azslow3
General PC components are not DAW optimized. Gamers have different requirements.

Name one motherboard, memory module, graphics card, CPU, case or power supply esp optimized for DAWs in mind by design (hardware or software drivers).

Gamers and DAW systems want low latency as well. The only major difference is DAW environments would be optimized for high graphics resolutions and would avoid stuff like turbo and hyperthreading, or shadow caching (and tuning the power saving).

There are lots of techniques that optimize PC's across the board. Sure you can pay for support if you want but many of us find the internet littered with optimization tips. It's not really the rocket science that the so cold experts would have you believe. Time consuming maybe... but if you are seriously interested in optimizing you will frequently spend the time.

CakeAlexSHere
Gamers and DAW systems want low latency as well. The only major difference is DAW environments would be optimized for high graphics resolutions and would avoid stuff like turbo and hyperthreading, or shadow caching (and tuning the power saving).

On a modern-build DAW, you do NOT want to disable TurboBoost or Hyper-threading... unless you want to sacrifice performance.
 
One other thing to note, a gamer isn't necessarily as concerned with super low/consistent DPC Latency... as the games they're playing use much larger buffers than say 1.5ms (64-sample ASIO buffer size).
A gamer is also typically MUCH less concerned about noise.
With high 3D frame-rates (advanced games), it's hard to keep higher-end graphics cards silent.  (As is the case with video rendering where all cores are maxed out at 100% and the video card is under heavy load).

Here is another option:
 
Custom Tower Desktops
https://www.avadirect.com/custom-pc-tower
 

Customers who purchased a custom built product from AVADirect are entitled to free technical hardware-related support for the lifetime of their product.

 
Custom Barebone Desktops
https://www.avadirect.com/custom-barebones-desktops
 

About AVADirect Custom Barebone Desktops 
What’s the easiest way to build your own custom gaming PC? A barebones PC kit from AVADirect is one of the fastest and most affordable ways to start building and upgrading your own custom PC. Preconfigured with just the case and motherboard, you can finish the build, adding and upgrading your components as you go, whether it’s online with our easy-to-use configurators or on your own, over time.
 
If you’re looking for more of a DIY project and love to build your own rigs, then an AVADirect barebones PC is the way to go. If this is your first build, your barebones PC is backed by our unsurpassed lifetime technical support, so you can contact one of our knowledgeable sales associates to help you choose the best components to complete your build.
 
AVADirect offers a variety of high-end components, in every price range, should you be ready to customize your barebones PC. We’re partners with some of the top computer component manufacturers in the industry, in order to offer you all of the available parts on the market.
 
Are you a gamer looking for performance?? Customize one of our barebones gaming PCs, adding top-of-the-line Intel, AMD and Nvidia components to complete your rig. We offer the newest releases, available day one, so you don’t have to wait.
 
AVADirect offers a variety of handcrafted barebones PCs for you to customize and make your own. Start building your one-of-a-kind rig and get a solid piece of equipment built to last for years to come.

CakeAlexSHere
Gamers and DAW systems want low latency as well. The only major difference is DAW environments would be optimized for high graphics resolutions and would avoid stuff like turbo and hyperthreading, or shadow caching (and tuning the power saving).

Jim Roseberry
On a modern-build DAW, you do NOT want to disable TurboBoost or Hyper-threading... unless you want to sacrifice performance.

One other thing to note, a gamer isn't necessarily as concerned with super low/consistent DPC Latency... as the games they're playing use much larger buffers than say 1.5ms (64-sample ASIO buffer size).
A gamer is also typically MUCH less concerned about noise.
With high 3D frame-rates (advanced games), it's hard to keep higher-end graphics cards silent. (As is the case with video rendering where all cores are maxed out at 100% and the video card is under heavy load).

So my posts are being swallowed or deleted for no reason several times.

Anyway firstly hyperthreading can actually cause crackling on some systems and most DAW installations don't actually need it, so unless you are totally obsessed with system power (as you are) it really isn't necessary. There is of course no doubt hyperthreading will work perfectly fine on many system but it's weird that you haven't considered other the scenarios.

