Medium end pc

[Croac]

Budget (including currency): 800 - 1000 euros

My dad has been using a rundown laptop that barely works anymore. Since he doesn't like spending money on himself I thought of surprising him with a PC. I have limited experience on building computers so I wanted to get some input o what I have been consdering so far. He will mainly use it for World of Tanks but I wanted to get him something that will last in case he ever decides to branch out.

 

https://nl.pcpartpicker.com/list/B3DXjZ

 

[jaslion]

4 minutes ago, Croac said:

Budget (including currency): 800 - 1000 euros

My dad has been using a rundown laptop that barely works anymore. Since he doesn't like spending money on himself I thought of surprising him with a PC. I have limited experience on building computers so I wanted to get some input o what I have been consdering so far. He will mainly use it for World of Tanks but I wanted to get him something that will last in case he ever decides to branch out.

 

https://nl.pcpartpicker.com/list/B3DXjZ

 

Half the computer is missing. Do you already have parts?

[brob]

PCPartPicker Part List

CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 5600X 3.7 GHz 6-Core Processor  (€154.95 @ Megekko) 
Motherboard: MSI B550-A PRO ATX AM4 Motherboard  (€119.00 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Memory: Corsair Vengeance LPX 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3200 CL16 Memory  (€42.85 @ Megekko) 
Storage: Samsung 970 Evo Plus 1 TB M.2-2280 PCIe 3.0 X4 NVME Solid State Drive  (€75.50 @ Azerty) 
Video Card: Sapphire PULSE Radeon RX 6600 8 GB Video Card  (€254.00 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Case: Fractal Design Focus 2 ATX Mid Tower Case  (€66.24 @ Azerty) 
Power Supply: SeaSonic G12 GM 550 W 80+ Gold Certified Semi-modular ATX Power Supply  (€75.41 @ Azerty) 
Monitor: LG 24GN650-B 24.0" 1920 x 1080 144 Hz Monitor  (€229.00 @ Megekko) 
Total: €1016.95
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2023-05-05 18:01 CEST+0200

[Bob__]

2 minutes ago, brob said:

Storage: Samsung 970 Evo Plus 1 TB M.2-2280 PCIe 3.0 X4 NVME Solid State Drive  (€75.50 @ Azerty) 

you can easily get a NV2 2tb for this price gen 4 x 4 and double the storage

 

[Why_Me]

PCPartPicker Part List

CPU: *AMD Ryzen 5 5600 3.5 GHz 6-Core Processor  (€144.90 @ Azerty) 
CPU Cooler: *Deepcool AG400 75.89 CFM CPU Cooler  (€26.71 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Motherboard: *Asus TUF GAMING B550-PLUS ATX AM4 Motherboard  (€111.00 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Memory: *Corsair Vengeance LPX 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR4-3200 CL16 Memory  (€65.90 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Storage: *Crucial P3 Plus 1 TB M.2-2280 PCIe 4.0 X4 NVME Solid State Drive  (€53.89 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Video Card: *Gigabyte EAGLE Radeon RX 6600 8 GB Video Card  (€215.00 @ Azerty) 
Case: *Fractal Design Focus 2 ATX Mid Tower Case  (€66.24 @ Azerty) 
Power Supply: *NZXT C650 (2022) 650 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply  (€93.52 @ Azerty) 
Case Fan: *ARCTIC P12 56.3 CFM 120 mm Fan  (€8.01 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Monitor: *Asus VP249QGR 23.8" 1920 x 1080 144 Hz Monitor  (€171.37 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Total: €956.54
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
*Lowest price parts chosen from parametric criteria
Generated by PCPartPicker 2023-05-05 18:02 CEST+0200

 

A better look at those components.

 

https://www.asus.com/displays-desktops/monitors/gaming/vp249qgr/ 

 

https://www.fractal-design.com/products/cases/focus/focus-2/black-tg-clear-tint/

 

https://www.asus.com/motherboards-components/motherboards/tuf-gaming/tuf-gaming-b550-plus/ 

 

https://www.amd.com/en/products/cpu/amd-ryzen-5-5600  

 

https://www.deepcool.com/products/Cooling/cpuaircoolers/GAMMAXX-AG400-Single-Tower-CPU-Cooler-1700-AM5/2022/15898.shtml   

 

https://www.gigabyte.com/Graphics-Card/GV-R66EAGLE-8GD#kf

 

 

[brob]

12 minutes ago, Bob__ said:

you can easily get a NV2 2tb for this price gen 4 x 4 and double the storage

 

 

Sure, but the NV2 doesn't have cache and performance is highly variable since Kingston uses whatever is cheapest at time of manufacture. Given the brief I felt a decent quality drive was worth the cost.

