!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
If you can afford option 2 go with option 2. That CPU especially is so much better, on top of the video card improvement.
Wilds specifically is poorly engineered, just look at the Steam reviews. If that's the main game he wants to play, every little bit helps make it run slightly less awfully, but also other demanding games will benefit as well
As others have said #1 will do the job, but their expectations should be tempered. Even people with extraordinary computers struggle with performance issues with that game specifically. The engine that game was designed on was not made for the type of game they made and it has been struggling since day 1.
I love the game, put many many hours into it, but even with a brand new rebuild that is closer to option #2 but a better processor, slightly worse graphics card, and more memory, my computer struggles a bit with it and I get noticeable performance drops.
Damn, that’s good to know, thank you.
Option 2.
Buying less expensive things can be more expensive in the long run. With option 1 you’re already behind the curve and will be needing upgrades sooner than option 2.
I would agree but at least from those links, option 2 is almost 2x the price. Sadly wilds will run like shit no matter the machine you got, option 1 would be better value even in the long run (and I hate Intel)
I believe the price difference is made up by the current generation CPU and GPU, plus the fact AMD Is much more upgrade friendly with CPUs when they time comes. Also, X3D whips ass in games. I’m still rocking a 5800X3D and don’t feel behind the times whatsoever with my gaming rig.
I do not believe option 1 to be the value proposition for gaming, despite the significantly lower price.
Upgrade friendly doesnt really make sense, the CPUs are either AM4 or AM5 right now. If you want to "future proof" in any way you'd just want to make sure you get an AM5 motherboard+CPU combo. AM4 is find but when upgrade time comes youll likely need to replace the motherboard and/or the CPU.
7800X3D is AM5 which is AMDs current socket. Of the choices presented, this is the most likely to be supported in the future, which is why I suggested this option.
I never suggested an AM4 setup, nor is it an option presented. I’m merely sharing an anecdote that my current 5800X3D is still very relevant for gaming, so I believe a 7800X3D will fare similarly.
it's a really controversial take but if you're building a PC spend a ton of the money on the PCB so you have more options for upgrading in the future
Recommend 1
Yeah option 1 should be fine and should be fine for almost every game until he gets older, gets a job, and buys a new rig himself or does upgrades.
Thank you!
I'd suggest a little of both. A 7600x is $150. A 5600ti 16gb is $429. 1tb SSD is fine.
This will cost the same as option 1. It will last years and then you'll be able to upgrade the CPU, GPU and SSD.
There's no Ultra 7 as good as the best AMD for gaming right now. So in 5 years you'll definitely be able to pick up a better AMD for cheap but there won't be an equivalent cheap Intel without replacing the Motherboard.
First one is more than good enough to play this game, not sure why they mark the cpu as 1.8ghz but it can actually do 5.3.
That said, the second one will last a bit longer, maybe.
Neither of the PCs you linked come with a monitor. These questions are hard to answer without knowing what resolution you want to run the game at. Running it at 1080p is very different from 1440p and 4k.
Make sure you check out their PowerSpec line, its Microcenters own custom builds and they tend to go above and beyond supporting them with any issues you might have. MSI and ASUS can be hard to deal with their customer service.
Ive also seen Asus stuff returned at a higher rate than other brands so that could be a sign of build quality.
I currently work at Microcenter so if you have any questions feel free to ask.
Got any inside tips for shopping there? Like good ways to save some money?
Usually clearance/refurbished stuff with protection on it is cheaper than new without for the same items.
Inland is microcenters own brand so that stuff is cheaper and supported directly.
We get refurbished graphics cards daily, and those are fantastic prices IMO.
Youd likely want to start checking the website daily, I'd say late evening or early morning.
Edit: just to add since this was about prebuilt PCs the only way to save money there is by only buying what you need now. If you dont care about "future proofing" you suddenly are looking at much cheaper computers.
Option 1 will work for a while. The only thing you will need for the near-ish future is larger storage. Games nowadays take up so much space and 1 TB won't last long. Would recommend buying a 2-3TB HDD while you're at Microcenter. They may even be able to install it for you
you would not want a hard disk drive as reading data off of that will vastly slow the system performance.
