1st Gaming PC - Custom build

[Marvo400_]

Honestly with gaming being the main focus the GPU is where I'd make savings to have the best CPU, the GPU is the component that gets changed the most so making a compromise with something that's likely to be changed in a couple years vs something that'll likely be in the build for the entirety of it's life cycle doesn't make sense to me

I'd 100% without question "sacrifice" on the GPU to get the 7800X3D personally it's a no brainer. Especially when I can still get a perfectly capable 1440p 144hz GPU to slot in there at the same budget

You're going for prettier frames right now at the cost of the builds longevity

Appreciate the advice, food for thought...

Do you mind if I ask: you mentioned you had a 3060ti. Can I ask what CPU you're currently pairing with that? Also, by any chance do you play any CoD titles and if so, would you mind sharing rough FPS?

One of the reasons I have been moving towards the 7700X and going more GPU heavy, is because I can find plenty of evidence on YouTube, etc., of this pairing so I can 100% guarantee that I would hit the FPS I want (which is my priority right now and for the foreseeable future).

For example:

-> Testing done on 7700X and averaging 200 fps on Modern Warfare 2 on balanced settings at 1440p, potentially giving the option of running higher settings at closer to 150 fps, or upgrading monitor to hit the max. Addionally, demanding games like Cyberpunk hitting over 100 fps on 1440p at ultra settings. This is the kind of performance I am aiming for, because although I play Warzone 2 the majority of the time, I do love a good single player game every so often.

Whereas, because the 7800X3D is so new and beastly, the only evidence I can find for GPUs paired with this are all more higher-end, like 4090s, 4070s, 7900xt, and so on...

I have tried to find evidence of the 3060ti performing at close to 144 fps on Warzone 2, and I can't really find much evidence of that. It often hits above 100, but sometimes even less, dependent on settings.

I am currently getting 120 fps on PS5, so I don't really want to spend extra on the CPU and get a 3060ti for example, if I don't have any evidence of it performing at the increased frame rate that I would like right now (higher than 120 fps).

Fully appreciate the future benefits of getting the 7800X3D and really do see where you're coming from there, but if the immediate benefits would be limited, I'm not 100% sure if I would like to go down that route.

Unless you could point me somewhere where I can see the desired performance on a 3060ti, but I can't seem to find this. Although, maybe I am looking in the wrong places.

Appreciate the continued support on this

 

[SpyderTracks]

Appreciate the advice, food for thought...

Do you mind if I ask: you mentioned you had a 3060ti. Can I ask what CPU you're currently pairing with that? Also, by any chance do you play any CoD titles and if so, would you mind sharing rough FPS?

One of the reasons I have been moving towards the 7700X and going more GPU heavy, is because I can find plenty of evidence on YouTube, etc., of this pairing so I can 100% guarantee that I would hit the FPS I want (which is my priority right now and for the foreseeable future).

For example:

-> Testing done on 7700X and averaging 200 fps on Modern Warfare 2 on balanced settings at 1440p, potentially giving the option of running higher settings at closer to 150 fps, or upgrading monitor to hit the max. Addionally, demanding games like Cyberpunk hitting over 100 fps on 1440p at ultra settings. This is the kind of performance I am aiming for, because although I play Warzone 2 the majority of the time, I do love a good single player game every so often.

Whereas, because the 7800X3D is so new and beastly, the only evidence I can find for GPUs paired with this are all more higher-end, like 4090s, 4070s, 7900xt, and so on...

I have tried to find evidence of the 3060ti performing at close to 144 fps on Warzone 2, and I can't really find much evidence of that. It often hits above 100, but sometimes even less, dependent on settings.

I am currently getting 120 fps on PS5, so I don't really want to spend extra on the CPU and get a 3060ti for example, if I don't have any evidence of it performing at the increased frame rate that I would like right now (higher than 120 fps).

Fully appreciate the future benefits of getting the 7800X3D and really do see where you're coming from there, but if the immediate benefits would be limited, I'm not 100% sure if I would like to go down that route.

Unless you could point me somewhere where I can see the desired performance on a 3060ti, but I can't seem to find this. Although, maybe I am looking in the wrong places.

Appreciate the continued support on this

The screen you linked is 144Hz so no matter how many FPS you push on the pc, you'll top out at 144fps because that's the max the screen can produce.

