When I'm asking you to back up your claims I'm referring to your claim about my build being bad, it being bad is not 'common knowledge'
1. You're reaching for stuff that isn't there! The RAM I picked isn't 'cheap' RAM and thinking they will have XMP profile issues is reaching like crazy. I've built systems for many years with both expensive and cheap RAM (from reputable manufacturers) and I've never ever had an issue with the XMP profile, although I know it can happen.
2. General claim/statement, you have to look at each specific monitor. I've owned both the Dell, BenQ and Asus and I can tell you it had no issues whatsoever.
3. You're right it's only another $20 extra, and only another $50 for the PSU, and only another $2 for the RAM, and only another $33 for the monitor, and only another $15 for the case.
As for the specifics on the motherboard, the majority of all the $100+ boards are super close in actual performance and stability when it comes to overclocking on current and previous generation. The Audio implementation is just fine with the same codec on both. If you wanna get technical, the Intel NIC is regarded as the better NIC in comparison with the gaming marketed Killer NIC.
The Gigabyte comes with 10 power phases and the
MSI board has 11 power phases, now a number of phases isn't necessarily a sign of quality but the components on both boards are fine.
4. It's absolutely
good enough for the above system, again you're pulling claims out of thin air. The GPU draws
152W at MAXIMUM load!
5. Why do 'they' obviously need more storage? And even if that's the case you just simply add an HDD, it's not exactly rocket science.
So I
still haven't seen any evidence as to why my build suggestion was or is bad, other than "it's common knowledge".