A solid state drive would be recommended. . Preferably an SSD that has caching.
Most modern games will barely run when installed on a HDD as well. Especially open world games
2TB HDDs, what is this the 2010s?
Get a 1TB SSD for OS/games and 10TB HDD for media/cold storage. Neither are particularly pricey these days.
I guess 2 TB is also relatively small. However, considering that OP only mentioned one specific game their child wanted to play, I think it's not an unreasonable amount of storage.
If their kid also wants to do things like download/edit movies, graphic arts, or other storage heavy activities then of course they could go for a larger storage. It all depends on their needs and budget.
2TB is SSD range now, is my point. Buying an HDD that small is kinda pointless. It’s massively outclassed in both speed and capacity by modern drives. It will be replaced quickly and end up being more expensive in the long run for more effort and a subpar experience.
Yeah I replied to another comment saying I'm surprised how cheap lower capacity SSDs have become. It was only like $100 more than a comparable HDD.
Got it, thanks!
Please, don't buy an extra HDD, buy an SSD. The difference is that an HDD has a physical spinning disc inside of it (picture yourself a CD) while an SSD doesn't rely on physical moving components like that, which makes them literally 10 or more times faster. If you have an old computer that is slow it's very likely that it has an HDD and swapping it out for an SSD would make it feel like new. Do not fall into the "HDDs are a bit cheaper" trap, it's not worth it especially with those two machines
Very helpful, thank you!
It's been a long time since I've upgraded the storage on my PC so I am surprised at how much cheaper SSDs have gotten. The fact that a 4TB WD Black SSD is only $100 more than the HDD one is pretty crazy to me. With that in mind, if OP is willing to spend more money, than the SSD is definitely the way to go.
One thing to note, however, is that Option 1 only has expansions for 3.5" storage (i.e. HDDs). So if OP does decide to go with Option 1, they'll have to take the 1TB SSD it comes with and replace it with whatever they buy, rather than adding additional storage. Option 2, however, only has m.2 expandable storage so using only SSDs for that computer would be a lot easier.
Option 1 is fine. It can run the game at 1080p
I'd argue option 2 is the better choice overall. It's going to hold up to new games better in the long run
Thank you! I can definitely view it as an investment for future gaming.
Either option should be able to run the game, I'm just referencing what you've got picked out versus the listed minimum specs on Steam. That being said, option 2 is a significant upgrade, hence the cost. Without knowing more about what your son's expectations are with respect to resolution and frame rate it's hard to speculate about what will "work". Hope that helps!
It does help, thank you!
either one meets or exceeds the requirements you posted for the game.
note that if you're able to shop in person at microcenter, many more options are available, including their own brand of prebuilts (powerspec) and custom-builds assembled in-store.
I am totally able to shop in person, they are about a 45-min drive from me. Thank you!
If you don’t want to have to buy a gaming rig;
https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/geforce-now-thursday-monster-hunter-wilds/
Basically you stream your games from a rig.
Yeah but a while back they capped your monthly hours for the paid tiers to 100 (i think you pay to keep streaming after). I was easily averaging 3 hours a day as a kid, especially with weekends and summer vacations.
What about Sunshine/Moonlight instead? Assuming they have a good PC themselves.
I am judging a book by it's cover here, but they said they're not tech savvy, and asked the question in the post, so my assumption is that they themselves do not own one.
Yeah it’s probably enshittified since I last used it.
I could not spring for a gaming rig but wanted to play BG3.
I can see very little difference between the two, then again my PC refresh period is roughly eight years.
Both will run Monster Hunter Wilds with possibly 15% difference in framerate, but very manageable whichever you choose. I've listed below some ideal components to look for in a PC - if you can find a desktop with most of them your son will be set for a decade:
CPU:
GPU:
RAM:
SSD:
PSU (Power Supply):
Preference: Performance over RGB lighting aha
Thank you for taking the time to write this out! Super helpful.