Why are you intent on 200fps? Do you understand what high refresh means? 99% of humans can't see any difference over 120hz

 

[Steveyg]

Yeah currently I have a 10700k with a 3060Ti I can't say specifically on CoD because I don't play it but I have played a lot of Cyberpunk and it runs at 100+ FPS on high settings no RTX and DLSS Quality settings enabled but then again CP2077 is a mess of a game so not a good game to compare results too it's so fickle

The latest game I've been playing is Diablo 4 BETA and it's cruising at 150FPS all the time, I have a limiter set there so it would probably go higher. I have a 1440p 144Hz monitor so not point in getting it to push over that because the monitor just won't be able to show it

Elden Ring I play a lot of as well handles 100+ fps just fine too

 

[Marvo400_]

The screen you linked is 144Hz so no matter how many FPS you push on the pc, you'll top out at 144fps because that's the max the screen can produce.

Why are you intent on 200fps? Do you understand what high refresh means? 99% of humans can't see any difference over 120hz

Yeah I get the monitor is capped right now, but that will most likely change in the near future. I mentioned previously that I would like to play Warzone competitively one day, and getting myself this gaming PC is the first step down that road.

And with regard to being intent on higher FPS, although the differences may be small and barely noticeable to the naked eye, I think in the competitive scene every marginal gain will help. With a new monitor, and then GPU upgrade a bit down the line, hitting something like 240 instead of 120 could only be seen as a positive. When you look at the pros out there now, the majority hit above 200, some even 350 fps with some godly PCs!!

Nevertheless, I do see where you are coming from but that's just my opinion and I feel maxing the FPS on my current monitor is up near the top of my preferences, with a new monitor allowing a further stretch.

 

[Marvo400_]

Yeah currently I have a 10700k with a 3060Ti I can't say specifically on CoD because I don't play it but I have played a lot of Cyberpunk and it runs at 100+ FPS on high settings no RTX and DLSS Quality settings enabled but then again CP2077 is a mess of a game so not a good game to compare results too it's so fickle

The latest game I've been playing is Diablo 4 BETA and it's cruising at 150FPS all the time, I have a limiter set there so it would probably go higher. I have a 1440p 144Hz monitor so not point in getting it to push over that because the monitor just won't be able to show it

Elden Ring I play a lot of as well handles 100+ fps just fine too

Ok that's interesting, performance is great there with the 3060ti.

I think I better just try and find some evidence of that GPU with WZ 2, because I know it can be a demanding game in some ways and often give a lower FPS than other games.

Thanks for that info though. Also saw the 4060ti is releasing on Wednesday too, which is the day I was planning to purchase. So who knows how that will effect everything in terms of the options I have within my budget, price of GPUs like 3060ti, etc...

We will wait and see!

 

[SpyderTracks]

Yeah I get the monitor is capped right now, but that will most likely change in the near future. I mentioned previously that I would like to play Warzone competitively one day, and getting myself this gaming PC is the first step down that road.

And with regard to being intent on higher FPS, although the differences may be small and barely noticeable to the naked eye, I think in the competitive scene every marginal gain will help. With a new monitor, and then GPU upgrade a bit down the line, hitting something like 240 instead of 120 could only be seen as a positive. When you look at the pros out there now, the majority hit above 200, some even 350 fps with some godly PCs!!

Nevertheless, I do see where you are coming from but that's just my opinion and I feel maxing the FPS on my current monitor is up near the top of my preferences, with a new monitor allowing a further stretch.

But that's my point, you don't just become competitive, it takes years of muscle training, and only a select few humans have that capability anyway, both in eyesight and physical reaction time.

There's so much disinformation on the web targeted at youngsters moving from console.

There are plenty of steps to take before shelling loads of money on high refresh, test your reaction times, there are loads of free tools to do this.

To have any benefit of over 144hz you need a reaction time of around 20ms

I'm saying this because high refresh doesnt improve visuals at all, but costs a lot of money. If you find your reaction times still aren't within competitive realms within 5 or so years, they're never going to be, it's a physical limitation, like only a minority of humans have 20-20 vision, and if you're coming from console, you won't be anywhere near reaction times that 144hz offers because consoles and locked latency far behind pc. Yet spending that cash on actual visual improvements like resolution make a ginormous amount of difference to gaming quality.

This is why competitive players are paid millions per match, they are literally superhuman.

The time considerations with various refresh rates

A different take on monitor refresh rates (and the actual fact why 60hz to 144hz is the biggest jump and 144hz to 240hz not so much) When we talk about refresh rates, we talk about a frequency in which the monitor refreshes the image on screen every second. We refer to that as hertz (hz). So...

www.pcspecialist.co.uk

 

[Marvo400_]

But that's my point, you don't just become competitive, it takes years of muscle training, and only a select few humans have that capability anyway, both in eyesight and physical reaction time.

