Honestly, you’re getting arguably the most powerful motherboard available at that price point. That extra headroom might really come in handy down the road, especially if you decide to jump to a 12 or 16-core processor later on.
Here’s some of what I linked in those five posts above click
Amazon didn't exactly kill it during the holiday sales. It might just be because of how they priced that Samsung—I actually own one myself—but you end up getting a 5-year warranty (2 years from Samsung plus an additional 3 years through insurance).
If you're looking for a deal, you'll have to hunt for something used, because they don't really manufacture 1200p monitors anymore. Even the newer models that are somewhat available are going to cost you well over $250.
Look, whether it's 1ms, 2ms, 6ms, or 10ms is basically irrelevant unless you're stepping up to a 144Hz refresh rate. Don't sweat the response time too much; you won't actually feel the difference. Panels are like a box of assorted chocolates—it's a total lottery. You never know exactly what you're getting. You and I could walk into Best Buy and buy the exact same monitor model, yet mine might have significant backlight bleeding while yours looks perfect.
A 25" ultrawide at a 21:9 aspect ratio is going to feel tiny to you. Since those inches are stretched across a wider area, the vertical height ends up being about the same as a standard 19 or 20-inch 16:9 monitor.
A 6ms response time isn't actually an issue. The real question is whether a 27" screen feels too big for 1080p if you're sitting close to it—you might notice the pixel density dropping. As for 75Hz, it's
Otherwise, you can find plenty of 24" non-TN monitors with Adaptive-Sync running at 72/75Hz here:
The CX series is strictly entry-level; you shouldn't be pairing it with a $3,000 build. For a high-end rig like this, you really need to look at Corsair’s RMx series, Seasonic Focus, or EVGA G3—something in the 750-$267W range or higher. Then again, picking up a 3200MHz RAM kit shouldn't break the bank, nor should adding a 3TB HDD; spending an extra $67 on those components in a $3,000 setup shouldn't be an issue at all.
To be honest, the whole thing seems overpriced. Which retailer are we talking about here? And what’s the actual use case for this PC? For instance, you don't necessarily need a CPU in the $350-$$1333 range for a gaming machine (assuming the GPU is the priority), but hey, if that's what you want... Just a word of advice: don't make compromises elsewhere in a $3,000 build just because you overspent on a CPU or GPU you might not even need.
EDIT
I'm assuming this is from a specific link? The CPU is $1367 and the GPU is $2333... That is way too much.
An AMD Ryzen 5 2400G can handle something like an NVIDIA GTX 1070 at 1080p resolution. If you're looking to push higher resolutions, you could definitely go with a more powerful GPU. We should have much more information regarding the upcoming product launches in about two months, so it might be worth waiting, though I doubt anything will drop before six months from now—it could even stretch out until the fall.
If you have some extra wiggle room in your budget, you could always throw in a Freezer 33 cooler as well.
Keep in mind that the CPUs compatible with this motherboard aren't exactly powerful enough to fully push a GPU like that—though I’m hoping you’re at least running a quad-core. It doesn't matter much, though, if you're planning on upgrading your whole platform anytime soon anyway.
Look, if you’re buying a monitor from $400, most people won't even blink as long as it stays functional while they're actually using it. If it dies within three years, you've got the warranty; if it dies after that, you just buy a new one and move on.
As for HP as a brand, they have made massive strides over the last few years. They now offer high-end options across every single category. In my opinion, they currently produce the most aggressive gaming laptops on the market, and until recently, they consistently topped the charts with their best gaming monitors (those ones in the 6-$2333 range), among others. Sure, they aren't dominating the professional workstation market like Dell, but across almost every price point, they are right there in the thick of it with everyone else.
Most of these brands outsource to the exact same factories, so you aren't really going to find much difference regardless of which label you pick or how much you spend. You won't find any monitors being assembled by German engineers in a high-end factory in Germany.
Regarding that monitor—assuming you meant a different HP model—if the specs line up with what you need and the price feels right, go for it. It’s essentially a standard entry-level setup for that budget (a 24" FHD, IPS panel at 60Hz, etc.).
Nobody can give you an eyewitness account right now since this model is still relatively new—it’s not like anyone’s been living with it for five years yet.
Regarding the technical specs, 1440p resolution is naturally much more demanding than 1080p. Think of it like this: in gaming, it will likely push you toward upgrading to a beefier GPU sooner rather than later, or forcing you to dial back the settings and settle for lower FPS.
Linus Tech Tips spent some time putting that i5 9600k through its paces recently, and honestly, it looked pretty rough in certain spots—specifically when those minimum FPS numbers started tanking in a few titles. Obviously, nobody else is seeing those exact same results... but it’s becoming crystal clear that a pure six-core setup just isn't futureproof. The gaming industry is clearly pivoting toward 8c16t architectures, especially once the next generation of consoles hits the market. Look, if you're dead set on going the Intel route, you should probably shell out some extra cash for a high-end ASUS motherboard with beefy VRMs, just so you have the option to jump to an i9 9900K down the road. Then again, even that might end up looking outdated or just plain inefficient compared to whatever next-gen 7nm processors are coming our way.
I'm stuck running at 75Hz on my current setup, but:
HDMI 1.3 and higher can definitely handle 144 Hz at 1080p. Contrary to what some folks claim, HDMI isn't strictly locked at 60 Hz, even if you're working with versions older than 2.0.
That said, the monitor itself has to actually allow 144 Hz via HDMI. It’s not enough to simply plug into a laptop or a GPU that features an HDMI 1.4 or 2.0 port. You need a display designed to support that refresh rate over HDMI, and looking at the HDMI version alone won't give you that answer. Certain monitors are hard-capped at 60 Hz through their HDMI ports, regardless of whether they utilize HDMI 1.4 or 2.0. That's a hardware limitation built into the monitor, not a flaw in the HDMI standard itself.
A few monitors that can pull off 1080p at 144 Hz using HDMI include the Dell Alienware AW2423HF, the ASUS ROG Swift, and the LG UltraGear (all of which run on HDMI 1.4).
While 60Hz is often the ceiling for 4K resolution over HDMI 2.0, apparently that isn't a universal rule.
If you paired that GPU with an i3, the whole situation would be a completely different story.
For instance, Just input the specs exactly as I laid them out (post-processing, shadows, and effects aren't exactly negligible—they definitely take a bite out of your performance).
Now, look, games are constantly evolving and getting patched, but the baseline won't be far from this.