Question What is an ideal desired gaming frame rate, and game video quality? What CPU and GPU would achieve that has the lowest price?

[davidl41]

Trying to figure out what is a good goal for gaming FPS and video quality. Are you aiming for 100+ FPS with low and mid quality graphics settings in gaming? Or, mid and high setting with 80fps?

Would a GPU and CPU combo achieve 100+ FPS on a mix of low and medium settings and cost no more than $500 for graphics card, and no more than $200 for a CPU? If not, which specific combo would you recommend that is under that budget?

 

[CountMike]

Trying to figure out what is a good goal for gaming FPS and video quality. Are you aiming for 100+ FPS with low and mid quality graphics settings in gaming? Or, mid and high setting with 80fps?

Would a GPU and CPU combo achieve 100+ FPS on a mix of low and medium settings and cost no more than $500 for graphics card, and no more than $200 for a CPU? If not, which specific combo would you recommend that is under that budget?

"Gaming" is too wide term to answer a question like that. With some games (mainly action and shooters). FPS is more important than graphics quality and details, you simply have no time to admire graphics quality and details. for role playing you want as much realism as possible. Online gaming presents different conditions.
Also have to match monitor resolution and frequency.

 

[alceryes]

Trying to figure out what is a good goal for gaming FPS and video quality. Are you aiming for 100+ FPS with low and mid quality graphics settings in gaming? Or, mid and high setting with 80fps?

Would a GPU and CPU combo achieve 100+ FPS on a mix of low and medium settings and cost no more than $500 for graphics card, and no more than $200 for a CPU? If not, which specific combo would you recommend that is under that budget?

The best BF/CM deal may get you a CPU and GPU for around $500 that will run some games at 100+FPS, but your question is way too vague.
First let's start with the parts you have. We need to know what motherboard and monitor you plan to use. Also, a minimum of an SSD drive is needed for most games to not stutter during loading of assets.

 

[punkncat]

Reading between the lines a bit here seems to indicate that you could have a budget around $7-800. As asked above it would be handy to know if you have a monitor and other peripherals.

Looking back at AM4, or 12th gen Intel would be fairly easy to find a pretty decent build with that budget. The issue here is going to be that it is instantly obsolete. There is no upgrade path out of AM4, and 13/14th gen Intel have that power/BIOS issue which leave a lot of folks (including me) reluctant to try them.

You might be able to squeeze an AM5 Ryzen 5 build out of that budget with some judicious choices and think that would be the approach I would take first.

As far as value for money goes, in relation to graphics cards, I would consider looking at RX 6xxx or 7xxx models.

Are you near a MicroCenter? They have some attractive bundles that might work well for you.

 

[davidl41]

The best BF/CM deal may get you a CPU and GPU for around $500 that will run some games at 100+FPS, but your question is way too vague.
First let's start with the parts you have. We need to know what motherboard and monitor you plan to use. Also, a minimum of an SSD drive is needed for most games to not stutter during loading of assets.

I have a 3060, a 3600 Ryzen, 16gb ram, and an Asrock b450 Steel Legend board. I remember hearing a while ago that CPU isn't so important, but, I think that is old news, because, my 3060 is bottlenecking at 30 to 50% during gaming, and CPU is at 70 to 85%. The frame rate on low settings in the game 'The Finals' is at around 85fps average, but, I think the 3600 Ryzen is bottle necking the frames by half.

Is 5 years a feasible upgrade interval to keep below $500 for CPU and GPU if I want 100+ FPS(with it getting a bit under 100 FPS in new games during year 4 and 5) for low setting on 1440p?

 

[Math Geek]

every game is different. some games tax the cpu more while others tax the gpu. still others hit both hard. there is no perfect balance as every situation is different. you're chasing a unicorn thinking one cpu/gpu combo will produce the same result in every game at similar settings.

in general (nowhere near a rule here), the cpu affects fps more while the gpu deals with resolution/eye candy. higher resolutions tax the gpu way more than the cpu so you can get similar results with pretty basic cpu's at 4k as you would with a high end cpu. but again every game is different in how it uses resources.

if you have a main couple games you play, then look at benchmarks for those specifically. this will tell you what is most important for those titles.

for an all around system i'd not bother with a platform upgrade. drop in a 5700x3d or 5800x3d and keep your current mobo. then get the best gpu you can afford. then adjust game settings on a per game basis. that's the best you can do right now.

worrying about 5 years from now is also not going to get you anywhere. games are going to do whatever they are going to do and you'll adjust as it happens. no one can guess what the future holds. get the best you can now and worry about 5 years from now in 5 years.

 

[davidl41]

Reading between the lines a bit here seems to indicate that you could have a budget around $7-800. As asked above it would be handy to know if you have a monitor and other peripherals.

