TR Forums

Hey everybody i'm putting together a new computer. It's been years since I've been involved in the tech world so help me out!!

I've got a budget of around $1000. And I want to put most of my resources into the Mobo and CPU. I'm looking at spending around $500 on a Mobo/Cpu combo. I'd also like to get a really nice case this time around if anyone has any recommendations. Full size case is fine.
I'm a big MSI fan boy. But that doesn't mean it has to be MSI.

http://techreport.com/review/31389/the-tech-report-system-guide-february-2017-edition/8 The sweet spot Build from the feb 2017 article was pretty close to what I was looking for, but I would like to pickup a better cpu/mobo even if it goes over my budget. I'm kind of set on the intel i7-7700k but honestly I wont be building this for another month or so. Do you guys think a Ryzen will come out that has the same performance as the i7-7700k but a cheaper price tag??

Processor: Intel Core i7-7700K 4.2 Ghz
Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper D92
Motherboard: MSI z270 Gaming M3
Memory G.Skill Ripjaws V 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4-3200
Graphics Gigabyte GTX 1060 6GB Windforce OC
Storage:I have an SSD, will just pick up a cheap WD Blue 1TB (7200 RPM) for main storage.
Enclosure: CM Storm Enforcer
PSU: Seasonic SSR-550RM

Yeah, that's way too much for that motherboard. I wouldn't go much higher, if at all, than something like this: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product. ... 6813132928

You need to get DDR4 for Kaby Lake btw. 1600MHz is too slow to get the best out of that 7600K. Get something along the lines of 3000MHz.

If you're set on Intel you should look at the system guide. http://techreport.com/review/31389/the- ... 17-edition

Intel K series CPU's don't come with coolers.

Ah, thanks for that lol.

Can someone tell me what the main differences are between the MSI Z270 GAMING M3, PRO, PRO CARBON, M5, and M7. From what I can see there are no differences that will really affect me. Just looks like a bigger price tag and more tacky plastic. Additional/different ports. But do any of those really matter?

Honestly looking more at a ASUS ROG STRIX Z270E GAMING LGA1151, Was wondering what the MSI equivalent would be?

DancinJack wrote:

You need to get DDR4 for Kaby Lake btw. 1600MHz is too slow to get the best out of that 7600K. Get something along the lines of 3000MHz.

You'd really need new RAM not due to the speed of the old stuff, but due to the fact that none of these motherboards are DDR3 compatible. You would want to as well, since DDR4 is faster, and it's a nice bit of futureproofing as much as you can in PC hardware.

PGleo86 wrote:

DancinJack wrote:

You need to get DDR4 for Kaby Lake btw. 1600MHz is too slow to get the best out of that 7600K. Get something along the lines of 3000MHz.

You'd really need new RAM not due to the speed of the old stuff, but due to the fact that none of these motherboards are DDR3 compatible. You would want to as well, since DDR4 is faster, and it's a nice bit of futureproofing as much as you can in PC hardware.

I know...that's why I said he needed DDR4 and not just a speed bump.

All good, just trying to clarify since I could read that as going either way. Never hurts to double check with things in this price class

Yes thank you, I read it as just, to get the most out of it. not that it wasn't even compatible with DDR3. Glad you clarified! Can you clarify which are not DDR3 compatible and which are. Is it just the z270 chipset that isn't?

But as for future proofing. It's much better to use something you already own and replace it a year down the road then replace it now. Memory is so easy to upgrade too.
That bites though if I won't be able to use this memory, it's practically brand new, at least I got it cheap so I wont be out much even if I didn't get my moneys worth.
Also I massively changed the OP. Good for a reread xD

What is it that you want to do with this new PC? A gaming PC built around the Core i7-7770K would be about 50% over your total. Which components can we downgrade from this list to meet your budget and performance requirements?

