800$ Budget Competitive Gaming Build

[LuckyFullmetal]

Are all of these compatible? + RX 5700 XT (waiting until gpu price to go down to decide what brand)

https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/3F46VNPSF3SZ5?ref_=wl_share

[Mihryazd]

Monitors are quite subjective and vary considerably in cost so it really depends on your wants, your budget, and what you play. All monitors have some kind of trade off and so there's no perfect monitor.

Your GPU choice suggests a display with 1440p resolution. 4K is quite demanding to drive, and IMO that GPU is overkill for 1080p. So 1440p seems like the sweet spot there. Refresh rate wise, I think (at least) 144 Hz is the way to go, it's a big jump over 60 Hz.

Some other things I'd look out for:

- Ergonomics: consider how the monitor can be adjusted to fit your desk. Ideally it would have height, tilt, and swivel adjustments. This is less of a concern if you VESA mount your display, since it can make up for any adjustments that the stock stand lacks.

- FreeSync/G-Sync: variable refresh rate to prevent visual tearing

- Panel technology (TN/IPS/VA): these have different tradeoffs when it comes to contrast, viewing angles, response time, etc.

[🦜Cloud Boy🦜]

3060 Ti is pretty powerful, it's better than 2080 Super and only like 15% slower than the previous gen $1200 flagship 2080Ti. It can easily do 100 fps (or near 100fps) in most games 1440p, if not more. So there could be a CPU bottleneck with a 4c/8t CPU. 4c/ 8t CPUs are only good for 60fps these days, definitely not recommended for those who are buying New rig in 2021. Especially the upper-end rigs with 144Hz monitor. Go for i5 10400F or Ryzen 3600 at least.

[LuckyFullmetal]

the i3-10100 is really good with newer games tho

[r.linder]

Lucky님이 먼저 게시:

the i3-10100 is really good with newer games tho

Ignore the claims around all quad cores only doing 60 FPS. An i3-10100 isn't that slow, but it will struggle with higher framerate IF the game NEEDS 6+ physical cores.

A 10400F would be a better bang for the buck either way, but the i3 isn't a slouch and you don't need to feel bad about choosing if if your budget is too tight.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbC652-5zrQ The 3300X and i3-10100/F are both 4C/8T, the 10400/F is 6C/12T. Not only are they not far behind, they're still going well above 60.

Who woulda thunk it? :facepalm:

[🦜Cloud Boy🦜]

No point of building a PC in 2021 with a quad core CPU, especially in high / semi-high end rigs. There are multiple games that shows 4c/8t CPUs can't do 60 fps. Or far below 60fps.
And it will get even worse in the future games. See the below benchmarks of Assassin's Creed Odyssey with i3 10100 in Ultra Settings. The FPS often drops to below 60. You have to run the Built-in benchmarks tool to see the actual performance of the game. Running in an in-game EMPTY area can often give you 150 fps, especially when the graphics is NOT ultra (Ultra graphics make more crowd and vegetation).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIsT1-HJC9U&t=123s

And btw, I know a lot about Assassin's Creed Odyssey. It's the most played game in my Steam account. This game is meant to be played with 6 cores, and gives lot smoother experience.

Here is another example, Cyberpunk, i3 10100 with RTX 3070 GPU. Footage of the busy market area. See how the FPS constantly drops to below 40s (believe it or not).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdFvgpcjHNg

[Illusion of Progress]

Escorve님이 먼저 게시:

Lucky님이 먼저 게시:

the i3-10100 is really good with newer games tho

Ignore the claims around all quad cores only doing 60 FPS. An i3-10100 isn't that slow, but it will struggle with higher framerate IF the game NEEDS 6+ physical cores.

This. Cloud Boy has been getting smarter it seems over time, but the one thing they stick to, despite constantly being told otherwise, is the idea of core count being so absolute in dictating frame rate.