[Bob__]

1 minute ago, brob said:

 

Sure, but the NV2 doesn't have cache and performance is highly variable since Kingston uses whatever is cheapest at time of manufacture. Given the brief I felt a decent quality drive was worth the cost.

maybe it sreally the OP's decision

[Queen Chrysalis]

2 minutes ago, brob said:

 

Sure, but the NV2 doesn't have cache and performance is highly variable since Kingston uses whatever is cheapest at time of manufacture. Given the brief I felt a decent quality drive was worth the cost.

That's small potatoes, arguably parrot-speak, for budget SSDs.  Literally everyone has done it with budget parts because outside of synthetic testing it doesn't make a difference.  There's really nothing to be lost there for 90% of users, as just having an NVMe already puts it past the point of 'too fast to make a difference'.  And the DRAM cache on Gen 4 NVMes is totally unnecessary.  Even DRAMless gen 3s do everything gamers and regular users need them to at the speed of a click. The P# plus also doens;t have a cache either, but again, it doesn't matter.  It's cheap space that does everything gamers need to faster than it needs to.

[Queen Chrysalis]

You can get a 140p monitor with this budget easily, which makes the entire user experience 1000x better, and really sells the 'quality' of the new PC.  Especially since most of the time people use their PCs, they aren't gaming.  1440p makes reading webpages, typing documents, editing spreadsheet, and yes, DEFINTIELY gaming, look so much clearer.

 

• The 5500 is plenty for a 6650xt.  You could get a 5600 for $40 more if you want but it won't really make a difference.
• The aftermarket cooler is uneccessary, but it will keep the system quieter and looks cool, so it may be worth it worth the 'gift-factor'.  Otherwise you can save $25 and use the stock cooler
• The motherboard has onboard bluetooth adn wifi, otherwise you would need to buy an adapter
• 1TB of storage is probably enough for gamer who doesn;t play that many games.  You can always add storage later.
• The 6650xt is a little faster than a PS5 or XBOX Series X, so any game should look great on it, WoT will run and max settings really high fps
• The case includes all the fans you need and has good airflow
• A good 650w PSU is plenty fo this
• This monitor is probably the most important piece.  165Hz panels are much newer tech than 144Hz panels, and 1440p looks way better than 1080p.  A 27-inch display is a really nice thing to have.

 

PCPartPicker Part List

CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 5500 3.6 GHz 6-Core Processor  (€103.85 @ Megekko) 
CPU Cooler: Deepcool AG400 75.89 CFM CPU Cooler  (€26.71 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Motherboard: Asus TUF GAMING A520M-PLUS WIFI Micro ATX AM4 Motherboard  (€99.95 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Memory: Corsair Vengeance LPX 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR4-3200 CL16 Memory  (€65.90 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Storage: Kingston NV2 1 TB M.2-2280 PCIe 4.0 X4 NVME Solid State Drive  (€46.90 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Video Card: Asus DUAL Radeon RX 6650 XT 8 GB Video Card  (€277.00 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Case: Deepcool CC560 ATX Mid Tower Case  (€55.44 @ Alternate) 
Power Supply: be quiet! System Power 10 650 W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply  (€64.88 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Monitor: ViewSonic VX2718-2KPC-MHD 27.0" 2560 x 1440 165 Hz Curved Monitor  (€232.00 @ Azerty) 
Total: €972.63
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2023-05-05 18:35 CEST+0200

[Why_Me]

5 hours ago, Queen Chrysalis said:

You can get a 140p monitor with this budget easily, which makes the entire user experience 1000x better, and really sells the 'quality' of the new PC.  Especially since most of the time people use their PCs, they aren't gaming.  1440p makes reading webpages, typing documents, editing spreadsheet, and yes, DEFINTIELY gaming, look so much clearer.

 

• The 5500 is plenty for a 6650xt.  You could get a 5600 for $40 more if you want but it won't really make a difference.
• The aftermarket cooler is uneccessary, but it will keep the system quieter and looks cool, so it may be worth it worth the 'gift-factor'.  Otherwise you can save $25 and use the stock cooler
• The motherboard has onboard bluetooth adn wifi, otherwise you would need to buy an adapter
• 1TB of storage is probably enough for gamer who doesn;t play that many games.  You can always add storage later.
• The 6650xt is a little faster than a PS5 or XBOX Series X, so any game should look great on it, WoT will run and max settings really high fps
• The case includes all the fans you need and has good airflow
• A good 650w PSU is plenty fo this
• This monitor is probably the most important piece.  165Hz panels are much newer tech than 144Hz panels, and 1440p looks way better than 1080p.  A 27-inch display is a really nice thing to have.

