Don't go with AMD processors yet, it doesn't support Thunderbolt yet so you'll be better of with intel chips. Don't think about savings when it comes to CPU, save for ram and get the best CPU first, you can add ram later, go with intel chip & spend that 100 bucks more & get 32gb ram & add extra 32gb ram later.

 

are you gaming? you dont need the newest, for instance i use a smaller and older quadro (videoediting)
smal cool and 4 4k displays possible. 100 or 120 bucks but only 45wats, powersavings galore

i would look for max power consumption and io for grafix (like D.p 1.2 (0r 3), Hdmi2) that is guarnted 4k 60hz
depending on your monitor or tv needs ;)

1)you have to use the calculator a bit, since everything am4 could be "expensive"
2) expansion like tb or usb-c (wich is still not too comon on pc side)so you could realisticly wait till everything is cheaper)
3)64g of ram only if you are sure you need it since 16- 24 is more than enough.
64 or more is only needed if you (really i mean rwaaaallly)use that many kontakt library at the same time
or even multiple computers
like this junkie here. hes XL ;)

 

The best i 've seen so far in terms of features is the Asrock Tai Chi.
http://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X370 Taichi/
As correctly indicated no AM4 chipset has built in Thunderbolt support.

 

They're 'optimized' for NAS but that doesn't mean they won't run well @home. In fact, i reccomend them for home use too as a cheap, but reliable alternative to WD blue/ST barrcuda simply because they're made for longevity, not run-fast-but-die-fast.

I don't know baout you, but I'd rather have HDs that last.

NB:I have ST NAD & WD RED @home. Running fine after 2 years of 23.976/7 on use.

 

I used the cheapest ddr2 ram for my old amd rig, 16gb for like 30$, ebay china.And they worked really well.One did die later but all in all a cheap solution if you are on an amd system.(am 2, am2+, am3).
Could run many kontakt libraries and achieved a lot with them.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/16GB-4x4GB-...780620?hash=item25b09ba64c:g:iGkAAOSwo6lWNyhv

 

Well, it sounds quite unorthodox to say the least for these reasons:
Desktop drives: Are optimized for quick seek times. Automatic acoustic management is typically set to minimum or disabled. On error they will use all resources available to recover the data if they can.
Nas/Raid drives: Are optimized for low power usage. Automatic acoustic management is set to high, which multiplies rotational latency. On error they will retry only a few times and then just report an error.

WD Red/ 5400rpm/ 175mb per sec ADTR (8tb drive)/ 22ms read&write access/ 3 year warranty.
WD Black/ 7200rpm/ 225mb per sec ADTR (6tb drive) / 15ms read access/ 6.5ms write access/ 5 years warranty.
The redeeming factors to use a Red as a desktop drive would be the cheap price and the workhours rate (estimated real world usage) which is about triple the Black. But again, all metrics referring to a WD Red drive as long lasting (load/unload cycles/ MTBF) have been made strictly under a nas or raid enironment and not as a desktop drive, as it is not made to be used as such. Even the Red's access times are rated under raid/nas and not as a single desktop drive which typically should be even slower due to high level of AAM. And if you take in mind the different warranty, you establish your own conclusions
Take care
PS: I do have 3 Wd Reds (3x3tb) in raid 5 in my backup pc about 3 years now. It's a fine cheap drive for raid.

 

Last edited: Mar 20, 2017

keep an eye on the cpu side, hardly any i7 supports more than 64 GB memory.
the 6800k does support up to 128 GB quad channel.
Xeons support up to 1.54 TB ECC memory

Ryzen 64 GB, and ECC support

the 1700x is the sweet spot
heard only good things about the Asrock taichi AM4 boards

Windows 7 is not supported officially!