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant
CPU: Intel Core i7-7700K ($346 @ Amazon)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo ($30 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z270MX-Gaming 5 ($160 @ Amazon)
Memory: 2x8 GiB G.Skill DDR4-3000 ($110 @ Newegg)
Storage: Sandisk Ultra II 480GB 2.5" SSD ($149 @ B&H)
Video Card: MSI Radeon RX 480 8 GiB Armor 8G OC ($220 @ B&H)
Case: Silverstone TJ08B-E MicroATX Mini Tower ($100 @ Amazon)
Power Supply: SeaSonic SSR-550RM ($70 @ Amazon)
Optical Drive: LG WH14NS40 ($49½ @ Amazon)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Home OEM 64-bit ($93 @ Amazon)
Keyboard: Corsair STRAFE ($80 @ Newegg)
Mouse: Logitech G402 ($43 @ Amazon)
Speakers: Cyber Acoustics CA-3602 ($40 @ Amazon)
Total: $1490
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

Korpz wrote:

Can someone tell me what the main differences are between the MSI Z270 GAMING M3, PRO, PRO CARBON, M5, and M7. From what I can see there are no differences that will really affect me. Just looks like a bigger price tag and more tacky plastic. Additional/different ports. But do any of those really matter?

There really isn't much point spending more on a board if the cheaper board has the ports you want. A lot of the time, the extra cost is for gimmicks like plastic decoration and flashy LED lights that pulse in time to your music. You either love those things, or you're like me and you think they're a blight on the PC industry

Realistically, if you find a board that has the following, you're good:

• A PCIe x16 slot for your graphics card.
• A PCie x4 slot for any NVMe cards you want to use the slot for
• Onboard sound with isolated PCB traces
• an M.2 Slot
• USB 3.1, ideally with a USB-C port but that's not essential since you can convert with adapters.

Korpz wrote:

Can someone tell me what the main differences are between the MSI Z270 GAMING M3, PRO, PRO CARBON, M5, and M7.

Newegg is the best place to compare. Here's a link of the comparison.

Did you choose an ATX mobo because you'll be using a GPU and 4 other expansion cards? Or would a mATX board suit you just as well (1GPU + 2 other expanion cards) while allowing the possibility of a smaller case?

I didn't see you state the usage of this machine. By default, most gerbils assume its a heavy gaming machine.

I don't see a monitor in your list. Do we assume you'll be carrying over your existing monitor? What resolution? Are you aware of the vendor lock for GSync (Nvidia) and FreeSync (AMD)?

NONE of the 200 series Intel boards are DDR3 compatible. You need DDR4. Get something in the 2800-3000MHz range. Also, try to avoid RAM with tall heat spreaders as that could hamper CPU cooler compatibility and/or not allow you to fit a stick of RAM in the first slot. Something like this kit for $110 would be ideal IMO.

JustAnEngineer wrote:

What is it that you want to do with this new PC? A gaming PC built around the Core i7-7770K would be about 50% over your total. Which components can we downgrade from this list to meet your budget and performance requirements?

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant
CPU: Intel Core i7-7700K ($346 @ Amazon)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo ($30 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z270MX-Gaming 5 ($160 @ Amazon)
Memory: 2x8 GiB G.Skill DDR4-3000 ($110 @ Newegg)
Storage: Sandisk Ultra II 480GB 2.5" SSD ($149 @ B&H)
Video Card: MSI Radeon RX 480 8 GiB Armor 8G OC ($220 @ B&H)
Case: Silverstone TJ08B-E MicroATX Mini Tower ($100 @ Amazon)
Power Supply: SeaSonic SSR-550RM ($70 @ Amazon)
Optical Drive: LG WH14NS40 ($49½ @ Amazon)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Home OEM 64-bit ($93 @ Amazon)
Keyboard: Corsair STRAFE ($80 @ Newegg)
Mouse: Logitech G402 ($43 @ Amazon)
Speakers: Cyber Acoustics CA-3602 ($40 @ Amazon)
Total: $1490
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

