PC Building Guide and Discussion #13

[John Price]

So, after buying my new computer this past fall (it's been working great), I'd be ready to buy a new monitor.

Don't really know what to look for. I'm still hesitating between 1440p and 4K. My main worries are related to how 1080p content (or even lower) show up at these resolutions. I've read it depends on the screen somewhat (and how it interpolates and stuff). Not just videos, pictures and stuff, but also gaming. I'm not sure all games support 1440p let alone 4K (or do they?). Even if that's the case, while my set up is alright in terms of performance (RTC 2080 + Ryzen 5 3600), I'm not sure it could handle 4K at max settings, even when limiting the FPS to 30-45. I think 1440 would be fine.

Any experience from people gaming at 1080p on a 1440 or 4k monitor? How does it look? What should be looked for in the monitor to make the upscale "not too bad"?

In the end, I'd still be keeping one of my two 1080p monitors, so I could always switch to it for optimal gaming resolution at that resolution, while using the 4k/1440p monitor mostly for viewing content and only occasionally for gaming.

Any suggestion? Budget would be around 600-700 CAD and I'd prefer something that I can order from Canada (I got hit by unexpected custom taxes when I ordered my computer from the states T_T).

get the 1440

very few people need 4k monitors that aren't TV's

Is A 4K Monitor Worth It? [Simple Guide] | DisplayNinja

 

[Commander Clueless]

So, after buying my new computer this past fall (it's been working great), I'd be ready to buy a new monitor.

Don't really know what to look for. I'm still hesitating between 1440p and 4K. My main worries are related to how 1080p content (or even lower) show up at these resolutions. I've read it depends on the screen somewhat (and how it interpolates and stuff). Not just videos, pictures and stuff, but also gaming. I'm not sure all games support 1440p let alone 4K (or do they?). Even if that's the case, while my set up is alright in terms of performance (RTC 2080 + Ryzen 5 3600), I'm not sure it could handle 4K at max settings, even when limiting the FPS to 30-45. I think 1440 would be fine.

Any experience from people gaming at 1080p on a 1440 or 4k monitor? How does it look? What should be looked for in the monitor to make the upscale "not too bad"?

In the end, I'd still be keeping one of my two 1080p monitors, so I could always switch to it for optimal gaming resolution at that resolution, while using the 4k/1440p monitor mostly for viewing content and only occasionally for gaming.

Any suggestion? Budget would be around 600-700 CAD and I'd prefer something that I can order from Canada (I got hit by unexpected custom taxes when I ordered my computer from the states T_T).

At couch-to-TV distance, 4K is fantastic. At desk distance, I find 1440p to be the sweet spot for pixel density...at least for the 27'' plus range. Anything above 32'' and I have no experience.

I've experimented with 4K at 27'' and 32'', and it's a bit much without getting into some wonky scaling.

4K gaming for the big AAA games is still a tough ask, barring any scaling technology (which is getting more advanced). That said, you are correct in that the 4K monitor will scale 1080p content much better than the 1440p.

However, with your setup, I think you can safely run 1440p on pretty much everything. Most PC content will support it. If you intend to run consoles on the monitor as well, keep in mind the PS4 does not handle 1440p well...although the Xbox does a good job.



Long story short: I would go with a high end IPS monitor at 1440p with a higher refresh rate and some VRR tech (G-Sync or FreeSync) before going 4K, unless you could also use 4K for work and/or consoles.


I find myself in the latter category, thinking about switching from my ultrawide 1440p to a dual monitor setup, as working from home on my HMI development is far easier on a 4K monitor and I enjoy hooking my PlayStation up to my desk while others are using the TV.

I'm leaning towards the possibility of a cheaper 4K monitor (no gaming features) and a gaming 1080p or 1440p , depending on my allowable budget

 

[SolidSnakeUS]

Anyone else waiting for Ryzen 4000 CPUs?

Also, this is my build as of now and will be similar for when the Ryzen 4000 CPUs come out. I chose that SSD due to the link below the list.

System Builder

HP EX950 2 TB M.2 NVMe SSD Review - New Firmware Makes a Big Difference

Also, $290 for 2TB with an NVMe that is that fast is nuts.

At couch-to-TV distance, 4K is fantastic. At desk distance, I find 1440p to be the sweet spot for pixel density...at least for the 27'' plus range. Anything above 32'' and I have no experience.

