W TDP CPUs it is 142W. https://www.anandtech.com/show/14605/the-and-ryzen-3700x-3900x-review-raising-the-bar/19 Basically that means the max power draw of the 105W TDP chips is 142W. In CPUs for every watt of power that comes in you will have the same wattage of heat. For 142W draw you need a cooler that can dissipate 142W or more for the CPU to not throttle. However, said 142W cooler will have the CPU running at 100 degrees Celsius. That is why you want to have a cooler capable of removing more heat than can be generated as 100C is very hot for a CPU. Putting in a 180W+ cooler will reduce your temps by quite a bit.

While 142W for a 105W CPU might seem a lot, that is less than the current Intel. The 125W TDP 10900K in stock setting is allowed to draw 250W for 56 seconds, assuming your cooling can handle that. Some motherboard makers have made non stock adjustments to their BIOS and more than 250W power draw has been seen.

 

[horstp]

Oh, okay. So this is all about normal usage then, nothing to do with overclocking or anything like that?

Regarding AI turn times... that's pretty cool. I would see that as a bonus, because where I find performance lacking on my other PC (can't share specs now, because I'm abroad, but it's a 10 year old MB with a 10 year old CPU (AMD Phenom x6 3.2 Ghz), everything else has been upgraded over time, most recently the GPU to a 1060TI with 6GB) is performance during battles. I should really get an fps counter, but what I have observed is while the game runs reasonably well during normal battles (i.e. 20 vs 20 units), during large battles it slows down to basically a slide show. I will check fps tomorrow, when I'm back home and post them.

As far as I can tell from running some programm while playing (called MSI after....something) that my GPU is not at capacity during those battles, but I think the issue is mostly with my CPU which just can't keep up with calculating up to 80 units of up to 160 individual troops slugging it out on the battlefield.

Would you add your latest changes to your partspicker list?