It's gotta be an everything computer really. I do basically everything. And that includes being able to render video without taking days hopefully. I know that makes this hard for you guys but that's a big motivator for me to want to put most of my money into a mobo/cpu. Memory and storage are very easy to accommodate should they be insufficient down the road. But having a cpu that can't hack it a couple years down the road is a much more expensive fix, and typically results in you having to replace other things as well. Graphics as well isn't that huge of an issue, I want to be able to play all the current games on the highest settings of course, but i don't mind if after a couple years the settings are only on high instead of highest.

So using the build you've got here. We can take off the monitor, keyboard, mouse, and speakers. And downgrade the storage to something cheap, 1TB WD Blue or something. I already have an SSD I will be installing the OS on and a couple of my intense programs such as Adobe After Effects that I render videos with. Plus again, picking up additional storage down the road is easy and cheap.

And yes an mAtx board is fine, I was actually looking for one but for some reason there seemed to be very few pickings for matx boards, or maybe I just wasn't looking in the right places.

And I have no idea what the vendor lock is with the monitors, can you explain that please?

If you want a quiet CPU cooler, and something that won't interfere with using the memory slots, use something like:
CORSAIR Hydro Series H55

roncat wrote:

If you want a quiet CPU cooler, and something that won't interfere with using the memory slots, use something like:
CORSAIR Hydro Series H55

Just an FYI that I had to replace the fan on my H90 as being way too loud. I know that the H55 is tuned more for quiet, but just wanted to give you a heads-up.

Also, a mobo is rarely something you splurge on unless you're at the cutting edge of overclocking. If you want to render video, your mindset should be "what's the best CPU I can afford, and what's the minimum motherboard that lets me use that." That minimum being ports, build quality, integrated sound quality, etc.

I don't know how parallel your rendering is, but you might actually be someone who wants to build a Ryzen system (assuming you can put up with the current platform quirks).

Monitor vendor lock: This will only apply to you if you're going to buy a variable refresh rate monitor. I'm assuming your current monitor is not variable refresh rate.
Nvidia introduced the first variable refresh monitor technology and named it GSync. It requires a proprietary chip installed in the monitor to enable variable refresh rates (AMD can't ever support GSync). Not long afterward, AMD introduced FreeSync, which is an open standard supported by VESA so technically NVidia could support FreeSync. FreeSync does not require a special chip inside the monitor. However, NVidia has so far chose NOT to support FreeSync. Hence creating a vendor lock between the GPU and monitor. The other problem is that, because of the proprietary chip required for GSync monitors and the licensing/royalties to be paid to Nvidia for producing GSync monitors, GSync monitors tend to be about $150 more than a FreeSync monitor with the same specs. YMMV depending on sales. It remains to be seen as to when/if NVidia will ever support FreeSync, but I don't think they can hold out forever. What I'm not sure about is, when they finally do cave to FreeSync, if their past generation cards will be able to support it.

FreeSync was initially a bit more limited feature-wise than GSync, but those deficits were quickly eliminated (Low Framerate Compensation was the feature missing from FreeSync initially) so now the two technologies do the same thing. What they do is allow the monitor to refresh itself every time it receives a new generated frame from the GPU, unlike in the past where monitors refreshed on a fixed frequency which introduced tearing if the frame delivery and monitor refresh weren't in sync. Tearing is when the monitor is displaying two different rendered frames on the same refresh cycle, most easily seen when panning side to side. You've probably heard of VSync. That's what people used to eliminate tearing on fixed refresh monitors. However, VSync also introduces lag. Variable refresh eliminates tearing while not introducing lag.