Yes, it's true that you want more cores than this in modern times for newer and/or more demanding titles to get the most out of your PC (which is why many people suggest hex cores or octo cores these days), but unless a game needs a lot of cores (and many are still surprisingly good with 4/8 CPUs), then core count will be as irrelevant factor. At that point, how FAST the cores are prevails. This is why a modern Core i3 might outperform even modern Ryzen 7 and Ryzen 9 CPUs in those cases, because if the game only needs 4 cores, the faster one will give more performance (and this is where the equally silly idea that a Core i3 is better than AMD's entire lineup comes from). This idea would be suggesting those Ryzens are only good for 60 FPS in older games, which makes no sense.

🌈Cloud Boy🌈님이 먼저 게시:

No point of building a PC in 2021 with a quad core CPU, especially in high / semi-high end rigs.

I mean, except for strict budget situations. With everything going on in the world today, and in some markets, this is sometimes what people have to go for. And there's really nothing wrong with this, either.

But for those who can afford better, yes, you're right. Most people around here will agree with you on this. You shouldn't be going for quad cores anymore.

But the idea you claim time and again that "quad cores can't get over 60 FPS in new games" isn't so clear cut. Even in games that can utilize more cores than that, they don't usually CONSTANTLY do so, meaning even in games quad cores struggle in, it's not like they're constantly pegged below 60 FPS. For those where this might apply, I can't imagine a CPU with two or more cores magically getting double the performance, meaning they are likely struggling too as it's just a heavy game on anything, because games typically don't scale that linearly with parallelization.

[🦜Cloud Boy🦜]

Someone in this thread told the OP to ignore those claims that says quad core CPUs only do 60 fps. I showed the OP (with proofs) that those claims are indeed TRUE.
And, Quad cores CPU's can't do 60 fps, it's NOT a claim. It's a FACT.

[r.linder]

🌈Cloud Boy🌈님이 먼저 게시:

Someone in this thread told the OP to ignore those claims that says quad core CPUs only do 60 fps. I showed the OP (with proofs) that those claims are indeed TRUE.
And, Quad cores CPU's can't do 60 fps, it's NOT a claim. It's a FACT.

There's literal thousands of videos that show they can. You literally picked 2 poorly optimized titles, 1 that requires 6 and one that needs a behemoth of a GPU.
AC:O is still the only game that's really bad for quads and nobody really gives a crap about Cyberpunk anymore because CDPR fails to deliver on every single promise.
Even my system with a 3900X and 2080 Ti struggles to maintain over 80-90 at 1080p in most areas of NC and in the worst areas it drops below 60. A 10400F won't save him in that game because the needs for that game are well above its time.

One day you'll realise that the vast majority of gamers are still using ~4 core CPUs. Not many people have 6+ cores and not many people can afford to upgrade, and silicon shortages have raised more than just GPU prices, and OP is waiting for GPU prices to drop before he even bothers so he can stick to his budget.
So while he should ideally opt for an i5-10400F or R5 3600, if it interferes with his budget too much then it's a problem. His goal is to get a 3060 Ti for MSRP or less, not 800$, and it's a 75+ dollar difference for the CPU.

[r.linder]

AMD: https://pcpartpicker.com/user/hawkshawz/saved/dLqfyc

Roughly 40$ difference between them when opting for the i5-10400F and R5 1600-AF (aka 1600 12nm, basically a 2600 for less). The Intel build (10400F, 2666 MHz RAM, B460 board) costs less if you opt for the 3600 instead, but the 1600-AF is fine.

There are cheaper B450 boards but I picked out the best value B450 in terms of price and performance, since the highest performing B450 motherboards only go up to around 125 amps which is only good enough for AMD's 8 core 105W CPUs at stock configuration, and I didn't want to limit CPU upgrade potential by opting for a worse B450. (Zen+ and earlier CPUs are not supported on AMD's B550 chipset so that isn't an option, one would have to pay 60$+ more for a 3600 in order to be compatible and not lose cores)

[LuckyFullmetal]

i'm gonna get a i5-10600K with a 3060 Ti