There's so much disinformation on the web targeted at youngsters moving from console.

There are plenty of steps to take before shelling loads of money on high refresh, test your reaction times, there are loads of free tools to do this.

To have any benefit of over 144hz you need a reaction time of around 20ms

I'm saying this because high refresh doesnt improve visuals at all, but costs a lot of money. If you find your reaction times still aren't within competitive realms within 5 or so years, they're never going to be, it's a physical limitation, like only a minority of humans have 20-20 vision. Yet spending that cash on actual visual improvements like resolution make a ginormous amount of difference to gaming quality.

This is why competitive players are paid millions per match, they are literally superhuman.

The time considerations with various refresh rates

A different take on monitor refresh rates (and the actual fact why 60hz to 144hz is the biggest jump and 144hz to 240hz not so much) When we talk about refresh rates, we talk about a frequency in which the monitor refreshes the image on screen every second. We refer to that as hertz (hz). So...

www.pcspecialist.co.uk

I get that, and I know there's misinformation out there, but I am not new to gaming and I am not a youngster either. I am 28 and I believe I can potentially play competively one day, I have just never taken gaming seriously enough.

I am going to be between jobs from the end of this month, for at least 2 months, so I would like to start taking my gaming more seriously and see where it takes me. It is why I am upgrading from console to PC for the 1st time and my immediate priority is getting a good rig that can perform well with high FPS.

If it gives me an advantage, great!

If it is so small that it is not noticeable and doesn't give me an advantage, still great! At least I will have a solid rig moving forward that can play pretty much any game at a solid fps in 1440p

Only question I have left is whether I would like to go for 7800X3D with 6750 XT , or else 7700X with 6950 XT. That is what I am still undecided on. Edging towards 7700X but definitely still considering 7800X3D...

******

EDIT:
When I say competitively, I don't mean eSports and getting paid millions per match. I mean becoming one of the best Warzone players, competing for prizes, making a living from streaming and content creation as a result. I just wanted to clarify that.

 

[SpyderTracks]

I get that, and I know there's misinformation out there, but I am not new to gaming and I am not a youngster either. I am 28 and I believe I can potentially play competively one day, I have just never taken gaming seriously enough.

I am going to be between jobs from the end of this month, for at least 2 months, so I would like to start taking my gaming more seriously and see where it takes me. It is why I am upgrading from console to PC for the 1st time and my immediate priority is getting a good rig that can perform well with high FPS.

If it gives me an advantage, great!

If it is so small that it is not noticeable and doesn't give me an advantage, still great! At least I will have a solid rig moving forward that can play pretty much any game at a solid fps in 1440p

Only question I have left is whether I would like to go for 7800X3D with 6750 XT , or else 7700X with 6950 XT. That is what I am still undecided on. Edging towards 7700X but definitely still considering 7800X3D...

******

EDIT:
When I say competitively, I don't mean eSports and getting paid millions per match. I mean becoming one of the best Warzone players, competing for prizes, making a living from streaming and content creation as a result. I just wanted to clarify that.

You're really missing the point.

If you're coming from console, you're nowhere near trained enough to even make use of 120Hz, let alone 140Hz, it will take you years of learning mouse movements and muscle memory to get up to 144Hz territory.

Seriously, just measure your reaction times, and you'll see what I mean.

By the time you've had enough training to be up to 144Hz, you'll need a new GPU anyway, it took me about 4 years or so to be able to competently play with a keyboard and mouse on PC. I'm not saying it will take you that long, but it takes a long time is my point.

 

[Marvo400_]

You're really missing the point.

If you're coming from console, you're nowhere near trained enough to even make use of 120Hz, let alone 140Hz, it will take you years of learning mouse movements and muscle memory to get up to 144Hz territory.

Seriously, just measure your reaction times, and you'll see what I mean.

By the time you've had enough training to be up to 144Hz, you'll need a new GPU anyway, it took me about 4 years or so to be able to competently play with a keyboard and mouse on PC. I'm not saying it will take you that long, but it takes a long time is my point.

I probably should have clarified, I will not be changing to keyboard and mouse. I play with controller and will continue to play with a controller on PC.

At the level I am at now, which is a good level, I don't think I will need any training if transferring from console to PC considering I will continue to play with a controller. Majority of WZ players play on controller anyway.