This Asus RX480 8GB is on sale for $200 after MIR and includes a free copy of Doom. The RX480 more-or-less equivalent in performance to the GTX1060 6GB (RX480 slightly faster in DX12 games). While NVidia cards are slightly more power efficient at full tilt, AMD offers the ability to set a framerate limit in which the card will automatically throttle itself to only deliver up to the max fps set (see: Framerate Target Control and Chill) which can save gobs of power (and heat/noise) in less taxing games. I'm not aware of any such features for Nvidia cards aside from manually setting clock speed profiles for each game (which you can also do with AMD cards). In fact, NVidia cards try to OC themselves as much as possible by default.

DPete27 wrote:

While NVidia cards are slightly more power efficient at full tilt, AMD offers the ability to set a framerate limit in which the card will automatically throttle itself to only deliver up to the max fps set (see: Framerate Target Control and Chill) which can save gobs of power (and heat/noise) in less taxing games. I'm not aware of any such features for Nvidia cards aside from manually setting clock speed profiles for each game (which you can also do with AMD cards). In fact, NVidia cards try to OC themselves as much as possible by default.

GPU power consumption is only going to be a few bucks a year, so generally you want to buy around max thermals (which drive your cooling, PSU, noise etc.) than fancy load throttling. The 480 and 1060 are close enough in power draw that you'd pick based on platform, drivers, cooler quality, etc. If you're on a budget the AMD ecosystem is the best bang for your buck, but I'm willing to spend more for Nvidia's marketshare/dev support, G-Sync curation, and drivers. Note that a 1060 or 480 are a bit of a compromise at 1440P, so a lot of your build depends on your monitor budget, too.

Power = heat = noise.

Marketshare/dev support: Not sure what that gives you over AMD.

GSync curation: $150 more for a monitor.

Drivers: Nvidia drivers have been pretty awful for the most part of the past year...

No offense. To each their own.

DPete27 wrote:

Power = heat = noise.

I agree, but you typically pick a system's thermal solutions to be as quiet and cool as possible at full load. If my system is already quiet and cool at full load, throttling in certain games isn't going to do much.

Edit: Marketshare and dev support means that every game runs well on an Nvidia card. I've run AMD recently, and certain games or developers never get optimized for the hardware. For example, Battleborn never ran well on any AMD card. You will be paying more and it's a personal choice, but I'm willing to pay a premium for better coverage/less hassle. Drivers are the same way. I've used both FreeSync and GSync on my main system over the past year, and the AMD drivers and FreeSync had more quirks for me. Is that worth paying more for a GPU and monitor? It's up to the individual buyer.

GSync curation really does matter, as we've seen high profile - even "flagship" - monitors like the CF791 ship with broken FreeSync implementations. Again, I like the idea of buying with peace of mind instead of endless troubleshooting or realizing that your new $900 monitor only runs in FreeSync over 80 FPS, or has some weird FreeSync range, etc. The price difference is rapidly dissapearing, too! GSync/27"/1440P/165Hz is now $20 more than FreeSync/27"/1440P/144Hz (and that MG279Q only runs FreeSync up to 90Hz). The GSync monitors often have better specs and features, too (75Hz vs 100Hz, build quality, etc). Exciting times.

I cannot endorse AOI watercoolers with anything less than a thick 240mm radiator.

The water being pumped around doesn't magically add cooling, it simply replaces the copper heatpipes in an air cooler. Until you start to get serious overclocks pushing more than 150W through the CPU, the 4 heatpipes in a typical air cooler are more than adequate to do the job of moving heat to the fins without the expense, noise, complexity, leak-risk and degradation-over-time that AIOs suffer from.

For small AIOs what it comes down to is "is the surface area of the radiator bigger than the surface area of a normal air-cooled tower heatsink?"
For anything less than a thick 240mm radiator the answer is no, so you're just paying a lot of money for:

• a cheap pump that can fail and will add noise to your system.
• some cheap hoses that can leak and destroy your whole system.
• a copper block and aluminium radiator that will degrade through galvanic (electrolytic) corrosion over the course of 6 months to 3 years.
• fan(s) linked to your CPU fan header, but a pump that isn't, so you can't monitor if the pump is starting to struggle or fail

Chrispy_ wrote:

I cannot endorse AOI watercoolers with anything less than a thick 240mm radiator.

