SSJGodemis

I'd go 1440p 144Hz monitor for him to upgrade into.  He won't always get 144Hz on High but he *should* get over 60Hz in everything.

A bottleneck is not a hard and fast thing in most scenarios. For example I have a buddy using a Ryzen 1600 and 2080 Ti. Some games he gets a large bottleneck and in others you cant tell the difference because the FPS are so high already. 
 
In this case though, an A4-6300 is old and a pretty low end CPU. An RX 560 would not be a terrible pairing for it though.  

Are you like 5? 

Are you like 5? 

Are you like 5? 

The 3900x is a better buy because while it does lose in gaming technically, it is a better all around performer. For your average gamer it is a complete waste of money though. The 3700x performs the same in gaming and is the best high end gaming CPU in terms of price to performance. 

It is very unlikely that PC gamers will give up. I have some friends who moved from PC to Console once they had a family and had much less time to game. A powerful high end PC was not worth the investment and a console was just easier.  However, with that said, I have plenty of friends who play PC still and just a build something more mid tier. 

It is very unlikely that PC gamers will give up. I have some friends who moved from PC to Console once they had a family and had much less time to game. A powerful high end PC was not worth the investment and a console was just easier.  However, with that said, I have plenty of friends who play PC still and just a build something more mid tier. 

Um... People stopped using Prime95 and other powerbug programmes because they are too taxing. To the point they could be harmfull. If your OC survives Prime95 its damn stable. But some software or games might dislike the OC due to AVX or some other reason. Hence people saying you should test using the workload you work in to be safe. 
 
Blender is often used instead. 
 
The only point where the 1200 is better id AC oddessey due tl a cacheissue with the 2200G.
 

It definitely is not the normal trend haha.   I told him if he stays at 60fps, then almost all modern CPUs can handle it with relativity no issue. Thats when he pumped more money into the GPU. Initially it was going to be a Ryzen 2700x and GTX 1660 Ti build. Which is kind of another mismatched pair to some extend. Though, I still think for $80 dollars more, getting a Ryzen 2600, would have been more future proof! 

ah, so you're running on personal experience and not actual facts?
ah, that's probably where you're wrong. some people are lucky, some aren't
that's as simple as silicon lottery gets
 
and btw OP: darn good choice you made

welcome to the land where CPU bottlenecking is mentioned way to much as it is honestly fearmongering within the community. 
 
8 lanes is enough for even the biggest GPU avavible. aka the Titan V where it starts to affect the performance a tiny bit. 
 
2400G is not a CPU someone should buy. at the budget it occupies a 2200G is better and the 2600 is a 20$ bill above it. 

In terms of price to performance, which is the metric most important to most PC builders out there, it's hard to beat an R5 2600 (even a 1600 on sale) and an RX 570 or 580. I'm not an AMD fanboy by any means (look at my signature), but I'll readily acknowledge that for the typical gamer, an R5 2600 is a way, way better buy than the comparable ninth-gen i5 and i7 chips.

Yeah, hes always been like this. He had an FX-6350 and AMD 7970 for 1080p 60fps which he purchased in 2012. Then bought the 2560x1080 UW last year. His build gave him 7 years until his 7970 died. So he wanted to go overkill again and have something last him long. 
 
Meanwhile here I am upgrading my GPU every 2 years lol. 

I mean your frame rate is correct for 4k gaming.  You should get 60fps with occasional drops to 50's which don't affect performance that much.

Basically AMD will finally release a competitor to the GTX 1080 Ti, at the same price point, whose performance is around since 2016 with the TITAN X Pascal.
 
All nVidia had to do was finally allow FreeSync support to make AMD's 7nm product line feel rather meh...

I almost didn't want to post here since it seems like I'm a generation older than everyone but oh well...
 
"back in my day" we called them 'graphics adapters', then 'video cards' or 'graphics cards' before referring to the whole card as only the processing unit component.
 