I've experimented with 4K at 27'' and 32'', and it's a bit much without getting into some wonky scaling.

4K gaming for the big AAA games is still a tough ask, barring any scaling technology (which is getting more advanced). That said, you are correct in that the 4K monitor will scale 1080p content much better than the 1440p.

However, with your setup, I think you can safely run 1440p on pretty much everything. Most PC content will support it. If you intend to run consoles on the monitor as well, keep in mind the PS4 does not handle 1440p well...although the Xbox does a good job.



Long story short: I would go with a high end IPS monitor at 1440p with a higher refresh rate and some VRR tech (G-Sync or FreeSync) before going 4K, unless you could also use 4K for work and/or consoles.


I find myself in the latter category, thinking about switching from my ultrawide 1440p to a dual monitor setup, as working from home on my HMI development is far easier on a 4K monitor and I enjoy hooking my PlayStation up to my desk while others are using the TV.

I'm leaning towards the possibility of a cheaper 4K monitor (no gaming features) and a gaming 1080p or 1440p , depending on my allowable budget

Honestly, 1440p is the perfect blend of image quality and FPS at the moment. And with the ever expanding G-sync support for monitors that don't have the G-sync module, you can get something affordable yet has a great panel and a high refresh rate.

 

[Bruins4Lifer]

I ordered the Dell S3220DGF 32" 1440p 165 Hz monitor a couple months ago. Still waiting on it since there's delays in manufacturing/shipping right now but I got it for just under $500CAD shipped to my door. I thought it was a good deal and it ticked a lot of boxes for me.

The options for 4K monitors out there still aren't great in my opinion. If you can handle the size, I think the best options are actually LG's OLED TVs. Either the 55" C9 or the soon to be released 48" CX.

 

[Kairi Zaide]

At couch-to-TV distance, 4K is fantastic. At desk distance, I find 1440p to be the sweet spot for pixel density...at least for the 27'' plus range. Anything above 32'' and I have no experience.

I've experimented with 4K at 27'' and 32'', and it's a bit much without getting into some wonky scaling.

4K gaming for the big AAA games is still a tough ask, barring any scaling technology (which is getting more advanced). That said, you are correct in that the 4K monitor will scale 1080p content much better than the 1440p.

However, with your setup, I think you can safely run 1440p on pretty much everything. Most PC content will support it. If you intend to run consoles on the monitor as well, keep in mind the PS4 does not handle 1440p well...although the Xbox does a good job.



Long story short: I would go with a high end IPS monitor at 1440p with a higher refresh rate and some VRR tech (G-Sync or FreeSync) before going 4K, unless you could also use 4K for work and/or consoles.


I find myself in the latter category, thinking about switching from my ultrawide 1440p to a dual monitor setup, as working from home on my HMI development is far easier on a 4K monitor and I enjoy hooking my PlayStation up to my desk while others are using the TV.

I'm leaning towards the possibility of a cheaper 4K monitor (no gaming features) and a gaming 1080p or 1440p , depending on my allowable budget

It would be at desk distance in my case.

What do you mean by wonky scaling?

And then why do you say 4K monitors scale 1080 content better than the 1440p ones do? Is it simply because on 4K, the pixels are simply doubled, whereas on a 1440p, there's some interpolation needed?

Regarding consoles, I only have a Switch and don't plan on buying the PS5 or XSX. No idea how the Switch looks on a higher resolution monitor (I don't have a TV to plug it in). I could definitely just use a 4K screen for browsing and work and keep using my 1080p screen for gaming, if I go for 4K. If I go for 1440p, I could use it for both work and gaming if my setup is good enough, which I think it is. Doubt I'd reach more than 30-40 fps at 4K on AAA games.

Honestly, 1440p is the perfect blend of image quality and FPS at the moment. And with the ever expanding G-sync support for monitors that don't have the G-sync module, you can get something affordable yet has a great panel and a high refresh rate.