I am switching to PC for several reasons, the main reason right now being I would like an increased performance when playing the game. In addition to other reasons like pure backwards compatibility of old games, the general need for a PC as my laptop has gave up on me (for work, etc.), in addition to several other reasons not worth mentioning

I do appreciate the advice of measuring my reaction times though and I will for sure to this because this interests me. That being said, based on my current ability on PS5 and general desire to consistently get better, I would like to think I have a chance of playing competitively.

Anyway, I feel the conversation has gotten sidetracked as the purpose of my post was for advice on which CPU and GPU to pair for the performance I desire to play games, specifically Warzone 2. I do appreciate the feedback surrounding wanting a certain FPS, but FPS is not the be all and end all. I would like a good rig that performs well with all games, FPS for Warzone 2 was just highest on the list and I want to ensure that my new PC performs at minimum 120 fps with whichever CPU/GPU combination I choose.

 

[Steveyg]

I played competitively in the COD:UO COD2 and COD4 days was pretty good at it. I can't see a difference over 100FPS probably why I never went further vs the people who can

 

[SpyderTracks]

I probably should have clarified, I will not be changing to keyboard and mouse. I play with controller and will continue to play with a controller on PC.

Then you'll never benefit from high refresh. You won't get any benefit over 120hz

Controllers are latency limited. Navigating is far far slower than a mouse. There's nothing you can do about that, it's a limitation of the hardware.

Can A Controller Compete With Mouse and Keyboard in Gaming? (2023) – Raise Your Skillz

raiseyourskillz.com

 

[robin h 25]

I probably should have clarified, I will not be changing to keyboard and mouse. I play with controller and will continue to play with a controller on PC.

At the level I am at now, which is a good level, I don't think I will need any training if transferring from console to PC considering I will continue to play with a controller.

Without learning to play with mouse and keyboard, it's extremely difficult to play competitively with a controller, and this is coming from experience of 30+ years as a console gamer using controllers,

I play a lot of CoD Warzone / DMZ, I've played Warzone on console with a controller - on console with mouse and keyboard, - on PC with controller and PC with mouse and keyboard, And i do so much better on PC with mouse and keyboard,
As an example 1v1 in the gulag, A PC player on a controller vs PC player on mouse and keyboard, both using 144hz monitors, Mouse and keyboard player will dominate the controller player,

Majority of WZ players play on controller anyway.

My opinion on this, Is there too lazy to learn mouse and keyboard, There only using controller to take advantage of autoaim that controllers get on PC, but they'll never get the skills or quick fluid silky smooth aiming reaction times that keyboard and mouse offers.

Again i'm coming from 30+ years as a console/controller player, To a mouse and keyboard PC player,

It's not easy to learn a new input, but as you learn and refine mouse and keyboard skills, you'll never want to play FPS games again with a controller,
I never thought i would ever put the controller down in favor of mouse and keyboard, Now i very rarely really pick up and use controller anymore.

 

[SpyderTracks]

We get this all the time with people coming from console.

PC is an entirely different ball game to console, far far richer experience, and far far faster.

But you have to be open to learning about the differences.

If you're going to be playing with controller, at your budget, you should be looking at a high end 1440p or ultrawide system, you can do so so much better than you're currently aiming for.

I know you're not going to understand, but we're quite knowledgeable with this stuff and have a lot of experience between us. If you put some faith into PC gamers rather than console or influencers on the web, you'll get a far far better experience for your money.

 

[Marvo400_]

Without learning to play with mouse and keyboard, it's extremely difficult to play competitively with a controller, and this is coming from experience of 30+ years as a console gamer using controllers,

I play a lot of CoD Warzone / DMZ, I've played Warzone on console with a controller - on console with mouse and keyboard, - on PC with controller and PC with mouse and keyboard, And i do so much better on PC with mouse and keyboard,
As an example 1v1 in the gulag, A PC player on a controller vs PC player on mouse and keyboard, both using 144hz monitors, Mouse and keyboard player will dominate the controller player,


My opinion on this, Is there too lazy to learn mouse and keyboard, There only using controller to take advantage of autoaim that controllers get on PC, but they'll never get the skills or quick fluid silky smooth aiming reaction times that keyboard and mouse offers.

Again i'm coming from 30+ years as a console/controller player, To a mouse and keyboard PC player,

It's not easy to learn a new input, but as you learn and refine mouse and keyboard skills, you'll never want to play FPS games again with a controller,

I never thought i would ever put the controller down in favor of mouse and keyboard, Now i very rarely really pick up and use controller anymore.