The water being pumped around doesn't magically add cooling, it simply replaces the copper heatpipes in an air cooler. Until you start to get serious overclocks pushing more than 150W through the CPU, the 4 heatpipes in a typical air cooler are more than adequate to do the job of moving heat to the fins without the expense, noise, complexity, leak-risk and degradation-over-time that AIOs suffer from.

For small AIOs what it comes down to is "is the surface area of the radiator bigger than the surface area of a normal air-cooled tower heatsink?"
For anything less than a thick 240mm radiator the answer is no, so you're just paying a lot of money for:

• a cheap pump that can fail and will add noise to your system.
• some cheap hoses that can leak and destroy your whole system.
• a copper block and aluminium radiator that will degrade through galvanic (electrolytic) corrosion over the course of 6 months to 3 years.
• fan(s) linked to your CPU fan header, but a pump that isn't, so you can't monitor if the pump is starting to struggle or fail

I agree for large cases, but AIO is a much easier build for ITX and small MATX. My last build was relatively smooth with a 140mm AIO but would have been hell with a tower cooler.

Kretschmer wrote:

DPete27 wrote:

Power = heat = noise.

I agree, but you typically pick a system's thermal solutions to be as quiet and cool as possible at full load. If my system is already quiet and cool at full load, throttling in certain games isn't going to do much.

Quiet and cool as possible under full load doesn't mean a system cant be quieter and cooler under less than full load.

There will undoubtedly be games that require a GPU to run at full tilt to deliver desired framerates, and in that case, yes, throttling won't help you. But I think it's safe to say that most people play a variety of games with varying degrees of taxation on the GPU, and you obviously choose your GPU based on the most taxing games you'll be playing. Why have that $200-$400 monster you bought to play Tomb Raider/Deus Ex/etc churning out 1000 fps in games like LoL/Warframe/etc when even the fastest monitors can only display 240fps? I think it's a great idea for GPUs to be able to discern what "full load" really is.

[Add] FWIW, I was able to cut the power draw of my RX480 by about 30W or more across the stock frequency curve by undervolting, putting it on par with the GTX1060 in terms of perf/watt.

DPete27 wrote:

Kretschmer wrote:

DPete27 wrote:

Power = heat = noise.

I agree, but you typically pick a system's thermal solutions to be as quiet and cool as possible at full load. If my system is already quiet and cool at full load, throttling in certain games isn't going to do much.

Quiet and cool as possible under full load doesn't mean a system cant be quieter and cooler under less than full load.

There will undoubtedly be games that require a GPU to run at full tilt to deliver desired framerates, and in that case, yes, throttling won't help you. But I think it's safe to say that most people play a variety of games with varying degrees of taxation on the GPU, and you obviously choose your GPU based on the most taxing games you'll be playing. Why have that $200-$400 monster you bought to play Tomb Raider/Deus Ex/etc churning out 1000 fps in games like LoL/Warframe/etc when even the fastest monitors can only display 240fps? I think it's a great idea for GPUs to be able to discern what "full load" really is.

I agree that it's nice to have but just weigh the utility a bit less. Soon Vega should be out and consumers will have multiple viable options and trade-offs. I personally am swapping over to NVidia/GSync but recognize that I can pay that premium without giving anything up. If your choice is 80 FPS/AMD/FreeSync or 60 FPS/Nvidia/GSync, then that's a different scenario for someone to weigh. Right now AMD is dead at the high end and monitor selection is still evolving; hopefully Vega and new displays will Plow users more choice in a few months.

Kretschmer wrote:

I agree for large cases, but AIO is a much easier build for ITX and small MATX. My last build was relatively smooth with a 140mm AIO but would have been hell with a tower cooler.