That's kind of how I see it looking at different options, though I'm not too familiar with panel specs. What should I look for specifically? The model below is one that I was looking at, but I feel the static contrast ratio might be low?
Dell 27" WQHD 144Hz 1ms GTG TN LED G-SYNC Gaming Monitor (S2716DGR) - Black | Best Buy Canada

I ordered the Dell S3220DGF 32" 1440p 165 Hz monitor a couple months ago. Still waiting on it since there's delays in manufacturing/shipping right now but I got it for just under $500CAD shipped to my door. I thought it was a good deal and it ticked a lot of boxes for me.

The options for 4K monitors out there still aren't great in my opinion. If you can handle the size, I think the best options are actually LG's OLED TVs. Either the 55" C9 or the soon to be released 48" CX.

I can't fit 32" under my desk's top unfortunately. I've been thinking about getting rid of it, but even then I think 32" is way too big. TVs are out of the question for the same reason, and also because they won't fit under the allowance my job offers to improve work from home conditions.

 

[Commander Clueless]

It would be at desk distance in my case.

What do you mean by wonky scaling?

And then why do you say 4K monitors scale 1080 content better than the 1440p ones do? Is it simply because on 4K, the pixels are simply doubled, whereas on a 1440p, there's some interpolation needed?

Regarding consoles, I only have a Switch and don't plan on buying the PS5 or XSX. No idea how the Switch looks on a higher resolution monitor (I don't have a TV to plug it in). I could definitely just use a 4K screen for browsing and work and keep using my 1080p screen for gaming, if I go for 4K. If I go for 1440p, I could use it for both work and gaming if my setup is good enough, which I think it is. Doubt I'd reach more than 30-40 fps at 4K on AAA games.

Wonky scaling in the sense that often text will require Windows scaling to be comfortable to read, and games will likely require scaling from lower resolutions because native 4K is hard to push a solid FPS.

Yes, 1080p to 4K fullscreen looks better because of the 2x factor rather than the 1.3333x factor. On the other hand, if you have trouble pushing frames at 1440p and render in 1080p, you can use windowed mode without it being too tiny, whereas it will be tiny on a 4K monitor.

In terms of straight performance at native resolution, 1440p is the sweet spot for your rig.

 

[Kairi Zaide]

Wonky scaling in the sense that often text will require Windows scaling to be comfortable to read, and games will likely require scaling from lower resolutions because native 4K is hard to push a solid FPS.

Yes, 1080p to 4K fullscreen looks better because of the 2x factor rather than the 1.3333x factor. On the other hand, if you have trouble pushing frames at 1440p and render in 1080p, you can use windowed mode without it being too tiny, whereas it will be tiny on a 4K monitor.

In terms of straight performance at native resolution, 1440p is the sweet spot for your rig.

I see. Thanks. Yeah I think I'll go with 1440p for now, and see how it fares performance wise, and buy a 4K in a year when I can renew my work allowance on that.

Any recommendation would be welcome though, I'm kinda getting lost at all the possible specs (IPS or not, number of colors, contrast ratio, etc.)

 

[Commander Clueless]

I see. Thanks. Yeah I think I'll go with 1440p for now, and see how it fares performance wise, and buy a 4K in a year when I can renew my work allowance on that.

Any recommendation would be welcome though, I'm kinda getting lost at all the possible specs (IPS or not, number of colors, contrast ratio, etc.)

My quick cheat sheet:

IPS - Best image quality, can struggle with backlight bleed and ghosting if your response time is too high

TN - Worst image quality, but fast and smooth (particularly for competitive shooters). Also usually the cheapest.

VA - Middle ground, can suffer from a shimmer effect.


I personally prefer the image quality of the IPS, as the others look a little washed out (varies widely depending on quality). IPS with a 5ms or lower is good. Keep in mind I don't play much in the way of shooters or games that require fast movement so much anymore...

I wouldn't worry too much about contrast or colours unless you are doing photo or video editing, but higher is nicer.

I do recommend a higher refresh rate (typically 144Hz is the easiest to get) with FreeSync/G-Sync Compatible. Basically, you can set your G-Sync on and just let it push as high of frames as you can get without any tearing or stuttering.


I wouldn't recommend my current monitor, but I have been keeping my eye on this bad boy, hoping it comes back in stock:


LG's Nano IPS supposedly solves most of the downside of IPS, but it's just price gougers right now.

Others might have better recommendations. Right now, I'm sort of on the outside looking in as well, currently running an HP monitor from work.

