I'm sure it's been mentioned before in this thread but I'm too lazy to read every post. Your GPU selection is way too weak for that 4k Display.. Should have gone GTX 1080.
SSD all day... Especially if you download from Steam/torrent on a Gigabit Internet connection.. Normal hdd will fail to maintain max write speed even in raid. (this is for dl and install, obviously what might not need that). I have 400 mbit (hits true max at sustained 45-50 MB/s, my normal drive slows my dl down to like 22 or less (this is more intensive since Dl and install and even says waiting on drive to write). And Yes, this is on a high speed mech drive. what, if you don't game then GPU is whatever, but even Office and Basic Tasks are so much faster on SSD. I know you mention Intels Tech for drives/controllers, but on SSD that's even better. I mean that AsRock board will OC fine with that unlocked Proc, and since you're not doing that a non-K proc or Hell even an i3 would have been a better choice with an SSD. ie since you don't game, an i3 proc with an SSD would outperform the Bottleneck in basic Windows Productivity tasks that the mech drives created. And SSDs are so cheap there is no reason not to. But as far as 4k and not gaming (at that Res) then GPU is fine. Lol, maybe use the Integrated gpu and return that GPU for an SSD, especially since you don't game Desktop stuff/streaming will be fine on that 6600k at 4k.
When you say that you download from torrent, and you fill your harddrive with junk, I can see why you might think an ssd is a godsend. Because your drive is always cluttered with crap.Your problem is that your harddrive is cluttered up all the time, not the hdd drive itself. If you didn't download all that crap to your harddrive, it would work like a champ. Like mine does. I don't have that problem because I keep my harddrive clean, thus an ssd is a luxury, not a necessity.
I treat it like f-u money. I have a big beautiful 4k monitor and they don't. What do I have to worry about? Let them enjoy their super fast ssds, lol. I'll gladly give that up for my stunning 4k monitor with 32 ins of big beautiful screen space.
what, first off... I was using torrent as an example (I don't torrent), 2nd off if you download and install (like most programs do for games these days, ie steam), a fast mechanical drive will not keep up when writing multiple files, and steam will actually say "waiting for drive to write". This can be applied to transferring multiple files over a local network too. With your thinking enterprise servers for data transfer/web hosting wouldn't have switched to SSDs because mechanical is "good enough". Obviously you'd need a high-speed connection but I'm sure since you're probably using 56k with your raid drives, it doesn't matter. 2nd off, I can put together a system for productivity (since you don't game), using an i3 or an i5 and no gpu and absolutely be faster. This is even with a shitty non-samsung/performance drive and come out ahead just off a single SSD. I agree on using mechanical for storage but in this day there's no reason for an OS to be loaded on a mech drive. Thanks for assuming since I like performance that I don't understand how File Systems or Virus/Malware work (or whatever you think you were getting at with Torrents???). Your WD Black drives can't even saturate Sata 1 channels (sustained/random), so good job on this 2016 build! I am starting to see why you have the rep you do here, thinking SSD is a luxury still? ? Check the calendar, it's not 2011 Also love that you bought an Unlocked Proc and probably don't know what a multiplier is (assumptions, right???). It's real easy to get more out of that systm, but why bother?? You probably should underclock it or better yet... Get a Mac
ssd's are a luxury because they cost 3 times as much as a regular drive and that doesn't look like that is changing. again, when you mentioned torrents, that means you like free stuff, and you download a lot of free crap, so your drive is getting cluttered. Btw, I never compared the speed of an ssd drive to the speed of an hdd drive, or questioned it once. I only said that ssds are way more expensive, and that I can't justify the cost. If you were just looking for a speed boost, it would be worth the money, but I doubt many people upgrade just to get a speed boast. Most, like me, upgrade to get back into compliance with the latest technology. In my case, my motherboard had an severely outdated bios, I could no long add the latest graphics cards, nor could I get directx 12, and all the new features that Skylake provided over my Sandybridge processor besides speed. When I upgrade to Skylake, that requires a motherboard upgrade, and then a memory upgrade. At this point, I could then chose either a nice graphics card or an ssd: if you wish to argue that an ssd is better than a graphics card in a basically new system, then to each your own. But once I did a mb, graphics card, memory update, my harddrive loadtimes are nominal and I'd like to have the pure performance of a graphics card. But that's just me.
But I didn't just want that. I'm not sure where you got that from. I bought a 4k monitor to stream in 4k, but to also upgrade my monitor to a bigger size, to get more pixels and a better graphics. The thing about the xbox one s is that (and here's the rub) you have to have a 4k tv that is hdcp 2.2 compliant. Netflix says that in general smart 4k tvs need to be 2014 or newer to be in compliance with this. So don't buy the xbox one thinking you are going to stream Netflix in 4k, you ain't. I've done a lot of research on this since larv8 blindsided with this news about Netflix. Basically, it boils down to this: everything you are using to get 4k needs to be hdcp 2.2 to be compliant, or you can't steam Netflix in 4k, period. Also, 4k and 1080p on my system is nearly identical. I have tested this with youtube 4k videos and Netflix (Gilmore girls). Now I will say this, that prior to my upgrade, my system with sandybridge processor, my Samsung 1080p px2370 and my bg p67 mobo, the video playback from where I am at now to where I was then was like night and day: you can tell a big difference. I think it is a combination of a better monitor, better hardware and an up to day system. So if you buy a 4k monitor, and you want 4k streaming, better make sure one of those ports are hdcp 2.2 compliant or your out of luck, but again, from my experience, even if you ARENT getting 4k, it's going to look like you are with a better monitor and hardware till you pro0bably can't tell the difference, anyway. The rub though is that 4k monitors are going to have the best specs to turn 1080p into something that looks identical to 4k.
Okay, since you can't read that I don't torrent, I am going to just accept that you think an SSD costs millions. Or that you think Chrome renders 4k video better than Edge (you're a pro google guy right???).
Don't take my word for it. From Netflix: Supported Browsers: Google Chrome version 37 or later on Windows 7 or later and Mac OS X 10.9 or later (Snow Leopard) Internet Explorer 11 or later on Windows 8.1 or later Microsoft Edge on Windows 10 Mozilla Firefox version 47 or later on Windows Vista or later and Mac OS X 10.7 or later Supported on stable, official release builds from Mozilla. Non-Mozilla builds are not supported. Opera version 33 or later on Windows Vista Service Pack 2 or later and Mac OS X 10.9 or later Safari on Mac OS X 10.10 or later (Yosemite) Supported on all 2012 or later models and select 2011 models Resolution: Google Chrome up to 720p Internet Explorer up to 1080p Microsoft Edge up to 4K* Mozilla Firefox up to 720p Opera up to 720p Safari up to 1080p on Mac OS X 10.10.3 or later *Streaming in 4K requires an HDCP 2.2 compliant connection to a 4K capable display, Intel's 7th generation Core CPU, and the latest Windows updates. Check with the manufacturer of your system to verify specifications.