That's why things like this and this exist for!

The Thermalright in the particular is likely to do a better job than a 140mm AIO too, since not only does it have 6 heatpipes for up to 180W of cooling, it has the benefit of cooling the important components around the socket which are otherwise getting quite toasty in a cramped ITX case. It's something you don't have to worry about in a large, spacious ATX case, but once the airflow is hindered by a cramped motherboard shoehorned into a case too small for a tower, the VRMs and everything else around the socket with a heatsink starts to cook instead.

Not that a 140mm AIO is bad, just that it's still an extra pump, the added risk and the degeneration of the AIO over time. The air cooler will still be good for your next processor whilst the AIO will likely have gone bad by then.

Ehhh, I'm with Kertschmer on this one. I think AIO is great for mTIX, longevity aside. Also, both my brother and I have the Silverstone TJ08 case. He has an AIO, I have a tower. It's MUCH easier to work inside his case. From every article I've read, down-facing coolers just don't have the cooling capability that towers/rads have. Not only that, but you're presumably getting rid of an additional fan by going with an AIO since they're typically mounted on the rear fan mount.

Chrispy_ wrote:

Kretschmer wrote:

I agree for large cases, but AIO is a much easier build for ITX and small MATX. My last build was relatively smooth with a 140mm AIO but would have been hell with a tower cooler.

That's why things like this and this exist for!

The Thermalright in the particular is likely to do a better job than a 140mm AIO too, since not only does it have 6 heatpipes for up to 180W of cooling, it has the benefit of cooling the important components around the socket which are otherwise getting quite toasty in a cramped ITX case. It's something you don't have to worry about in a large, spacious ATX case, but once the airflow is hindered by a cramped motherboard shoehorned into a case too small for a tower, the VRMs and everything else around the socket with a heatsink starts to cook instead.

Not that a 140mm AIO is bad, just that it's still an extra pump, the added risk and the degeneration of the AIO over time. The air cooler will still be good for your next processor whilst the AIO will likely have gone bad by then.

From a cooling and simplicity standpoint, big hunks of copper are a great solution, but my giant mitts and lack of dexterity appreciate the extra wiggle room of an AIO. It's a personal choice, and many experienced and patient builders shoehorned massive Noctua heatsinks into their Node 304s. At my skill level, I shudder at trying to replicate that feat!

You guys pretty much got it. All my money is going into a good cpu, the i7-7700k and a mobo that can support it and allow me to do anything else. To be honest I don't overclock my stuff very much. A slight boost at best and then maybe a little harder a little farther down the road, but nothing intensive. I need to to be able to do everything. And I know that sounds unrealistic, but it only needs to be able to do everything right now. All the current games on best graphics, able to render video well, etc. The cpu and the mobo are the only parts that need to be future proof, well and the psu. Storage I can add more or upgrade later. memory I can upgrade or add more. Even the graphics card will make me happy just getting 2 or 3 years out of it. But as I've stated before I consider having to replace the cpu basically building an entirely new machine. Time to scrap it, salvage what you can and build a new system.

CPU: Intel Core i7-7700K ($346 @ Amazon)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo ($30 @ Amazon) I honestly prefer coolers like this http://www.cryorig.com/c7_us.php rather than the tower models.
Motherboard: Looking at something like the MSI z270 M3 or z270 Pro Carbon. (their around $160) Though Honestly one of the cheaper ones a step down would probably work. your thoughts?
Memory: 2x8 GiB G.Skill DDR4-3000 ($110 @ Newegg)
Storage: A decent 1 TB HD will do fine. I own a nice SSD for it already.
Video Card: MSI Radeon RX 480 8 GiB Armor 8G OC ($220 @ B&H)
Case: CM Storm Enforcer (around $100) (I plan on purchasing an additional fan for the slot at the top of the case)
Power Supply: SeaSonic SSR-550RM ($70 @ Amazon)
Optical Drive: LG WH14NS40 ($49½ @ Amazon)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Home OEM 64-bit ($93 @ Amazon)

So this is basically where I'm at currently. you can get the i7-7700k in a combo deal with just about every mobo there is,so that'll cut the price down a bit as well.
Do you guys think a 550w PSU is really enough for this ?? I have no idea what power consumption is like nowadays.
I haven't even looked at the memory or gfx card yet to be honest, that's just the ones you recommended earlier.