 

PCPartPicker Part List

CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 5500 3.6 GHz 6-Core Processor  (€103.85 @ Megekko) 
CPU Cooler: Deepcool AG400 75.89 CFM CPU Cooler  (€26.71 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Motherboard: Asus TUF GAMING A520M-PLUS WIFI Micro ATX AM4 Motherboard  (€99.95 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Memory: Corsair Vengeance LPX 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR4-3200 CL16 Memory  (€65.90 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Storage: Kingston NV2 1 TB M.2-2280 PCIe 4.0 X4 NVME Solid State Drive  (€46.90 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Video Card: Asus DUAL Radeon RX 6650 XT 8 GB Video Card  (€277.00 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Case: Deepcool CC560 ATX Mid Tower Case  (€55.44 @ Alternate) 
Power Supply: be quiet! System Power 10 650 W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply  (€64.88 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Monitor: ViewSonic VX2718-2KPC-MHD 27.0" 2560 x 1440 165 Hz Curved Monitor  (€232.00 @ Azerty) 
Total: €972.63
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2023-05-05 18:35 CEST+0200

It looks like you gutted that build in order to fit the OP into a 1440P monitor.  That cpu doesn't even support PCIe 4.0 it's that bad.

 

https://www.techspot.com/review/2494-amd-ryzen-5500/ 

If you're building a new PC from scratch, the Ryzen 5 5500 is a hard pass, don't even consider it. For $35 less, the Core i3-12100F will easily beat the 5500 as it was 14% faster than the Ryzen 5 3600 in our day-one review, even when limited to the 58W TDP. So assuming you're looking at building the most affordable gaming PC possible, the Ryzen 5 5500 at $140 makes no sense when you can snap up the 12100F for $105 and throw it on a quality B660 board like the MSI B660M Bazooka for $140, or a middling entry-level B660 board for $100, where it will work just fine, but that will limit your upgrade path.

[Queen Chrysalis]

10 minutes ago, Why_Me said:

It looks like you gutted that build in order to fit the OP into a 1440P monitor.  That cpu doesn't even support PCIe 4.0 it's that bad.

 

https://www.techspot.com/review/2494-amd-ryzen-5500/ 

If you're building a new PC from scratch, the Ryzen 5 5500 is a hard pass, don't even consider it. For $35 less, the Core i3-12100F will easily beat the 5500 as it was 14% faster than the Ryzen 5 3600 in our day-one review, even when limited to the 58W TDP. So assuming you're looking at building the most affordable gaming PC possible, the Ryzen 5 5500 at $140 makes no sense when you can snap up the 12100F for $105 and throw it on a quality B660 board like the MSI B660M Bazooka for $140, or a middling entry-level B660 board for $100, where it will work just fine, but that will limit your upgrade path.

A few things:

• It's $100, not $140.  I noted that the 5600 would still fit in the budget.  The 5600 is $140.
• There's still nothing inherently wrong with the 5500.  It's appropriately priced for what you get.  Lots of users still use 1600s and 3600s that are a little slower than that and depending on the use case, they're still flawless.  Anyone who hasn't gotten a brand new system in the last 2 years is not using PCIe 4.0.
• It doesn't support PCIe 4.0, right, not that big of a deal.  Most people's systems don't  With a 5600 in there for $35 more it does, which is still in budget.  I also noted that the cooler could be omitted, but IDK if you read that or not and would prefer to just flame me.
• The 12100f costs more, has 4 fewer threads, and generally wants a more expensive motherboard.  It would be fine, but I think that having 8 threads instead of 12 will be a problem for games far sooner than PCIe 3.0, considering nothing on RDNA2 fully saturates PCIe 3.0

I'd hardly call that 'gutting it' for the component that makes the biggest difference out of anything.  it's an immediately perceivable improvement to the most important component for someone who primarily plays world of tanks.  I would think 1080p for a new system would be orders of magnitude worse than PCIe 3.0 in terms of not having a quality user experience.

[Why_Me]

3 minutes ago, Queen Chrysalis said:

A few things:

• It's $100, not $140.  I noted that the 5600 would still fit in the budget.  The 5600 is $140.
• There's still nothing inherently wrong with the 5500.  It's appropriately priced for what you get.  Lots of users still use 1600s and 3600s that are a little slower than that and depending on the use case, they're still flawless.  Anyone who hasn't gotten a brand new system in the last 2 years is not using PCIe 4.0.
• It doesn't support PCIe 4.0, right, not that big of a deal.  Most people's systems don't  With a 5600 in there for $35 more it does, which is still in budget.  I also noted that the cooler could be omitted, but IDK if you read that or not and would prefer to just flame me.
• The 12100f costs more, has 4 fewer threads, and generally wants a more expensive motherboard.  It would be fine, but I think that having 8 threads instead of 12 will be a problem for games far sooner than PCIe 3.0, considering nothing on RDNA2 fully saturates PCIe 3.0

I'd hardly call that 'gutting it' for the component that makes the biggest difference out of anything.  it's an immediately perceivable improvement to the most important component for someone who primarily plays world of tanks.  I would think 1080p for a new system would be orders of magnitude worse than PCIe 3.0 in terms of not having a quality user experience.