Anywho, my first 'graphics adapter' was probably the S3 VESA VLB 16-bit ISA card. We had something in the previous 486 PC but I don't remember what it was, and I do remember this S3 card in an early 90's Dell desktop that Novell let my dad bring home when he worked there through the 90s. It had the normal 16bit ISA connector on one end but on farther down it had what looked like PCI fingers too (this thing was LONG even by todays standards). It had a Pentium 133, a 1gb HDD, and we had a giant 21" CRT that looked unreal lol
 
If we're talking what was our own (like not a family PC type thing), the first PC I built for myself with my own money was around 1998 or 99, Initially it was a Celeron 566 Socket 370 on a socket 370 to Slot 1 adapter card. I spent most of my summer janitor job savings on the graphics card, a Hercules 3D Prophet DDR-DVI (I believe this was the first graphics card on the market either with DDR or DVI, or maybe just the first with both). It was a Geforce 256 with 32mb of DDR VRAM.

Wow very nice. 7800 GT was king back then. 
 

for fear i think i had gt 7800 or whatever it was, cause i remember upgrading to the 8800 gt for lost planet, first gpu though was geforce 2 or 3 for diablo 2.

Hercules VooDoo Banshee 2D/3D card.back in 1997.

The reference design looks good. 
 
https://www.anandtech.com/show/13832/amd-radeon-vii-high-end-7nm-february-7th-for-699 
 
It looks like it will compete with the RTX 2080/1080 Ti for the same MSRP. This is not great. For the same price you can get RTX/DLSS through Nvidia. This is pretty disappointing.  If it competes with the RTX 2080 Ti which is pretty unlikely, then this would be a fantastic deal if you did not care about RTX and DLSS. 
 
 ng. 

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant
CPU: AMD - Ryzen 5 2600 3.4 GHz 6-Core Processor  ($159.99 @ Amazon) 
CPU Cooler: Scythe - SCNJ-4000 84.64 CFM CPU Cooler  ($39.95 @ Amazon) 
Motherboard: ASRock - Fatal1ty B450 GAMING K4 ATX AM4 Motherboard  ($97.97 @ Newegg) 
Memory: G.Skill - Aegis 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3000 Memory  ($104.99 @ Newegg Business) 
Storage: Crucial - MX500 500 GB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive  ($64.99 @ Amazon) 
Storage: Seagate - Barracuda 2 TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive  ($58.50 @ Amazon) 
Video Card: EVGA - GeForce RTX 2080 8 GB Black Video Card  ($704.98 @ Newegg) 
Case: Fractal Design - Meshify C White TG ATX Mid Tower Case  ($87.10 @ Newegg) 
Power Supply: Corsair - TXM Gold 750 W 80+ Gold Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply  ($62.98 @ Newegg) 
Monitor: Acer - XB281HK bmiprz 28.0" 3840x2160 60 Hz Monitor  ($479.99 @ Amazon) 
Total: $1861.44
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2018-12-16 22:01 EST-0500

I believe that is correct. 
 
I tested this on my 4k monitor last night at 4k. I tossed everything to high including the Nvidia works. I get 45-55fps on average without DLS. With DLS I am seeing 60fps-75ps. The image quality holds up. Its not as clean as pure 4k but its close. With the increase in FPS, its legit. 
 
Basically, DLSS is a superior form of checkerboard rendering. It allows GPU's at 4k or 1440p(in the future), to gain FPS by using the tensor cores instead of normal rasteraztion. 
 
 
 

50fps at what resolution and settings. Also what GPU? Saying it works great on your system is fine but we have no clue what your system is. 
 
Your I5 is definitely a bottleneck in Far Cry 5 and Assassins Creed Origins at 1080p and 1440p. They are CPU demanding titles. 
 
 

EVGA has the best customer service.
Asus has some of the best cards.
Gigabyte is pretty decent.
 
I'd look for an EVGA FTW3 or Asus Strix, personally.