I would definitely be open to learning mouse and keyboard, it just wasn't in my immediate plans as I would imagine its like learning to play all over again.

Definitely something I would consider at some point once I am on PC, just never even thought about it as I've only ever played on console.

I'm always open to new things if it will help me improve, and getting the PC was the first step o for that due to the gaming experience just being generally better.

I definitely will take that advice on board and appreciate the time taken to provide your input. Like I said, first step is to grab myself a nice PC and then see where we go from there, as I just would like to get better generally.

I do watch some PC pros and my god their aim is crazy good, you just couldn't do on controller...

 

[Marvo400_]

We get this all the time with people coming from console.

PC is an entirely different ball game to console, far far richer experience, and far far faster.

But you have to be open to learning about the differences.

If you're going to be playing with controller, at your budget, you should be looking at a high end 1440p or ultrawide system, you can do so so much better than you're currently aiming for.

I know you're not going to understand, but we're quite knowledgeable with this stuff and have a lot of experience between us. If you put some faith into PC gamers rather than console or influencers on the web, you'll get a far far better experience for your money.

Yeah the PC experience is the main reason why I want to do the move over from console. However, it's something that I didn't know before that M&K can take advantage of that more than controller guys, so I appreciate that info a lot!

Definitely open to learning about the differences, switching over to M&K just wasn't in my immediate plans, so that's why I was saying I would be staying on controller.

And with your recommendation for a high-end 1440p, would you mind proving some more info on this?

My budget allows approximately €2400 at the max, and my monitor is a 144hz 1440p. As mentioned previously, I was thinking either 7800X3D with 6750 XT, or alternatively, a 7700X with 6950XT.

For my budget, I was under the impression that this was two of the best builds I could get for 1440p? Especially for Warzone, because it seems like the AMD GPUs perform well in that game.

I defintely want to get the advice of PC gamers, which is why I came here in the first place. What would you recommend for that budget?

 

[Marvo400_]

Hi everyone,

I am returning for some final feedback on my build as it has been tweaked quite a bit since my previous post last week!

I am purchasing this PC to game on a 144hz monitor at 1440p for now, with a potential monitor upgrade down the line to a high refresh-rate 4K monitor. I play Warzone 2 90% of the time and would like to play on max settings in 1440p at max FPS for my monitor, which I understand this build will hit with ease.

I have decided to stretch the budget out a bit, and actually had a build picked out for 7800X3D & 7900XTX, but I felt there was no need to max the GPU out at this time as I am capped with my monitor. Down the line (after a year or two) I can upgrade to a high-end GPU that will perform at 4K after I get a new monitor.

Instead, I have decided to go for a much more aesthetically pleasing as I have not chosen the 7900XTX, and I will still save a few hundred quid!

See build below:

Case
HYTE Y60 MID-TOWER PANORAMIC CASE
Processor (CPU)
AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D Eight Core CPU (4.2GHz-5.0GHz/104MB w/3D V-CACHE/AM5)
Motherboard
ASUS® TUF GAMING B650-PLUS WIFI (DDR5, USB 3.2, 6Gb/s)
Memory (RAM)
32GB Corsair VENGEANCE RGB DDR5 6000MHz (2 x 16GB)
Graphics Card
16GB AMD RADEON™ RX 6950 XT - HDMI, DP - DX® 12
Graphics Card Support Bracket
NONE (BRACKET INCLUDED AS STANDARD ON 4070 Ti AND ABOVE)
1st M.2 SSD Drive
500GB SAMSUNG 970 EVO PLUS M.2, PCIe NVMe (up to 3500MB/R, 3200MB/W)
1st M.2 SSD Drive
2TB SOLIDIGM P41+ GEN 4 M.2 NVMe PCIe SSD (up to 4125MB/sR, 3325MB/sW)
Power Supply
CORSAIR 1000W RMx SERIES™ - MODULAR 80 PLUS GOLD, ULTRA QUIET
Power Cable
1 x 1.5 Metre UK Power Cable (Kettle Lead, 1.0mm Core)
Processor Cooling
CORSAIR iCUE H150i ELITE RGB High Performance CPU Cooler
Thermal Paste
STANDARD THERMAL PASTE FOR SUFFICIENT COOLING
Extra Case Fans
3 x CoolerMaster SickleFlow 120 ARGB + Controller Kit
Sound Card
ONBOARD 6 CHANNEL (5.1) HIGH DEF AUDIO (AS STANDARD)
Network Card
ONBOARD 2.5Gbe LAN PORT
USB/Thunderbolt Options
MIN. 2 x USB 3.0 & 2 x USB 2.0 PORTS @ BACK PANEL + MIN. 2 FRONT PORTS
Operating System
Windows 11 Home 64 Bit - inc. Single Licence [KUK-00003]
Operating System Language
United Kingdom - English Language
Windows Recovery Media
Windows 10/11 Multi-Language Recovery Image - Unlimited Downloads from Online Account
Office Software
FREE 30 Day Trial of Microsoft 365® (Operating System Required)
Anti-Virus
NO ANTI-VIRUS SOFTWARE
Browser
Microsoft® Edge
Warranty
3 Year Silver Warranty (1 Year Collect & Return, 1 Year Parts, 3 Year Labour)
Delivery
2 - 3 DAY DELIVERY TO REPUBLIC OF IRELAND
Build Time
FAST TRACK 5 WORKING DAY DISPATCH