 

[Kairi Zaide]

My quick cheat sheet:

IPS - Best image quality, can struggle with backlight bleed and ghosting if your response time is too high

TN - Worst image quality, but fast and smooth (particularly for competitive shooters). Also usually the cheapest.

VA - Middle ground, can suffer from a shimmer effect.


I personally prefer the image quality of the IPS, as the others look a little washed out (varies widely depending on quality). IPS with a 5ms or lower is good. Keep in mind I don't play much in the way of shooters or games that require fast movement so much anymore...

I wouldn't worry too much about contrast or colours unless you are doing photo or video editing, but higher is nicer.

I do recommend a higher refresh rate (typically 144Hz is the easiest to get) with FreeSync/G-Sync Compatible. Basically, you can set your G-Sync on and just let it push as high of frames as you can get without any tearing or stuttering.


I wouldn't recommend my current monitor, but I have been keeping my eye on this bad boy, hoping it comes back in stock:


LG's Nano IPS supposedly solves most of the downside of IPS, but it's just price gougers right now.

Others might have better recommendations. Right now, I'm sort of on the outside looking in as well, currently running an HP monitor from work.

Thanks for the info. That helps. It's funny that you linked that monitor because that's exactly the model I was looking at, albeit just the IPS one (not nano IPS).

 

[Commander Clueless]

Thanks for the info. That helps. It's funny that you linked that monitor because that's exactly the model I was looking at, albeit just the IPS one (not nano IPS).

The non-Nano IPS is a good monitor by all accounts as well. I'm just super intrigued by the nano.

 

[Kairi Zaide]

IPS 1440p monitors are literally out of stock everywhere T_T

 

[Dick Sledge]

I decided to sell my monitor and get an Acer Predator xb273k.

Should be here next week.

 

[Commander Clueless]

The new Ryzen 3100 and 3300X are looking like a steal.

Gaming champs for $100/$120 USD. Pretty much all you need at the moment, unless you are doing something productivity-esque like rendering.

AMD Ryzen 3 3300X Review - The Magic of One CCX

The i3-10100 from Intel will likely be similar as well.

There's nothing wrong with the extra cores, but for the price, I sort of wish I had waited on my Ryzen 3600.

 

[Ricelund]

Can anyone recommend a cheap-ish monitor (<$300) that's good for gaming and working from home? I'm looking at the ViewSonic XG2401. Good choice?

This is my gaming setup:

CPU: Intel Core i5-9400F 2.9 GHz 6-Core Processor
Motherboard: MSI B360I GAMING PRO AC Mini ITX LGA1151 Motherboard
Memory: Corsair Vengeance LPX 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-2666 Memory
Storage: SanDisk SSD PLUS 480 GB 2.5" Solid State Drive
Video Card: MSI GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6 GB VENTUS XS OC Video Card
Case: Silverstone SG13 Mini ITX Tower Case
Power Supply: Corsair SF 450 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular SFX Power Supply
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Home OEM 64-bit
Custom: SilverStone Technology Universal ATX to SFX Power Supply Bracket RL-PP08B

 

[Osprey]

The new Ryzen 3100 and 3300X are looking like a steal.

Gaming champs for $100/$120 USD. Pretty much all you need at the moment, unless you are doing something productivity-esque like rendering.

AMD Ryzen 3 3300X Review - The Magic of One CCX

The i3-10100 from Intel will likely be similar as well.

There's nothing wrong with the extra cores, but for the price, I sort of wish I had waited on my Ryzen 3600.

Wow, the 3300X looks like the new budget CPU to beat. If I were to upgrade right now (which is not out of the question), I'd most likely get that (well, once they're actually on sale; I don't see it on Amazon yet). I'd prefer at least 6 cores, but $120 sure is tempting and paying $50-60 more for just 2 more cores doesn't seem worth it.

 

[LT]

So I'm planning on building a PC for the first time. I've spent about a week doing some low-level research and came up with this:

System Builder

My budget is around $1250 for the full thing, so this is near the top end of that after I add a monitor and keyboard (I already have a good mouse). I will mostly be using it for casual, moderate gaming.

I'm happy with the case, RAM, and hard drive and I'd like to keep these as is, but advice on everything else (CPU, video card, power supply, cooler, mobo - whether these are too much or good enough) would be nice. I'm not particular although I do prefer AMD based on what I've read so far.

