The cheapest mobos are probably going to be 200-250£.
Decent B350 + 1800X = 450-500£
With the 1920X at 600-700£ that gets us a range of 300 to 500£ more. Can't pinpoint it exactly as prices are dependant on supply and demand.

You still don't understand.
SLI is using two GPUs.

If you have SLI turned off or a game doesn't support SLI the second GPU just turns off.

No, I don't think SLI is worth it.

If you don't get 60 fps with a 1080 Ti and the game doesn't support SLI (or just doesn't perform any better with it on) and you don't want to lower the settings then you're out of options. You can't buy a faster GPU because there is none and you can't use multiple GPUs without SLI.

1920X isn't released yet and neither are the mobos so I can't tell you the price.
For the 1800X the cheapest one on alternate.dk that supports SLI would be this one: https://www.alternate.dk/MSI/X370-GAMING-PLUS-AMD-X370-Socket-AM4-ATX-bundkort/html/product/1349661?

PSU e.g. https://www.alternate.dk/Corsair/CX850M-850W-ATX-Sort-enhed-til-str%C3%B8mforsyning-PC-str%C3%B8mforsyning/html/product/1253700? or https://www.alternate.dk/Corsair/RM750x-750W-ATX-Sort-enhed-til-str%C3%B8mforsyning-PC-str%C3%B8mforsyning/html/product/1227633? but there's quite a few options.

No one is going to post on that forum so it's still effectively threadjacking.

You don't need 2.0. HDMI 1.4 got enough bandwidth for 1920x1080 at 120 Hz.

This isn't that complicated.
You have the VG248QE. Why didn't you just check the manual?
http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/LCD%20Monitors/VG248/VG248_English.pdf
Page 1-3.

Some monitors are listed here
http://www.nvidia.com/object/3d-vision-system-requirements.html
For other monitors just see what the manual says.

680 still got decent SLI drivers.

Also you're saying that two GPUs are magically more than twice as fast as a single one.

He wants to play the absolute newest games (not even released yet), for others a single 1080 Ti would be more than enough.

Yeah, PSU of course. Like I said a mobo for the 1920X would be full ATX any so you'd have plenty of slots.

SLI is the software side of multi GPU setups. If you have 2 GPUs, but SLI no enabled then one will be turned off.
If SLI is turned on, but the game does not support then you get nothing again. Still only using one GPU, 2nd one is turned off.
If SLI runs like shit then you get less fps than without it.
In most new games it'll run poorly and you'll get something between 0 and 30% more fps than with a single GPU.
If it runs well then you get 50-70%. That's it.

It used to get better as time went on and drivers improved, but since that meant SLI might actually end up being useful nVidia decided to disable it on everything below a 1070. Wouldn't want anyone to buy two cheaper GPUs that combined end up getting you the same fps as a GPU that's more than twice as expensive. So I wouldn't put much faith in nVidia spending a lot of time and effort on improving SLI scaling these days.

Yes, looks smoother, still feels exactly as choppy (or worse) as with a single GPU.

#2440
That particular 1080 Ti is faster than a Titan Xp. So you're not going to find a faster single GPU.
Obviously all games would run at 4K, but it depends on the game how well they'd run.
E.g. Witcher 3 would be fine.
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1080_Ti/25.html
Others you'd need to drop down to lower settings.
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1080_Ti/12.html
Keep in mind though that the need for AA is greatly reduced at 4K, so that already buys you bit of performance.

For a second 1080 Ti you'd need a different mobo (X370 instead of B350). Any mobo for the 1920X should support it though. The problem is that SLI needs to be supported by the game and work well to do anything.
http://www.babeltechreviews.com/gtx-1080-ti-sli-performance-25-games/3/
As you can see it doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
On top of that it's all AFR, which means the frametimes won't change at all. Basically even when SLI works perfectly and you go from 30 fps to 60 fps it still feels like 30 fps, it just looks like 60.

And don't worry, more questions mean you're more likely to get what you want/need. Kind of important to invest that time when you're about to drop 1500-2000 quid on a new pc.

#2441
It does not have wifi so it will never show wifi connections.
Did you connect the ethernet cable to the router/switch as well?
Does windows show a connection that it just doesn't recognize?
Can you ping your router/modem?