Looking back at AM4, or 12th gen Intel would be fairly easy to find a pretty decent build with that budget. The issue here is going to be that it is instantly obsolete. There is no upgrade path out of AM4, and 13/14th gen Intel have that power/BIOS issue which leave a lot of folks (including me) reluctant to try them.

You might be able to squeeze an AM5 Ryzen 5 build out of that budget with some judicious choices and think that would be the approach I would take first.

As far as value for money goes, in relation to graphics cards, I would consider looking at RX 6xxx or 7xxx models.

Are you near a MicroCenter? They have some attractive bundles that might work well for you.

I got my numbers confused. I was mistakenly thinking in Canadian dollars. $500 US dollars is the total, which is $700 Canadian dollars.

I have a 3060 and a Ryzen 3600. The 3600 is bottle necking the 3060 to 30% usage. The 3060 is getting outdated I think, and the 3600 is already outdated.

If I was to upgrade now, I should already have a 6000 or 7000 series Ryzen in my PC, so, I should upgrade at least two generations which is a 9000 series Ryzen CPU when it reaches under $200 (future price), and I should have a 7000 series Ryzen GPU as an upgrade to the 3060 GPU.

The general rule of thumb for upgrades is buying mid tier parts(at the time of purchase) that are at least 2 generations ahead of your current PC's part? Or, is it fine to stretch it to 3 generations? Provided I want to sustain 100+ FPS at low settings on 1440p.

 

[davidl41]

every game is different. some games tax the cpu more while others tax the gpu. still others hit both hard. there is no perfect balance as every situation is different. you're chasing a unicorn thinking one cpu/gpu combo will produce the same result in every game at similar settings.

in general (nowhere near a rule here), the cpu affects fps more while the gpu deals with resolution/eye candy. higher resolutions tax the gpu way more than the cpu so you can get similar results with pretty basic cpu's at 4k as you would with a high end cpu. but again every game is different in how it uses resources.

if you have a main couple games you play, then look at benchmarks for those specifically. this will tell you what is most important for those titles.

for an all around system i'd not bother with a platform upgrade. drop in a 5700x3d or 5800x3d and keep your current mobo. then get the best gpu you can afford. then adjust game settings on a per game basis. that's the best you can do right now.

worrying about 5 years from now is also not going to get you anywhere. games are going to do whatever they are going to do and you'll adjust as it happens. no one can guess what the future holds. get the best you can now and worry about 5 years from now in 5 years.

I think the move is to upgrade every 4 years. And, just accept that the last 2 years of that 4 years will see lower frame rate on new games. However, I do want to get a GPU and CPU combo that will get 2 great years, and 2 good years. I think, since the upgrade comes every 4 to 5 years, I should buy something nicer, so, it's likely to fulfil that. Something like the 9000 Ryzen series CPU, and a mid end 7000 series AMD GPU, but, when the prices take a huge nose dive.

Is that what some people do? Or, is it even better to just go with top of the line 7000 series AMD CPU, and top of the line 6000 AMD GPU because the price to performance might be better?

 

[ohio_buckeye]

I’d start here I think.

https://www.amazon.com/XFX-Speedste...xt&qid=1732412683&sprefix=6800,aps,184&sr=8-1

You could then either go to top of the line for am4, or if you’ve got a Microcenter nearby, they have some good deals. For example you can get a ryzen 7600, board and 16gb of ram for 300 I think. I believe it’s 400 for a 7700x bundle. If memory serves they also have a bundle with an i5 12600kf, board, 16gb ddr 4 for 259, 299 for the 12700k.

 

[Math Geek]

i upgrade when my system stops doing what i need it to do. and then i upgrade the piece i need to be better. more often than not, the gpu gets upgraded a couple times before i need a new cpu. they are plenty strong these days. my last cpu upgrade was simply due to needing more cores/threads. so i went from a 3600x to a 5900x. i expect to keep using it for at least a few more years.

don't see any need for AM5 yet so might even skip it to AM6 before i need a new cpu. the 3600x was an upgrade from an i5-4690k if that tells you how i can keep something around if it does the job.

since you can cheaply drop in a still solid performing 5700x3d, i'd go there and then get whatever gpu you can now. just grab the best you can afford. or save some more and get even better gpu in 6 months or whenever. then whenever it stops being good enough for your use case, then upgrade. artificially setting an expiration date is just an excuse to spend money. don't get me wrong i buy stuff i don't need more often than i care to admit, but i never try to schedule when i should upgrade. if that makes sense.

 

[JohnBonhamsGhost]

what is a good goal for gaming FPS and video quality...

