Well I am older, have a good job, and usually buy the best hardware every few years as long as the price is reasonable. I think I got my 1080 for less than $600 and I also have few 1070's and a few 390xs. I have them for my kids machines gaming and for crypto. Gaming on a 32" 1080p monitor with a 1080 is NOT overkill. I am not one of those crazies that say they see a huge difference between 60 and 120 fps, 60 looks almost as perfect, but it has to be a MINIMUM of 60. I could care less if Ryzen does 78 fps and intel does 83 fps, but some games even my system drops to 47 fps at times, and THAT is noticeable to me. So I game at 1080p with ULTRA settings, I pay for all the eye candy, and I surely don't want a CPU that can't provide well over 60 fps minimum. Right now cpus are way behind gpus, you basically need a new gpu every 2 years and a new cpu about every 6 years, lol, as my system proves. I have had 3 different gpus, maybe 4 with the same 4.7ghz cpu. And I don't only care about gaming, my point is that GAMING WILL BE A SIDEGRADE to a 6 year old intel system for current games. I believe newer games this year and next will benefit from more cores, as well as the whole windows experience of multitasking will benefit. 8 cores is all well and good, but 8 cores at speeds of a core 6 years ago just isn't progress. Hell my cell phone has 8 cores and so does my Xbox One, and they are both slower than a 6 year old 4 core. I am still thinking of building a Ryzen system even if the gaming is within 5% of intel, it will be a gaming sidegrade, but a multitasking upgrade, so hope that makes you happy and understand my view. I don't cheap out on my hardware and hobby, I would NEVER get a 1700X to save $100 over an 1800X, but I also would never spend $1000 for an Intel CPU either, and I wouldn't spend $1000 for a 16c/32 thread Ryzen that is no faster at games.