Yeah, LGA2066 mobos are a lot more expensive.
In games the 7820X would still be faster than the 1920X (same as the 1800X in that regard). For rendering the 1920X would obviously win easily.
Keep in mind that if you're going to run max settings the difference games will probably be less than 20% because the GPU becomes the limiting factor. Like this:

https://techspot-static-xjzaqowzxaoif5.stackpathdns.com/articles-info/1006/bench/CPU_01.png

Considering the price including the mobo should be similar (200$ MSRP difference, possibly cheaper mobo for the 1920X and 7820X being more expensive than it should be due to supply issues) I'd say it'd be worth the wait.

We don't know anything about actual availability yet, it might not be in stock in Denmark right after the release on 10th August. It's not quite confirmed if the 1920X will ship with with a stock cooler (rumour has it there's version with an AiO liquid cooler, but no idea if that's the 1920X or a more expensive version) and due to the size current coolers might not be compatible at all. At the very least you'll need a new mounting kit for it too.

Sidenote: For both the 7820X and 1920X microATX mobos might be hard to find, so a larger case might be necessary.
Also since both support Quad Channel replace the 2x8GB RAM with 4x4GB (or 4x8GB if you feel like it).
Fun fact: Intel loves market segmentation so the 7820X supports 128GB RAM and no ECC. The 1920X and 1950X are identical to the server versions in that regard so you get ECC support and a maximum of 1024GB RAM, because why not?

By the way if you know which part of your old pc failed you could replace that, use it until you buy the new one and then sell it. That would make waiting more bearable.

#2435
Nah, it's just easier if I don't have to search for a cooler.
Alternate.dk it is then.
I'll stick with the H7. It's rather cheap in Denmark almost the same price as the 212 Evo, but it's much better. While the various Enermax ETS-T40 version perform pretty much the same (some 1% better, some 1% worse) and are slightly cheaper they are also taller and I don't want to limit your choice of cases.
You'll have to get the AM4 mounting kit though, ask alternate if they have it, otherwise http://www.cryorig.com/getam4.php

Here we go:
https://www.alternate.dk/AMD/Ryzen-7-1800x-3-6GHz-Boks-processor/html/product/1333130?
https://www.alternate.dk/html/product/1174912
https://www.alternate.dk/ASRock/AB350M-Pro4-Bundkort/html/product/1333840?
https://www.alternate.dk/Patriot/Viper-Elite-Series-DDR4-16GB-3000MHz-16GB-DDR4-3000Mhz-RAM-modul-Hukommelse/html/product/1304883?
https://www.alternate.dk/Samsung/850-EVO-MZ-75E250-SATA-6Gb-s-SSD-Solid-state-drev/html/product/1163757?
https://www.alternate.dk/Seagate/ST3000DM008-Harddisk/html/product/1289373?
https://www.alternate.dk/ZOTAC/GeForce-GTX-1080-Ti-AMP-Extreme-Core-Edition-Grafikkort/html/product/1350397?
https://www.alternate.dk/Corsair/CX550M-PC-str%C3%B8mforsyning/html/product/1253695?
https://www.alternate.dk/Fractal-Design/FD-CA-DEF-MINI-C-BK-W-Towerkabinet/html/product/1299897?
15158 DKK.

You have a couple of options though.
Obviously larger SSD/HDD, if you want.
There are also cheaper, but slightly slower HDDs.
https://www.alternate.dk/Intenso/3TB-3-5-Zoll-7-2k-SATA-III-64MB-3000GB-Serial-ATA-III-harddisk/html/product/1088605?
https://www.alternate.dk/Toshiba/3TB-3-5-Zoll-7-2k-SATA-6Gb-s-64MB-3000GB-Serial-ATA-III-harddisk/html/product/1026606?
https://www.alternate.dk/Toshiba/P300-3TB-3000GB-SATA-harddisk/html/product/1321249?
All 3 are identical, the difference is warranty (Toshiba vs Intenso) and between the 2 Toshibas the P300 comes in a box. That's all there is to it.
Now some people say a <300mm two fan, two slot cooler is perfectly fine for any GPU, I say fuck that. If I were to pay that much for a >250W GPU then I'd make sure that cooling will be the least of my problems. There is simply no substitute for a FAT TRIPLE FAN TRIPLE SLOT cooler. You're not going to use the shitty x16 slot (only runs at PCIe 2.0 x4, not 3.0 x16) anyway and it would hinder the GPU's air intake and the top slot is perfectly fine for a soundcard or whatever you need.
Of course you're free to choose another one. I should mention that it'll block the lower fan slot (there's 3 and only 1 fan included) in the Define Mini C, but moving the fan isn't a problem.
Which brings us to the case.
There's also the N200, which fits pretty much everything, including even larger GPUs, but while it's a good budget case it's still a budget case.
https://www.alternate.dk/Cooler-Master/N200/html/product/1066798?
If you want sound dampening like the Define Mini C, but don't need the window the Deep Silence 4 is a slightly cheaper option. https://www.alternate.dk/Nanoxia/Deep-Silence-4-Gr%C3%A5/html/product/1089170?
For the PSU sadly there's no better options immediately in stock. If you want a better PSU the G2 and other alternatives are not on alternate.dk at all and for the RM550x or RM650x you'd have to wait even longer.
https://www.alternate.dk/html/product/1227635