"On a modern-build DAW, you do NOT want to disable TurboBoost or Hyper-threading... unless you want to sacrifice performance."

Well modern PC's are powerful enough for most, you don't have to squeeze every last bit out of your environment (a la gamer mentality) and performance can be traded off with reliability (as every overclocking installer should know).

I find it strange you state your motherboards have turbo boost/hyperthreading control as a feature then you say it should be on all the time (desktop PC's can have this feature of course).

Special request.. PLEASE stop posting IN CAPs every so often IT COMES ACROSS like YOU ARE SHOUTING. Also please stop posting as though you have are the last word in PC hardware, your opinions are valuable and right up the top I'm sure.. but not all of us are altogether stupid. I've been building computers professionally since the 90's myself and have worked for some major names. Respect the fact that people can have different opinions to yourself and are qualified to make them. There is no harm in disagreeing JUST STOP DOING THIS. Thx.

Sorry I misunderstood the " Silent PC " comment as to the direction you wanted to take David. If you have 1200-1600 to put into a daw then I don't think you're poor. I may have also misunderstood those comments. It appears 
that you are looking in that price range for a computer. 
I don't have direct experience with Silent PC. The only things making noise in a computer are the fans and maybe the hard drive all depending.
Built for recording computers like (Silent PC?) I'm guessing and others are mainly the same basic cpu mobo packages as other higher spec'ed machines with better fans and cases. The optimization is mostly done in the bios. The rest is minor tweaks easily found online. Probably just as important is the audio interface and how you have it set up.
Maybe you know all of this. Probably do. Or maybe this is helpful to someone.

CakeAlexSHere

CakeAlexSHere
Gamers and DAW systems want low latency as well. The only major difference is DAW environments would be optimized for high graphics resolutions and would avoid stuff like turbo and hyperthreading, or shadow caching (and tuning the power saving).

Jim Roseberry
On a modern-build DAW, you do NOT want to disable TurboBoost or Hyper-threading... unless you want to sacrifice performance.

One other thing to note, a gamer isn't necessarily as concerned with super low/consistent DPC Latency... as the games they're playing use much larger buffers than say 1.5ms (64-sample ASIO buffer size).
A gamer is also typically MUCH less concerned about noise.
With high 3D frame-rates (advanced games), it's hard to keep higher-end graphics cards silent. (As is the case with video rendering where all cores are maxed out at 100% and the video card is under heavy load).

So my posts are being swallowed or deleted for no reason several times.

Anyway firstly hyperthreading can actually cause crackling on some systems and most DAW installations don't actually need it, so unless you are totally obsessed with system power (as you are) it really isn't necessary. There is of course no doubt hyperthreading will work perfectly fine on many system but it's weird that you haven't considered other the scenarios.

"On a modern-build DAW, you do NOT want to disable TurboBoost or Hyper-threading... unless you want to sacrifice performance."

Well modern PC's are powerful enough for most, you don't have to squeeze every last bit out of your environment (a la gamer mentality) and performance can be traded off with reliability (as every overclocking installer should know).

I find it strange you state your motherboards have turbo boost/hyperthreading control as a feature then you say it should be on all the time (desktop PC's can have this feature of course).

Special request.. PLEASE stop posting IN CAPs every so often IT COMES ACROSS like YOU ARE SHOUTING. Also please stop posting as though you have are the last word in PC hardware, your opinions are valuable and right up the top I'm sure.. but not all of us are altogether stupid. I've been building computers professionally since the 90's myself and have worked for some major names. Respect the fact that people can have different opinions to yourself and are qualified to make them. There is no harm in disagreeing JUST STOP DOING THIS. Thx.

I posted a couple of words in caps to accentuate the point.  It wasn't like it was whole phrases/sentences.  
 