Are you aiming for 100+ FPS with low and mid quality graphics settings in gaming? Or, mid and high setting with 80fps?

i don't think you really understand the category of interest that you're asking about.

the "ideal" goal is the highest possible settings with the highest possible frame rate.
every individual may have a different response to what is the minimum for themselves.

for modern AAA games;
my personal preference would be a static 120fps @ 3440x1440p with graphics detail settings maxed out, minus blur effects and camera/photo effects.
maybe a bit less @ 3840x2160p.

if gaming is a big deal for you,
the hardware you should be aiming for would be the best that you can afford.

 

[ohio_buckeye]

If the board would update to accept a 5700x3d, you could get that, the 6800xt I linked above and a 32gb ddr4 ram kit if desired and be about 600 but still be able to resell your old cpu and gpu and have a nice update. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Math Geek]

that 6800 for $350 got my attention. i'm trying to think which pc in my house could use a gpu upgrade. LOL

it's actually $340 at newegg

https://www.newegg.com/xfx-speedste...b-gddr6/p/N82E16814150896?Item=9SIAD2CKAG1769

 

[ohio_buckeye]

Nice. I’ve got the AsRock phantom gaming oc version that I bought last year. It’s a great gpu for that price. Pretty much nearly equal to a 7800xt.

 

[davidl41]

i don't think you really understand the category of interest that you're asking about.

the "ideal" goal is the highest possible settings with the highest possible frame rate.
every individual may have a different response to what is the minimum for themselves.

for modern AAA games;
my personal preference would be a static 120fps @ 3440x1440p with graphics detail settings maxed out, minus blur effects and camera/photo effects.
maybe a bit less @ 3840x2160p.

if gaming is a big deal for you,
the hardware you should be aiming for would be the best that you can afford.

I just got back into gaming. The last time I gamed was when I was young, and I played PS3 in high school since that was what everyone played. The only thing I am aware of in PC gaming is that people that are actually serious about gaming, Esports players, play on low settings, and want the highest FPS.

It does seem like it's far too difficult to zone into a game with all the effects, and details. Unless it is a non-first person shooter like Wukong and Cyberpunk . Respectfully, what is your counter argument as to why high settings are mandatory in every game?

 

[Math Geek]

correct, fast paced gameplay like shooters and competitive games like that, wants the highest fps they can get. they are not paying attention to the details. so low settings is the way to go.

but anything else, the goal is usually making it as pretty as possible. hence the "ultra" settings and such. 2 completely different goals for sure. as your walking through a beautiful landscape admiring how awesome the shadows look and the ripples in the pond you just walked past etc etc etc, you don't need 200 fps. 60 is more than enough to enjoy the scenery.

this is why its so hard to generalize by simply saying "gaming pc" and why we ask so many direct and specific questions. what YOU want to play and expect is all that matters for YOUR system. not what someone does/likes/expects

 

[davidl41]

correct, fast paced gameplay like shooters and competitive games like that, wants the highest fps they can get. they are not paying attention to the details. so low settings is the way to go.

but anything else, the goal is usually making it as pretty as possible. hence the "ultra" settings and such. 2 completely different goals for sure. as your walking through a beautiful landscape admiring how awesome the shadows look and the ripples in the pond you just walked past etc etc etc, you don't need 200 fps. 60 is more than enough to enjoy the scenery.

this is why its so hard to generalize by simply saying "gaming pc" and why we ask so many direct and specific questions. what YOU want to play and expect is all that matters for YOUR system. not what someone does/likes/expects

Yes. I am aware that everyone has their own gaming needs. The replier was adamant that it must be 100+ FPS and highest settings in every game. As if, it was the desired situation for every situation. For FPS shooters, it doesn't seem to be the case for everyone, since basic settings is less distracting.

I think, whatever the top series of GPU was released 2 years ago, is still good for enough 4 or so years from now and the price has dropped since it was launched 2 years, so that is the one to pick.

 

[JohnBonhamsGhost]

The replier was adamant that it must be 100+ FPS and highest settings in every game.

what is your counter argument as to why high settings are mandatory in every game?

my argument was that every person has their own idea of what is "ideal".
and if you want the best outcome then you want the best hardware you can afford.

games are made these days to offer realistic settings with advanced surfaces and lighting to make them more enjoyable visually.
in a fast paced first-person shooter for example, this shouldn't be any sort of a distraction any more than going to a shooting range and seeing other humans with hair and lights shining causing shadows on the surfaces of the world around you.

players don't turn down the settings so they can focus more on other players without any "distraction".
they turn down the settings to achieve higher frame rates so as to make the gameplay and responsiveness more fast paced.
with higher-end hardware you don't need to compromise and give up one for the other.

but, if you just want bland environments with flat textures because you're afraid of some sort of visual distraction in-game then you should be focusing on games from ~15+ years ago.

 

[punkncat]

Do yourself a favor and quit looking at "Bottleneck Calculators". Total scam designed to make people think they need new equipment. Every system has its limitations.