Feel free to ask some more questions.

#2436
Seems a bit low for OW.
We've been over this.
http://www.teamfortress.tv/39288/low-fps-problems/?page=2
Check which program is using too much of your CPU (might indeed be rainmeter), and turning that off will probably fix your problem.

PUBG is completely normal and no upgrade will fix that.
You're lucky the drops are just down to 30.

http://imagescdn.tweaktown.com/content/8/1/8189_01_playerunknowns-battlegrounds-benchmarked-cpu-gpu-war.png

#2432
Yeah, not the same mobo.
They don't have to be the exact same parts.
So which CPU did you decide to got with?
If it's the 1800X and you're willing to overclock you could go with the 1700 and not have to worry about a cooler.
Ignore the SSD and HDD, similar ones can be found in any shop.
Same for the mobo.

If you've decided which shop you'll use, be it alternate.dk or something else (possibly cheaper options), then I can just use that one. No price comparision site needed anymore and I don't have to worry about shipping so it's easier for me too.

#2433
Current CPU?
How many fps are you getting, how many do you want?
Is the CPU at 100% all the time or just spiking?
GPU usage?

1. Are you talking about cables, routers, switches or NICs?
Your network can only be as fast as its slowest part.
Cat6 cables cost a couple of dollars for 10m.
10G switches start at 300$. You'd need at least one. Routers are much more expensive.
You'll also need 1 10G for each device you want to connect to the network, that's at least 200$ each.

2. No. Unless you want to do rendering live to a fileserver at >100MB/s I don't really see a use case.

3. That's only the network inside your own house. That can be as fast as you want, to connect to the internet you need to go through your ISPs cables/network.
Those are most likely not even capable of 1 Gigabit.
If they are then you still have to pay for it. Those cables didn't suddenly appear over night and they are not connected to the internet via thin air. That all costs money and ISPs want to turn a profit.

So it's simple. Are you paying for Gigabit internet? If not then your existing home network is guaranteed to be faster at 1 Gigabit (= 1000 MBit). Look it up if you don't know, but you're probably paying for something between 1 and 200 MBit. Run a speedtest (http://speedof.me/) and check if you're reaching that "up to" number. If you do then that's as good as it gets.

#2/#6
SFP+ with twinaxial copper is garbage, specced to 10m for 10G. Standard Cat6 can do 55m, Cat6a 100m.
SFP+ optical is specced for 10km 10G and that is much overkill and so ridiculously expensive that I've never seen that being suggested for a home network.

7820X? For stock clocks no. But for overclocking yes, because Skylake-X gobbles up power like there's no tomorrow once overclocked.

https://img.purch.com/core-i9-7900x-review/o/aHR0cDovL21lZGlhLmJlc3RvZm1pY3JvLmNvbS9JL1IvNjg0OTYzL29yaWdpbmFsLzEwLUNpbmViZW5jaC1NdWx0aS1Db3JlLnBuZw==

That's not even a stress test, it needs 230W at stock on those.
Sure it's the 10C, but you can do the math for 8C (which is also slightly higher clocked).

Combine that with the fact that Intel chose to use thermal paste instead of solder (which got 10 times the thermal conductivity, that's why Intel used to use it and everyone else still does) those CPUs get really hot.

