whats the best way to calculate a truly price-to-performance

Unless you're gaming you can get away with anything up to (and including) second hand 10 year old pentiums.

Multiple monitors is a meme.

Don't be a consumerist; it's likely what you have now is already perfect for your needs.

>>57170504
>Multiple monitors is a meme.
Spoken like somebody who has never used multiple monitors in a productive (i.e. non-gaming/workbench) environment.

>>57170519
We have a three-monitor set up at work so people can see things without having to disturb the person currently working.

Multiple monitors are rendered pointless by workspaces since you don't need to move to view them.

Again, you're a consumerist who just wants to post your "epic" set up in "battlestation" threads.

>>57170483

No one builds general purpose computing systems in such a way.

PCs have open-ended purpose. You buy today for the most CPU/IO/Data intensive needs you have. Hopefully, it will keep up as your application needs change -- of course spending more now will extend the usable life/upgrade-ability of your system, but after a certain point you get diminishing bang/buck ratio.

>>57170551

but thats my point, whats the best way to see if "i can afford this and it'll do what i want"

vs "this is more than enough and much cheaper"

>>57170603
If this is such a concern just buy a refurbished or used unit for a fraction of the price.

>>57170483
Stop being poor and fucking buy a decent pc loser.

>>57170544
Not really. You're just a guy with OCD about anyone doing thing differently than yourself. Pretty dumb attitude, desu.

>>57170780

>stop being poor
>have a literal i3-4170
>looking at new 25watt CPUs and contimplating an even lower draw build that can do what i need without bottlenecking

>57170995
>have a literal i3-4170

What do you mean by literal?