The reason I am posting again this evening is because I plan on ordering tomorrow evening and would like some final feedback, which was recommended on my previous thread. Is there any issues with this build that immediately jump out at anybody that is experienced with building PCs?

With this case, I understand that the iCUE H150i cooler will fit on the top of the case in an allocated spot for it, with the additional RGB fans going inside the case -> 2 on the side and 1 at the rear. This is my understanding from watching some builds in this case. Is this correct?

Any additional feedback on the build would be much appreciated

Thanks in advance!

 

[Marvo400_]

Thanks for the feedback!

Coincidently, I did actually change the fans to the Corsair LL120 RGB LED Fans last night after my post for the same reason, with the CPU Cooler being Corsair.

Yes the third fan was to replace the stock rear fan. I did want to get 5 fans all together and replace the 2 bottom stock fans with new RGB ones too, but it says the build is not compatible when I try, and will only allow me to get 3 maximum... So I plan to have the CPU Cooler with 3 fans up top, 2 Corsair RGB Fans on the side, 1 Corsair RGB fan on the rear, and then the 2 stock fans in the bottom (for now).

And yes I will look into the 500GB Seagate Firecuda then

Thanks for the help!

 

[Marvo400_]

yeah, the configurator won't allow you to add more fans than the case allows as it does not know you want to replace some.

The 5 fan kit is out of stock till 20th June (although sometimes stock comes earlier) else I'd say put in the order with the 3 fan kit and then phone PCS (or send them a message) and ask them to change it to the 5 fan kit and which fans to replace. Or you could just go with the 3 fan kit and then rfeplace the 2 bottom fans yourself when you get the build

Cool, thanks for the advice! I think I will just go for the 3 fan kit and replace the bottom ones at a later date. I'm way to eager now and just wanna get my PC ASAP at this stage haha, I've wanted one for years and finally in the position now!

Final question surrounding the SSD you recommended, I just noticed have the Samsung 970 Evo Plus in that build, but the one I was looking at over the last few days was actually the Samsung 980 Pro (up to 6900MB/R, 5000MB/W).

How does the Seagate Firecuda (up to 7000MB/R, 3000MB/W) compare to the 980 pro? To be completely honest, I'm not very technical so I have no idea what those numbers/measurements mean, but I'm guessing is most likely related to the speed now that I've cross referenced them with the 970 Evo Plus.

Can you please clarify?

 

[Marvo400_]

Whilst write speeds can be important, read speeds are the more important. On the one hand, the Firecuda does have a much lower write speed. However, on the other, the lifetime write capacity (basically the endurance of it) is far superior to the Samsungs, plus there is a much longer warranty (5 years for the Seagate vs, I think, 2 years for the Samsungs)

For a system that was writing data heavily to the drives all day doing data processing etc, then the write speed may be more important. For a gaming system, not so much.

On the other hand, you are almost certainly not going to get to the write capacity of the Samsungs in the system's lifetime so. Don't get me wrong, I love Samsung drives....I have an SSD from my old system that has been excellent for the 5 years I've had it. However, I went for Seagates in my current system and have no complaints, albeit I did get the 1TB drive as my primary drive so it has faster write speeds.

In my old system, I had the equivalent of the PCS M.2 drive which is significantly slower than most of the drives and never had any load speed issues with games or anything

Thanks for that information, great to know 👍

I will definitely do some more research and see what the best is, I may even look into upgrading to the 1TB version if it's beneficial. That being said, I was only intending on using the 1st smaller drive for the OS and maybe some documents. I was planning on storing games on the 2T 2nd drive.

Nevertheless, thank you for clarifying!