Yeah you'll probably be fine with that PSU. If you want to drop in a new GPU at some later date you want to upgrade it then, but the 7700k and RX 480 shouldn't be a problem with it for the time being.

The C7 is a nice heatsink. I have one also, but since it's rated at 100 watts, and the 7700k has a TDP of 91 watts, then you might want to get something bigger if you do end up doing any amount of overclocking.

Power supply requirements are almost entirely down to how much overclocking you're planning on.

• For stock clocks, take the TDP of the CPU and the GPU, add them together and multiply by 1.5x
• For a stock, or near-stock voltage overclock, multiply by 2x
• For a high-voltage overclock, multiply by 2.5x

You can ignore RAM, because it's powered by the CPU.
You can ignore fans because all of them combined are likely under 10W.
SSD's peak at 3-5W but are almost zero at idle, and they are largely idle.
Mechanical drives peak at 5-10W and are less than half that at idle.

So, (91+150)*2= 482W or higher PSU output recommended for your configuration with mild overclocks. It won't need that much power but it'll be running in the efficient power range of the PSU and allow for some degradation of the PSU capacitors over the years.


As for CPU cooling, Yeah. The C7 is ridiculously compact and quiet. It's designed to run at stock speeds FAR quieter than the Intel boxed cooler and it'll handle mild overclocks without a voltage bump but the main focus is on it being very quiet and tiny for a stock CPU.

The AXP-200 I linked above solves height clearance issues for heavy overclocks in tiny shoebox cases and slim HTPC cases, otherwise the Hyper 212 Evo is a great cooler for the money if it fits. It will absolutely, definitely fit in the CM Storm case you've listed, with loads of room to make installation a cakewalk.

Korpz wrote:

Video Card: MSI Radeon RX 480 8 GiB Armor 8G OC ($220 @ B&H)

As I posted above, the Asus RX480 8GB is $200 after MIR and includes a free copy of Doom.

The i7-7700K doesn't overclock very much past it's already insane boost clocks anyway. IIRC, most, reviewers are getting about 4.8GHz, an extra 6%. Woop dee doo.

I really think you should go with a tower-style CPU heatsink. They generally have much higher cooling capacity. Maybe something like the Cryorig H7 for $35

Also, I see you're still looking at mobos. Would the MSI Z270M Mortar for $120 provide all the connectivity you need? That's really the majority of what you should look for in mobos. First and foremost, do they provide the connectivity you need.

Korpz wrote:

You guys pretty much got it. All my money is going into a good cpu, the i7-7700k and a mobo that can support it and allow me to do anything else. To be honest I don't overclock my stuff very much. A slight boost at best and then maybe a little harder a little farther down the road, but nothing intensive. I need to to be able to do everything. And I know that sounds unrealistic, but it only needs to be able to do everything right now. All the current games on best graphics, able to render video well, etc. The cpu and the mobo are the only parts that need to be future proof, well and the psu. Storage I can add more or upgrade later. memory I can upgrade or add more. Even the graphics card will make me happy just getting 2 or 3 years out of it. But as I've stated before I consider having to replace the cpu basically building an entirely new machine. Time to scrap it, salvage what you can and build a new system.

CPU: Intel Core i7-7700K ($346 @ Amazon)

This is available for $310 on Ebay. It's sold through Monoprice who is a reputable online dealer.
https://slickdeals.net/f/9842695-intel- ... =catpagev2