I think what I selected is a bit overboard for that, so any ways to cut the cost without losing any noticeable performance would be appreciated. I also would like to know if I need any additional fans besides the two built into the case - a few searches suggest that those should be fine as long as I'm not planning to do anything super heavy, which as of now I'm not.

I'd also like to have an old MacBook hooked up to the monitor so I can use that for browsing and spreadsheets and what not, but I know how to do this and that should be fairly easy.

I do have a work computer as well which will be completely separate from this - my work is very computationally expensive, but that's all run on that machine or remotely on servers. The main reason for actually wanting to build one is so I don't have to game on my work machine anymore (which I probably shouldn't be doing anyway ).

 

[aleshemsky83]

So I'm planning on building a PC for the first time. I've spent about a week doing some low-level research and came up with this:

System Builder

My budget is around $1250 for the full thing, so this is near the top end of that after I add a monitor and keyboard (I already have a good mouse). I will mostly be using it for casual, moderate gaming.

I'm happy with the case, RAM, and hard drive and I'd like to keep these as is, but advice on everything else (CPU, video card, power supply, cooler, mobo - whether these are too much or good enough) would be nice. I'm not particular although I do prefer AMD based on what I've read so far.

I think what I selected is a bit overboard for that, so any ways to cut the cost without losing any noticeable performance would be appreciated. I also would like to know if I need any additional fans besides the two built into the case - a few searches suggest that those should be fine as long as I'm not planning to do anything super heavy, which as of now I'm not.

I'd also like to have an old MacBook hooked up to the monitor so I can use that for browsing and spreadsheets and what not, but I know how to do this and that should be fairly easy.

I do have a work computer as well which will be completely separate from this - my work is very computationally expensive, but that's all run on that machine or remotely on servers. The main reason for actually wanting to build one is so I don't have to game on my work machine anymore (which I probably shouldn't be doing anyway ).

For cutting costs, a cheaper case, get rid of the cooler if you cpu comes with one out of the box (I think 2600s didn't used to but they do now, check the specific one you order), and cheaper power supply (though obviously you may not want to do that.

Id also upgrade to a 3600 since it's almost the same price right now but I realize the bios update might be impractical. However if you buy it from memory express they'll do the update for you in the store. Worth considering.

 

[Osprey]

So I'm planning on building a PC for the first time. I've spent about a week doing some low-level research and came up with this:

System Builder

My budget is around $1250 for the full thing, so this is near the top end of that after I add a monitor and keyboard (I already have a good mouse). I will mostly be using it for casual, moderate gaming.

I'm happy with the case, RAM, and hard drive and I'd like to keep these as is, but advice on everything else (CPU, video card, power supply, cooler, mobo - whether these are too much or good enough) would be nice. I'm not particular although I do prefer AMD based on what I've read so far.

I think what I selected is a bit overboard for that, so any ways to cut the cost without losing any noticeable performance would be appreciated. I also would like to know if I need any additional fans besides the two built into the case - a few searches suggest that those should be fine as long as I'm not planning to do anything super heavy, which as of now I'm not.

I'd also like to have an old MacBook hooked up to the monitor so I can use that for browsing and spreadsheets and what not, but I know how to do this and that should be fairly easy.

I do have a work computer as well which will be completely separate from this - my work is very computationally expensive, but that's all run on that machine or remotely on servers. The main reason for actually wanting to build one is so I don't have to game on my work machine anymore (which I probably shouldn't be doing anyway ).

If you can wait a month, motherboards based on the B450's successor, B550, will be for sale. The main difference is that it supports PCIe 4.0. The GPU that you picked out is only PCIe 3.0, but getting a PCIe 4.0 motherboard now will mean that, in a few years, if/when you upgrade your GPU, you'll get the most out of it. Also, unlike the B450, the B550 will support the upcoming Zen 3 CPUs, so that, years from now, if you want to replace your CPU, those will be an option to get a greater upgrade. If you can't wait a month, there are X570 motherboards that start at around $160 (or $50 more than the B450 one that you picked out) and already support PCIe 4.0 and will support Zen 3 CPUs. If I were you'd, I'd either wait a month and get a B550 motherboard or pay $50 extra for an X570 one now.