So you'll need a pretty beefy cooler to get a decent overclock.

http://www.pricerunner.dk/
http://www.edbpriser.dk/
Just FYI.

Well only 20% faster if you're GPU limited. It won't magically make CPU rendering faster.
Basically just games.

https://www.pugetsystems.com/pic_disp.php?id=40573&width=800&height=800

https://www.pugetsystems.com/pic_disp.php?id=40735&width=800&height=800

Yes, 300£ including the mobo.

Yes, if you're overclocking you can either squeeze a few more percent out of the 7820X (power consumption goes way up though) or get a 1700 instead of an 1800X (100£ cheaper, 150 if you use the stock cooler) and oc it to the same 4.0 GHz an 1800X gets you except with all cores active (instead of dropping to 3.6 with all active). 1800X isn't worth getting for overclocking since it runs into the same wall at 4.0-4.1 that the 1700 can also reach.

Right now it's
1700 - 8C ~290£
7800X - 6C ~350£
1800X - 8C ~390£
7820X - 8C ~560£
7900X - 10C >900£

MSRP for the 1920X (12C) and 1950X (16C) will be 799$ and 999$ respectively. So probably around 600£ and 900£.
If you think that makes Intel's prices look ridiculous then keep in mind that the cheapest (and only) 8C, the i7-6900K at 1089$ used to be a bargain compared to the 10C i7-6950X at 1723$ MSRP.

Of course because Math is a bitch 50% more cores mean your rendering time is at best reduced by 1/3.

Well there is no way to predict which GPU you'd need to get the performance you want (60fps/1080p/max, right?) in those games.
Since this is basically a guessing game I'll just give you multiple options and let you decide, then make the detailed partlist with danish prices.

Baseline:
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD - Ryzen 7 1800X 3.6GHz 8-Core Processor (£388.00 @ Aria PC)
CPU Cooler: CRYORIG - H7 49.0 CFM CPU Cooler (£47.52 @ Amazon UK)
Motherboard: ASRock - AB350M Pro4 Micro ATX AM4 Motherboard (£74.24 @ CCL Computers)
Memory: Team - T-Force / Night Hawk 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-3000 Memory (£124.58 @ Amazon UK)
Storage: Samsung - 850 EVO-Series 250GB 2.5" Solid State Drive (£84.74 @ Amazon UK)
Storage: Seagate - Barracuda 3TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive (£82.97 @ CCL Computers)
Video Card: Inno3D - GeForce GTX 1080 8GB iChill X3 Video Card (£499.99 @ Overclockers.co.uk)
Case: Phanteks - Enthoo Pro M ATX Mid Tower Case (£59.99 @ Overclockers.co.uk)
Power Supply: EVGA - SuperNOVA G3 (EU) 550W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply (£78.44 @ Novatech)
Total: £1440.47
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-07-20 17:46 BST+0100

1080 Ti would be about 20% faster, +200£.
An i7-7820X (+ different mobo) would be about 20% faster than the 1800X in Premiere, 10% in After Effects, 0-20% in games, depending on how much you're limited by the CPU. Cost +300£.
i7-7900X 25% Premiere, ~0% After Effects (lower baseclock than 7820X), 0-20% in games. Cost +650£. All still compared to the 1800X.
No idea about FL Studio.
If you want 12 or 16 cores you'll have to wait until August.

#2421
Trains would be so much better if they actually showed up. At all. Fucking idiotic kids on the track.
I want to do this properly, not while I'm tired as fuck so this'll have to wait until tomorrow.

EDIT: Had a quick look at it just now.
Forgot to ask overclocking yes/no?
Also neither Wolfenstein 2 nor Metro: Exodus are out yet, so I can't use them as benchmarks.

#2422
Not really. 1600 would be slower, 1600X barely faster (6 cores won't help at all in most games) and he could just overclock the 1500X (CPU and mobo allow it) to 4.0 GHz instead. i5-7500 might not be faster, i5-7600 is 40$ more expensive, i5-7600K or i7 are definitely out of reach. Really, for games 1500X (+ OC if he wants to) is good enough.
2400 might actually end up canceling out any gains from a 7500 or 7600.

1060 6GB is already the largest possible jump. It's difficult even finding one a ~300$ due to mining, but now instead of being ~100$ more expensive a 1070 would cost 150$ more, that's definitely not happening.