Help with my spec first new desktop for years.

[blaster9999]

This is my first desktop purchase since 2010 so really out of the loop and would love help putting a spec together. Mainly used for gaming or media comsumption, as well as regular light business work.
Fairly fixed on
Rizen 1600 with stock cooler
16 meg
B350 board
2 tb hard drive
dvd writer

Not so fixed on
1070 gtx
550 watt poer supply
256 gb SSD

No real idea about

gfx card
This PC will be paired with a 4k TV , would the 1070 be enought for trying out 1440 of 4k gaming
RAM speed.

comtemplating 2600 ram. would there be much a bump from 2100?

CASES
the cheapest case option given is a PCS ENIGMA 6003B BLACK CASE. Is there any benfit for going for the more expensive options really only concerned about utility, rather that esthetics.

SSD
Which one?
I seem to remember samsung having some sort of tech built in meaning they will last longer, is that still the case?

motherboard
I've gone for the B350, should I really be looking elsewhere? What the diff between 350 and 320 ? I do intend to only run only one gfx card , but do hope to upgrade components over time.

BIOS updates, I now that AMD released a now bios update last week, (its unlikely that Asus would of reimplmented and released an update by the time I buy. How quick have they been in the past?
Also how diffucult is it to update the bios yourself, and does it impact PCS warranty?

 

[Oussebon]

What's your budget? It's probably easier to start from there.

This PC will be paired with a 4k TV , would the 1070 be enought for trying out 1440 of 4k gaming

A 1070 is fine for 1440p. However, 1080p divides more evenly into 4k and so may look less crud on a 4k screen despite the lower res.

CASES
the cheapest case option given is a PCS ENIGMA 6003B BLACK CASE. Is there any benfit for going for the more expensive options really only concerned about utility, rather that esthetics.

Even the only somewhat more expensive cases in the ~£40+ range have better cooling and more features.

SSD
Which one?
I seem to remember samsung having some sort of tech built in meaning they will last longer, is that still the case?

Any SSD should outlast your needs for them. Which SSD, or whether to get one now or add one as a future upgrade, depends on budget and other things. The PM961 is usually a good option.

motherboard
I've gone for the B350, should I really be looking elsewhere? What the diff between 350 and 320 ? I do intend to only run only one gfx card , but do hope to upgrade components over time.

B350 is not much more expensive than A320 and has more expansion slots and USB 3.1 plus a couple of other things afaicr like slightly better onboard sound.

comtemplating 2600 ram. would there be much a bump from 2100?

The modest cost increase is usually worth it for gaming, yes.

But if gaming is one of the main purposes, depending on your budget an Intel build is probably a better bet.

 

[blaster9999]

Budget about 1250 inc vat. As for changing chips, most of what I've seen /read indicates that a cheaper rizen 5 to be better value.

 

[Oussebon]

Value depends on prices (PCSs can vary from general retail), what you're using it for, and what your priorities are.

It also depends what you're comparing it to. If you're comparing it to a 7700k with an expensive Z270 motherboard, then it's a lot cheaper. if you're comparing it to an i7 7700 with an H110M-R the picture suddenly looks quite different.

For gaming it's better value than the i7 7700k in that it's cheaper and it will run games. But its performance is less, sometimes by quite a lot. That's not to be uncharitable to it, it is after all quite a bit cheaper and is being compared to, more or less, the best gaming CPU currently available. But on the other hand, if you're a) not taking advantage of the extra cores and threads the R5 1600 has to offer (and from the uses you've described you're not) and b) have the budget, the 7700k is the better choice. Noting also that the extra performance may mean it's further into the future before you find yourself wanting to upgrade it.

i7 7700k, Z270H mobo, 16gb 3000MHz RAM, GTX 1070, 256gb PM961, 2Tb HDD, etc: Unique URL to re-configure : https://www.pcspecialist.co.uk/saved-configurations/intel-z270-pc/MDasm4VV5Z/ £1454
R5 1600, B350 mobo, 16gb 2666MHz DDR4, GTX 1070, 256gb PM961, 2Tb HDD, etc: https://www.pcspecialist.co.uk/saved-configurations/amd-am4-pc/w49gXtR9JP/ £1297
i7 7700, H110M-R mobo, 16gb 2133MHz DDR4, GTX 1070, 250gbh Samsung 850 Evo, 2TB HDD, etc: https://www.pcspecialist.co.uk/saved-configurations/intel-home-office-pc/eWxav5yYv6/ £1274

The R5 has slower RAM, lower games performance, one less M.2 slot, not as good onboard sound, vs the top intel one. The 7700 has no M.2 slot option, no USB 3.1, but overall better gaming performance than the R5. And you could get an M.2 slot by picking the B250 mobo though at a £50 price increase it partially undermines the point.

If you like AMD and you like Ryzen and you want to buy it because you like the brand, that's fine, there are plenty of people who shop by brand. I;ve found myself explaining than AMD GPUs aren't somehow inherently "worse" than AMD ones more times than I care to count. But if you're looking for a value proposition for gaming, then at least at these prices the R5 isn't your answer. It would seem to make more sense to me to either go with the full fat Intel build and get maximum performance and, therefore, a more futureproof system. Or to stick with the H110M-R build that shaves off some features but still has a more powerful gaming CPU for ~£100 less.

Or stick with the i5 7600 in the H110M-R build and get similar gaming performance for £100 less. Which would also, depending on one's point of view, be better value.


(as a very, very rough guide - obviously it doesn't take into account minimum framerates and lots of other things)

And if you scale your games to 1080p rather than 1440p since it might look a bit more even on a 4k screen, then that's another £150 off each build anyway as you can stick to a GTX 1060.

 

[blaster9999]

What if I change to a 1080 gtx, instead of a 1070? Is it better to push the budget towards a gfx card or CPU? Max budget really about 1350. As for gaming my interests are towards strategy rather than arcade Total war rather than GTA.One of the reasons I looked at the 1600 was that it comes with a decent stock cooler, I don't usally bother with overclocking , but modest overclocking is possible with possible just the stock cooler so 3.6/ 7 should be possible, more would prob need better cooling and not gauranteed. 7700 what locked to 3.6 , 7700k to 4.2 and again the potential to push higher is there. As for manufactuer I'm not adverse to intell, my old i7 has served me well

As for screen rez, I use 1080p now and one of the reasons to upgrade was to use the better rez availible

 

[Oussebon]

One of the reasons I looked at the 1600 was that it comes with a decent stock cooler,

The Titan CPU cooler is fine and only £13 more than the Intel stock cooler (configurator says £19 but you'll notice it only adds £13 to the build in the Intel configurator - it does add the full £19 to the Ryzen configurator for some reason...). Basing a purchase decision on the stock cooler isn't necessarily the best play - a nice stock cooler is a bonus, and perhaps an advantage in an absolutely ruthless budget build scenario, but shouldn't sway it one way or another here where you can spend £13 on the Titan if you need to.

The overclocking headroom on Ryzen is fairly limited and OCing a 1600 doesn't magic it into a better gaming CPU than a 7700(with or without the k). More's the pity, or Intel would have cut the price of that too.

A GTX 1080 will be pushing it for a £1350 budget. Also depending on what games you play and at what settings it may not have much headroom at 4k. It will do the job but you may find yourself wanting an upgrade before long. I would probably suggest going with the 1060, playing at 1080p, and then upgrading to a 4k gaming GPU in the next generation of GPUs launched. That would let you get the best base system possible now as well.