In fact, if you wait at least until next week, the Ryzen 3 3100 and 3300X will be released. See Commander Clueless' post above for a review of the 3300X (which also contains a link for their 3100 review). The 3100 benchmarks about the same as the 2600, yet will be only $100. That would save you at least $60. I would go with the 3300X, though, which is a good bit faster and only $120. That would still save you at least $40. The only downside is that both are only 4-core, but that makes no difference for gaming, which it sounds like this system will be almost exclusively for.

If I were you, I'd wait a month and get a spanking brand new B550 motherboard with a spanking brand new 3300X, but I understand if you're impatient to upgrade, especially with the lockdown providing so much free time.

Whatever you do, the CPU is going to come with a pretty decent cooler. If you have no intention of ever overclocking it (and note that the 3100 and 3300X don't even benefit from it in games), there's not a whole lot of reason to get a fancy cooler, IMO.

You said that you're happy with the case, which I respect, but, like alex suggested, you could shave off up to $100 on the case if you're willing to go more basic and give up the "premium" feel, the windows all around it, the front USB-C port and so on.

I have the $75 Corsair 200R and have been quite happy with it:
It's just a basic, but good quality case. Of course, I'm not the type who puts my case on display on my desk and wants windows for people see my hardware lit up by RGB lights, which seems all the rage these days. That's what the case that you picked out is for, so consider if that's really "you" before you spend extra on it. There's also the even cheaper 100R, which does have a window.

Oh, you asked about case fans. I think that two is plenty, personally. Whenever I've put more than that in a case, I've ended up disconnecting or removing them because I realized that I value a quieter case over one that's a degree or two cooler.

 

[LT]

For cutting costs, a cheaper case, get rid of the cooler if you cpu comes with one out of the box (I think 2600s didn't used to but they do now, check the specific one you order), and cheaper power supply (though obviously you may not want to do that.

Id also upgrade to a 3600 since it's almost the same price right now but I realize the bios update might be impractical. However if you buy it from memory express they'll do the update for you in the store. Worth considering.

If you can wait a month, motherboards based on the B450's successor, B550, will be for sale. The main difference is that it supports PCIe 4.0. The GPU that you picked out is only PCIe 3.0, but getting a PCIe 4.0 motherboard now will mean that, in a few years, if/when you upgrade your GPU, you'll get the most out of it. Also, unlike the B450, the B550 will support the upcoming Zen 3 CPUs, so that, years from now, if you want to replace your CPU, those will be an option to get a greater upgrade. If you can't wait a month, there are X570 motherboards that start at around $160 (or $50 more than the B450 one that you picked out) and already support PCIe 4.0 and will support Zen 3 CPUs. If I were you'd, I'd either wait a month and get a B550 motherboard or pay $50 extra for an X570 one now.

In fact, if you wait at least until next week, the Ryzen 3 3100 and 3300X will be released. See Commander Clueless' post above for a review of the 3300X (which also contains a link for their 3100 review). The 3100 benchmarks about the same as the 2600, yet will be only $100. That would save you at least $60. I would go with the 3300X, though, which is a good bit faster and only $120. That would still save you at least $40. The only downside is that both are only 4-core, but that makes no difference for gaming, which it sounds like this system will be almost exclusively for.

If I were you, I'd wait a month and get a spanking brand new B550 motherboard with a spanking brand new 3300X, but I understand if you're impatient to upgrade, especially with the lockdown providing so much free time.

Whatever you do, the CPU is going to come with a pretty decent cooler. If you have no intention of ever overclocking it (and note that the 3100 and 3300X don't even benefit from it in games), there's not a whole lot of reason to get a fancy cooler, IMO.

You said that you're happy with the case, which I respect, but, like alex suggested, you could shave off up to $100 on the case if you're willing to go more basic and give up the "premium" feel, the windows all around it, the front USB-C port and so on.

I have the $75 Corsair 200R and have been quite happy with it:
It's just a basic, but good quality case. Of course, I'm not the type who puts my case on display on my desk and wants windows for people see my hardware lit up by RGB lights, which seems all the rage these days. That's what the case that you picked out is for, so consider if that's really "you" before you spend extra on it. There's also the even cheaper 100R, which does have a window.

