Hi all, I am about to buy a new system and I am torn between 2 specs and wondered if you have any advice please ? I am based in the UK and my budget is £1700-£2100 including tax and shipping. I will be buying every single part APART form keyboard/mice and monitors. I run two monitors - both 27" at 1920x1200 resolution. I want to buy the system pre-built with on-site warranty ideally and was planning to use http://scan.co.uk (their 3xs systems). My usage is as follows : WORK USE : I am a coder / web developer so my main "daytime" use is for coding/maintaining servers/web dev/some graphics work etc... An average work session will see, perhaps, Notepad++ open with maybe 10-15 documents. Outlook 2010 with 15 different email accounts. Maybe 2 instances of Firefox with about 10 tabs on each and the same with Chrome. FTP is usually running with active connections to 5-10 sites. Skype is always running with normally around 5 conversation windows open (and very regular calling and desktop sharing). Adobe Photoshop and Fireworks will sometimes be open as well (but not doing anything complex, just editing images at usually less than 800x600) and possibly Word and Excel 2010. There are always one or two random folders open and I run Avast and Spybot. Google drive is always active too. I often also have a WAMP stack running for testing PHP code. GAMING USE : At night, I want to be able to run the latest games at max settings where possible. However, it is worth noting that I only game on ONE monitor - I use my primary monitor full screen (1920x1200) for gaming and my secondary monitor will be displaying Skype and some status stuff etc for me to monitor during gameplay. My priority is a stable, fast work system followed closely by a good gaming system. I don't really do any heavy video work - I may record the odd training video using Camtasia and do some basic editing and rendering but nothing too heavy and only occasionally. I have narrowed it to two configs from Scan. Both of them with onsite cover (important for my business) and both of the pro overclocked by Scan themselves. The overclock is also covered by their 3 year warranty. Both configs share some similar components as follows : 1. Samsung 512gb Evo Pro SSD and 2Tb WD Green storage drive 2. EVGA GTX 980 SC Single vid cards 3. 750W Corsair RM Modular Silent 80PLUS Gold SLI/Crossfire PSU's 4. Corsair Graphite 780T case 5. Corsair H100 wartercooler 6. Basic DVD-RW 7. Windows 7 Pro 64 bit Then the two configs differ as follows : CONFIG 1 1. CPU : i7-4790K Pro OC'd to 4.7Ghz 2. RAM : 16GB (2x8GB) Corsair Vengeance Pro, 2133MHz, CAS 11-11-11-27, 1.5V 3. MB : Asus Z97-P, 4 SATA 6Gbps, 1 PCI-E M.2, SATA RAID, ATX CONFIG 2 1. CPU : i7-5820k Pro OC'd to 4.2Ghz (or I can have 4.4Ghz but thought 4.2 might be best for stability) 2. RAM : Corsair 16GB (4x4GB) Vengeance LPX, 2666MHz, CAS 16-18-18-36, 1.2V 3. MB : Asus X99-A, Intel X99, S 2011-3, DDR4, SATA III 6Gb/s, SATA RAID, PCIe 3.0 (x16), ATX Config 2 is, obviously, the more expensive system but cost isn't an issue as it is still within the budget (and it gets offset against tax anyway). I have read many comparisons and reviews and I can't decide which way to go - The faster clock of the 4790k or the extra cores (and newer platform) of the 5820k. For example, given the type of desktop stuff I do (work time) - will the 5820k give me any advantage over the 4790k (I guess I do a lot of multitasking but, even so) ? Will config 1 blast config 2 out of the water for gaming or will not notice any real world playability difference? I am not worried about running benchmarks or anything - I just want to know will I get just as great a gaming experience from Config 2 as I would from Config 1 (in real world play). HELP please I need to get this ordered tomorrow !