How well could I run modern games on this PC? https://pcpar

>>377437452
You do not need an SSD ,save some money on the case, just use a default motherboard(Gaming mobos are a meme), and get some cheap ryzen (six core ones should be more than enough) instead of that old i5.

Games should run at 60fps at mid then.

You don't need to spend too much money for gaming on PC.(Also don't forget to pirate windows instead of buying it)

It'll be fine until that cheap PSU explodes and takes everything with it.

That CPU could be a bit better. No personal experience with the ryzens. But I picked up an i5 6600k for not much more money than that and it's fucking solid.

>>377438780
Ryzens take a fat shit all over the i5, and by that I mean it really boils down to personal preference.

That CPU is absolute shit and will bottleneck your GPU hard.
The SSD is unnecessary if you're on a budget.
That PSU will probably explode and kill your entire PC at some point.

>>377439137
no

File: 1490415052597.jpg (656KB, 711x1080px) Image search: [Google]

656KB, 711x1080px

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/JCM43F

How about now?

>>377439508
What's your deal with 7-year old CPUs? you can get more recent, better ones for less

>>377439764
I'm using what's on that site. What do you recommend?

>>377439764
They're more reliable if they're older. I read that newer ones have a killswitch in them which is essentially planned obsolescence.

>>377439907
http://www.logicalincrements.com/
An i5 7600k would be good and wouldn't bottleneck.
Don't fall for the ryzen meme, they have worse single core performance which is what matters for games.

>>377437452
>he doesn't know how to use canitrunit
>picture title has "doggo" in it

Well hello there, underage reddit. Do you also need me to google something for you

>>377440459
(You)

>>377437452
1080p 60 fps maxed out on optimized modern titles.
1440p 60 fps on older games. If you go for a midrange card I'd recommend AMD though, they age better.

>>377438262
Don't listen to this faggot, he's talking out of his ass.

>>377439907
that site uses modern CPUs too.
lemme give it a crack, OP. You on a budget? How much you tryin to spend?

Needs some serious de-memeing. Do not go for a shit CPU in this age of unoptimized CPU hog games.

Would a Ryzen 5 1600 and RX 470 4Gb be enough to run newer games, provided all of my other parts are decent and compatible?

>inb4 "google it, faggot"

>>377437452
>>377439508
>>377439907
>>377441436

Here you go, OP. I built an infinitely better modern Intel build thats also 200 bucks left
https://pcpartpicker.com/list/xLYmpb
I figure someone could find something wrong with this list, but it looks pretty solid to me tbqh.

I'll do a Ryzen one too

>>377442010
Dose that cpu come with a stock cooler, and if it does is it worth buying a separate one if I don't plan on OCing?

>>377442010
At the very least, OP should throw his build out and work off this one
>>377442420
They come with a stock cooler and they're fine if you're not OC'ing. But the CPU is unlocked, it's literally meant for overclocking. So I suggest you use that cooler anyway because even if you don't OC it right away, you might want to some day to squeeze some extra performance out of it.

>>377442420
I don't think it does, the site prompted me to add a CPU cooler. It might though, I could be wrong.

Heres a Ryzen build btw, it has an AMD Ryzen 5 1600 and an RX 580


https://pcpartpicker.com/list/VJGbzMI
also here's the Intel one, I swapped out the 580 for the 1060 you had in the OP.

fanboy memes aside, these builds are priced and perform pretty similarly to each other.

>>377442758
link's giving me a 404

>>377442758>>377442876


whoops, fucked up those links

AMD build

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/VJGbzM


Intel/Nvidia build

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/L8styf

>>377437452
Blease take your tech questions to /g/. Dont listen to these shanghai shit heinies

>>377437452
NEVER cheap out on the psu nigga that shit will always fuck you in the end
Also just get a 212 plus instead of that shit stock tier fan it's literally the same price

>>377442894
These are really pissing me off because I have a GTX 970 and a locked i5-4570 build for $1200. That was a few years ago, but damn. I would kill to have that CPU and it hurts that I paid more.

>>377442894
Many thanks, anon.

>>377441383
No he isn't, I have a similar build and its runs every game I've thrown at it well enough

>>377443078
Not him but if you're thinking about upgrading the Intel/Nvidia build, a GTX 1070 would make it even better and you'd be set for a while. But it's pretty good as is.

>>377442970

this is not necessarily true

I got a cheap off brand psu 8 years ago
still works

>>377443231
Was planning on going with the AMD build, but I'll keep that in mind.

>>377443409
Well, can upgrade that GPU too, I'm just not as familiar AMD.

>>377443531
Right, I'd assume so.

>>377443078
no worries anon, just a heads up though, the Intel board I chose don't OC, and I chose a a k series CPU which does.

Heres the Intel build with a OC capable board

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/7tbTxY

Heres the Intel board with the non K CPU

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/TvcGYr

The OC capable build it like 70 bucks more, but you'll have some longevity with your CPU down the road.

>>377442894
This is good, but if you are on a budget I would ditch the SSD and get 1070 instead of 1060, you should really try to spend as much as you can on the GPU.

>>377444015
I don't think he's on too tight of a budget tbqh. He could easily squeeze in both an SSD and a 1070 and still pay less than what his original build was.

>>377437452
Don't but an i5 in 2017, they hit 90-100% usage in some modern games now

>>377444382
Poorly optimized ones, but your point still stands. My i5 hits 100% in 64 player Battlefield 1, but is fine for other games. Except Planet Coaster, but there doesn't even exist a CPU that can play that properly after a certain amount of guests.

>>377439907
>What do you recommend?
Read the thread.
This Anon >>377438262 already said a Ryzen CPU.
The Ryzen 5 1600 is the CPU you want.

>>377440241
>http://www.logicalincrements.com/
Terribly shitty site.

>they have worse single core performance
A Ryzen can still run any game better than my fucking i5 4690 and I'm not bottlenecking anything. Any old ass 1C-game will run on a Ryzen just as well as on an i5.


If you're still running Win7 (like me), you may want to look into possible issues with the newest CPUs and that OS.

>>377438262

>gaming mobos are a meme
>overclocking 0.5 ghz without touching the V-Core on my gaming mobo

WEW LAD

>>377444601
Pretty much every modern game has my 2500k 4.6 at 90-100 usage. Deus ex, rottr, bf1, gta 5, Tw Warhammer, quantum break, witcher 3 novigrad.

Thats why I wouldn't recommend something only 20% more powerful especially when we're moving to highly threaded games now, even Intel is going 6 core i5s with coffee lake.

Would be even worse gpu bottleneck with future gpus

>>377438497
This, that psu is a death sentence.

>The only time you recognize something from real life in a picture
Maybe I should get out more.