As to Hyper-threading, note my choice of words (on a modern-build)...
Hyper-threading (the first generation) did cause audio glitches with Cubase and other DAW applications.
This hasn't been the case for quite a number of years.
Ironically, a reason some folks disable Hyper-threading (on a modern-build) is to achieve stable over-clock at higher clock-speed.  
 
As for TurboBoost, on a modern-build (with quality cooling), there's no good reason to disable it.
Using the 8700k as an example: With TurboBoost disabled, all CPU cores are running at 3.7GHz.
Not slow by any means, but why limit yourself when the CPU will run absolutely rock-solid with all cores locked at 4.7GHz?  With a quality cooler, the CPU stays cool... and near dead-silent. 
That's 1GHz difference across all six cores.
If the CPU doesn't have adequate cooling, then yes... it's advantageous to disable TurboBoost (and Hyper-Threading).
 
In well over 20 years, I've yet to field a single request to have a machine's speed intentionally limited.
That ~15% (in the above example), can literally be the difference between an audio glitch (or not) when running heavy loads at super small ASIO buffer sizes.
When stability, CPU-life, CPU-temps, noise, audio-glitches, etc... aren't a factor, it's logical to opt for maximum performance.
 

^^
Everything you say is about performance and overclocking. I sometimes think I am in a games forum. I'm not disagreeing with most of it but at least you are clarifying a little.

This statement below though I do have issue with, with the exception that if I was running a shed load of synths and convolution reverbs etc etc. But not everybody is, most people are not.

"That ~15% (in the above example), can literally be the difference between an audio glitch (or not) when running heavy loads at super small ASIO buffer sizes."

Well I do use a lot processor intensive stuff on my year 2010 Dell i7 2.93Ghz 16Gb RAM and I have no issues whatsoever. So I find these sort of blanket generalistic statements laughable, mainly because it really depends what you are trying to achieve (I notice you tend to avoid use cases), but then you are trying to peddle your PC's so from that perspective I can see where you are coming from.

It seems you are still both arguing the same point to me. That statement Jim made is accurate, but it agreeably does not apply to everyone. Bear in mind, that Jim has also mentioned that he has customers streaming samples from multiple drives to feed very intense orchestrations, so there are people who definitely want and need that. For the "average user" it is not necessary, but it also does throw a monkey wrench of sorts at average users that buy CPU-intensive VST(i)s and wonder why the computer develops issues. Not all developers are forthright about these requirements, and once they get included (or combined) into a more dynamic project they can cause issues.
 
For most, "heavier loads" requires a larger ASIO buffer, so the CPU performance (how fast it will run and maintain cooling) can make a huge difference.

Of course, *context* is everything.
Some folks want to be able to run virtual-instruments like Keyscape (and other advanced synths/libraries) at super small ASIO buffer sizes... *while* working in dense projects. 
Some folks (especially in a professional environment) don't want to wait for several minutes while large projects load.
No... that's not everyone.
But these folks exist... as I talk to them on a daily basis.
 
Had a composer call me yesterday... who's sole objective is to be able to run *large* orchestral templates.
When composing, these types of users want an enormous pallet of sounds immediately available.
That means... they're all constantly running in the background.
There is no such thing as "too much machine" for this type of user.
 
Many composers run Cubase. 
If you have Cubase 8, 9, or 9.5... open up a new project at a 64-sample ASIO buffer size.
Load up several instances of the likes of Diva, Omnisphere-2, Keyscape, and numerous advanced Kontakt-5 libraries.
Press F12 to bring up the Cubase Performance Meter.
Record some MIDI parts for each of those instruments... and watch the Realtime Peaks on the Performance Meter.
It takes a fast well-configured machine (no matter the source) to effectively work.
Yes, you can turn on ASIO Guard... or increase the ASIO buffer size.  Those are performance compromises.
Some folks don't want to make those compromises.
In the (extreme) case of those composers running huge orchestral templates, running at a 64-sample ASIO buffer size is often off-the-table... as it's just not possible (not even with the fastest machine/s).
 
 

^ Right.. so state your use cases before you make blanket statements I suggest. One size does not fit all. Not all off shelf PC's are the same either.