End of Year PC Build

I"ve had a great many people tell me that sure, if you OC your CPU you get faster clocks.....But in the long run it kills your CPU and shortens its lifespan because it generates more heat, has to work 'harder' and in the long run it can in some cases reduce the lifespan by a significant margin (and in all cases it does reduce lifespan but the margin of by how much depends on how hard you OC how long and how often you use it every day at those speeds and temps).

That is why I have never OC'd my CPUs.....I admit, I'm a bit of an odd duck: I buy CPUs that can be OC'd (ie the 10900KF or 6850K) but I don't OC them at all except for what is done automatically through Intel Turbo Boost. That's because I prefer to have the speed and flexability that comes with a K series CPU, but I know nothing about OC'ing, so I don't do it.

You see? Odd Duck.

Let me put it this way: How many CPUs have you killed? Cause I haven't, not a single one. Even the ones that I tried to bake and break didn't, and I have done some weird stuff. Heat on the other hand, has become a serious problem and should be taken into consideration. Hence I'm water cooling for the first time.
That's not odd, that's just good sense.

But that would mean... that we're all odd ducks? Oh bugger.
Never!
Inverted, like when using a not-gate? Wouldn't that give me... ANTI-information! Gasp!

An interesting read...
hexus.net/tech/news/cooling/148197-asus-x-noctua-geforce-rtx-3070-graphics-card-seen-eec-docs/
Can this actually be true???

A thought/question just popped into my head: Since I am running a Z490 Aorus Master (which apparently is PCIE 4.0 Ready) and a 10900KF....Will I be able to upgrade my 2080 Super down the line to a 3080TI (in about 4 years time)? Unless PC architecture changes dramatically in the next 3 to 4 years....Presently with the games I am playing such as the Tomb Raider reboot Trilogy, Jedi Fallen Order and the ME OT... I am more than happy with the performance and appearance of my newest PC.


Also, another thought just occurred to me: I read that "the 10900KF requires at least 64 GB DDR4 at 2666 to run well, so if you are only running 16 or 32 you should consider upgrading." When I bought the parts for my system I sourced everything from Amazon (with the exception of the PSU) and I purchased 32 GB of DDR4 from G.SKILL in a 2x16 package since it is a dual channel platform....If only going to 32 GB and 16gb chips were available, I figured 2x16 running in dual channel would be more efficient and just make more sense than 4x8. But having read this blurb, I am toying with the fleeting thought of upgrading to 64 gb.

Do I actually need 64 GB for the games I play? (When I game I don't have any other screens open)....unless I need to briefly check a walk through. Aside from the visual aesthetic of having all four RAM slots on my Board filled (mind you I don't actually notice a huge difference because I can't see the gaps left by open slots since the motherboard is black) is there any real-world performance need for me to upgrade to 64 GB?


And I've also been told that unless I buy the RAM together at the same time, there is a great chance that the second pair I buy will be defective and not work properly or as effeciently because they are more than likely of a different batch even if the specs and brand is exactly the same. I have known this to be true in years past from certain brands like Kingston (especially modules made in China rather than Taiwan) but does that same line hold true for today?