Oh, you asked about case fans. I think that two is plenty, personally. Whenever I've put more than that in a case, I've ended up disconnecting or removing them because I realized that I value a quieter case over one that's a degree or two cooler.

Good to know about the motherboards. I think I'm fine waiting a week for the processor, but a month is a bit long for me at the moment so I'd probably just get the more expensive one.

I don't plan on overclocking so I can drop the cooler and that should make up a good chunk of the extra mobo cost.

Unfortunately I live in a fairly small apartment and the PC will end up on my desk (and subsequently be a focal point in my living room). Given that, I'm happy to spend an extra 50-75 on one that I really like the look of and that'll make it easier for me to assemble as a first-timer.

I have run into the issue of many things being out of stock, especially when it comes to power supplies. My friends advised me to get a minimum of 750W at 80+ gold - is that really necessary?

 

[Osprey]

I have run into the issue of many things being out of stock, especially when it comes to power supplies. My friends advised me to get a minimum of 750W at 80+ gold - is that really necessary?

I'm no expert on power supplies, but I don't think that that's necessary for you. You're not adding a sound card or optical drive, your only hard drive is NVMe and you're not adding in older cards or drives that you have. The following site predicts that your system will draw 307W:

Power Supply Calculator - PSU Calculator | OuterVision

Even a lowly 500W power supply should be enough for you. I wouldn't go that low, though, since a 600W or 650W would future proof you more and not cost much more.

As for 80 Plus Gold, that's not necessary, either, IMO. It's just that a Bronze supply will draw a bit more power (since it's less efficient) that'll show up on your electricity bill, probably somewhere between 50 cents and a dollar more per month. In other words, do you want to spend less now and a tiny bit more per month or spend more now and a tiny bit less per month?

Here's an Antec 600W 80 Plus Gold for $79.99 that is backordered 10-20 days, but it sounds like you're willing to wait 9 days for a Ryzen 3 3300:
https://www.newegg.com/antec-zen-ne600g-600w/p/N82E16817371126
Here's a Corsair 650W 80 Plus Bronze for $69.99 that's in stock:
https://www.newegg.com/corsair-cv-series-cv650-cp-9020211-na-650w/p/N82E16817139249

Of course, there's nothing wrong with a buying a 750W 80 Plus Gold for $124.99 if you want total peace of mind. It just might be overkill for you and an area where you could save $50.

 

[Commander Clueless]

Well....that's interesting.

Nvidia's RTX 3080 Ti looks bigger than expected | PC Gamer

 

[aleshemsky83]

Well....that's interesting.

Nvidia's RTX 3080 Ti looks bigger than expected | PC Gamer

$1500, lol. I dont know how Nvidia moves any volume on the high end in the last 3 years. Their prices have been ridiculous.

Supposedly this guy has inside info, not sure how credible

 

[Commander Clueless]

$1500, lol. I dont know how Nvidia moves any volume on the high end in the last 3 years. Their prices have been ridiculous.

Yeah, these last few generations of nVidia pricing has brought me down from enthusiast to budget gamer.

I'm very much more interested to see how the 3060/3070 will fair, but I admit that thing is a monster. Will be over 2 grand in Canada though...yikes!

 

[Ricelund]

I'm thinking about upgrading my GPU to the 2070 Super so I can comfortably play COD at 1440P. Would that make sense with my current setup?

CPU: Intel Core i5-9400F 2.9 GHz 6-Core Processor
Motherboard: MSI B360I GAMING PRO AC Mini ITX LGA1151 Motherboard
Memory: Corsair Vengeance LPX 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-2666 Memory
Storage: SanDisk SSD PLUS 480 GB 2.5" Solid State Drive
Video Card: MSI GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6 GB VENTUS XS OC Video Card
Case: Silverstone SG13 Mini ITX Tower Case
Power Supply: Corsair SF 450 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular SFX Power Supply
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Home OEM 64-bit
Custom: SilverStone Technology Universal ATX to SFX Power Supply Bracket RL-PP08B

 

[Papa Francouz]

$1500, lol. I dont know how Nvidia moves any volume on the high end in the last 3 years. Their prices have been ridiculous.

Supposedly this guy has inside info, not sure how credible

I was considering waiting on building a new PC until the 3000 series came out, but if the 3080 Ti is going to have a price tag of $1500, I'm out. That's straight lunacy.