Can this build run most games 1080p 30-60fps

[6854]

This is my first time building. I'm ordering it this weekend so if you want to suggest any parts I should swap out please do so. I really want to play Arma 3 at 30-60 for on high ultra settings and DCS world.
SPECS:
CPU: I5 4690k
GPU: msi Gtx 960 4gb
MOBO: z97 PC mate
COOLER: cooler master 212 evo
POWER SUPPLY: fsp raider edition 550w 80 plus silver
MONITER: benQ rl2455hm 1ms 24" full HD
RAM: corsair 8gb ddr3 low profile c9 1600mhz
CASE: NZXT 340 mid tower

 

[ak47jar3d]

Yes, you build can run pretty much any game at 1080p in playable frame rates.

 

[6854]

Yes, you build can run pretty much any game at 1080p in playable frame rates.

Any parts you would swap out?

 

[geofelt]

Your build will work as is.

Some thoughts:
Paying more for 4gb vram is likely not worth it.
VRAM has become a marketing issue.
My understanding is that vram is more of a performance issue than a functional issue.
A game needs to have most of the data in vram that it uses most of the time.
Somewhat like real ram.
If a game needs something not in vram, it needs to get it across the pcie boundary
hopefully from real ram and hopefully not from a hard drive.
It is not informative to know to what level the available vram is filled.
Possibly much of what is there is not needed.
What is not known is the rate of vram exchange.
Vram is managed by the Graphics card driver, so there may be differences in effectiveness between amd and nvidia cards.
Here is an older performance test comparing 2gb with 4gb vram.
http://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Video-Card-Performance-2GB-vs-4GB-Memory-154/
Spoiler... not a significant difference.

Ram is fine, but buy a 2 stick kit of 2 x 4gb so you can run in dual channel mode.

 

[maddogfargo]

This build is not quite balanced. You have a powerful CPU/Motherboard and a decent cooler for overclocking it. But you're pairing it with a midrange GPU. I would suggest is getting a GTX 970 instead if you can manage it. Much better balance between CPU and GPU power.

 

[Wisecracker]

AMD FX-6350
Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3P
8GB (2x4GB) DDR3 1866
Combo Deal: $237

Put the extra cash toward your video card --- on Ultra at 1080p, you're going to need it.

To your advantage, there seems to be a small price war brewing between the GTX 970 and the Radeon R9 390. The 390 after rebate is hitting below $300

 

[6854]

This build is not quite balanced. You have a powerful CPU/Motherboard and a decent cooler for overclocking it. But you're pairing it with a midrange GPU. I would suggest is getting a GTX 970 instead if you can manage it. Much better balance between CPU and GPU power.

What about if I buy the 970 a year later? I've used all my budget so I can't afford the 970 at the moment.

 

[6854]

Your build will work as is.

Some thoughts:
Paying more for 4gb vram is likely not worth it.
VRAM has become a marketing issue.
My understanding is that vram is more of a performance issue than a functional issue.
A game needs to have most of the data in vram that it uses most of the time.
Somewhat like real ram.
If a game needs something not in vram, it needs to get it across the pcie boundary
hopefully from real ram and hopefully not from a hard drive.
It is not informative to know to what level the available vram is filled.
Possibly much of what is there is not needed.
What is not known is the rate of vram exchange.
Vram is managed by the Graphics card driver, so there may be differences in effectiveness between amd and nvidia cards.
Here is an older performance test comparing 2gb with 4gb vram.
http://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Video-Card-Performance-2GB-vs-4GB-Memory-154/
Spoiler... not a significant difference.

Ram is fine, but buy a 2 stick kit of 2 x 4gb so you can run in dual channel mode.

Yea it is a 2 by 4gb. With the 4 gb of vram it is only $20 more then the 2gb card so I thought might as well get that.

 

[6854]

AMD FX-6350
Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3P
8GB (2x4GB) DDR3 1866
Combo Deal: $237

Put the extra cash toward your video card --- on Ultra at 1080p, you're going to need it.

To your advantage, there seems to be a small price war brewing between the GTX 970 and the Radeon R9 390. The 390 after rebate is hitting below $300

The i5 4690k is deffaintly better then the fx 6350 though. I might by a 970 a year later. What would you recommend between 970 and r9 390?

 

[ak47jar3d]

At 1080p, gtx 970 will outperform r9 390. At 1440p, the 390 performs better. The gtx 970 will waste significantly less power and the 390 has more vram.

 

[geofelt]

At $20 difference, 4gb on a GTX960 is ok.
As others have pointed out, the 4690K is about as good as it gets for gaming today,(I5-6600K and Z170 motherboard) is slightly better and more future resistant) and can easily run dual GTX970ti cards if you wish.

A balanced gamer will budget 2x the cost of the cpu for the graphics card. I think if budget permits, a GTX970 would be appropriate for 1080P gaming.
As to R9-390, the performance category is similar, but R9 is getting old, and I would opt for a more modern card.

 

[Wisecracker]

The i5 4690k is deffaintly better then the fx 6350 though. I might by a 970 a year later. What would you recommend between 970 and r9 390?

At 4.5GHz the FX-6350 will work just dandy (essentially to the level of the Intel Core), and will be silly-easy with the GA-970A-UD3P and a CM 212.

I suspect the R9 390 will be even faster.