Not to sound mean, but that build is bad.

[Queen Chrysalis]

2 minutes ago, Why_Me said:

Not to sound mean, but that build is bad.

Care to elaborate beyond the parrot-talk you threw at me in the previous post?  Or at least respond to the contentions I made to your initial criticism?

[Why_Me]

1 minute ago, Queen Chrysalis said:

Care to elaborate beyond the parrot-talk you threw at me in the previous post?  Or at least respond to the contentions I made to your initial criticism?

The cpu is too light and too expensive to be a decent paperweight for starters ... it's horrible. Nobody should recommend that cpu on a build thread <$500. The case has bad airflow, the board gives a new meaning to the word 'budget', the psu is bad as is that SSD with its three year warranty not to mention it runs hot. Other than the cpu cooler I can't find a positive to that build. When the OP is working with a max budget of 1000 euros there's no reason to stick them into a 1440P monitor.  This is supposed to be a gaming build.

[Queen Chrysalis]

17 minutes ago, Why_Me said:

The cpu is too light and too expensive to be a decent paperweight for starters ... it's horrible. Nobody should recommend that cpu on a build thread <$500. The case has bad airflow, the board gives a new meaning to the word 'budget', the psu is bad as is that SSD with its three year warranty not to mention it runs hot. Other than the cpu cooler I can't find a positive to that build. 

Yeah none of that really counts as elaboration, those are just scattershot statements of judgement, save foe claiming the NV2 runs hot.  How hot?  Hot enough to effect operation?  And bad airflow?  It includes three intake fans and has quite a bit of ventilation, how bad could it really be considerring other cases in that price range have a closed off intake and people still use them wihtout much complaint.

17 minutes ago, Why_Me said:

the psu is bad

Netherlands are 230v power, so it's c-tier rating is less applicable (HWBuster's review saw it far less favorable on 110v power).  Also, with a 650w PSU for a 6650xt, we're not coming anywhere near the power budget, it would never be a problem.

 

Just saying stuff is bad, calling something a paperweight, or trying to zoomer-dunk me by making a drawn-out analogy isn't how you have a constructive discussion.  Especially when the other party is attempting to explain their stance.

 

 

[Why_Me]

9 minutes ago, Queen Chrysalis said:

Yeah none of that really counts as elaboration, those are just scattershot statements of judgement, save foe claiming the NV2 runs hot.  How hot?  Hot enough to effect operation?  And bad airflow?  It includes three intake fans and has quite a bit of ventilation, how bad could it really be considerring other cases in that price range have a closed off intake and people still use them wihtout much complaint.

Netherlands are 230v power, so it's c-tier rating is less applicable (HWBuster's review saw it far less favorable on 110v power).  Also, with a 650w PSU for a 6650xt, we're not coming anywhere near the power budget, it would never be a problem.

 

Just saying stuff is bad, calling something a paperweight, or trying to zoomer-dunk me by making a drawn-out analogy isn't how you have a constructive discussion.  Especially when the other party is attempting to explain their stance.

 

 

Let's do the cpu and SSD once more and yes there's a reason that SSD only has a three year warranty. I understand when the OP is on a tight budget that there's a place for that SSD but if you look at the build I posted on this thread this build isn't one of them. Fact of the matter is the OP's budget doesn't call for a 1440P monitor unless the OP plans on doing nothing other than surfing the internet and watching youtube vids.

 

https://www.techspot.com/review/2494-amd-ryzen-5500/ 

 

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/kingston-nv2-ssd

[Queen Chrysalis]

2 minutes ago, Why_Me said:

Let's do the cpu and SSD once more and yes there's a reason that SSD only has a three year warranty. I understand when the OP is on a tight budget that there's a place for that SSD but if you look at the build I posted on this thread this build isn't one of them.

I understand that these reviewers get extremely nitpicky about stuff like this (it's their job to find differences in new hardware, regardless of how much those differences actually matter), and when all this custom computer stuff is new to all those things seem like a big deal, but in context it matters a lot less. 

 

For the SSD, those synthetic benches have very little relevance to real-world gaming workloads, and IDK why they even got away with putting 'risky' in the headline, other than the length of the warranty.  THere is not enough information in that review to actually make heads or tails of durability (spoiler alert: it mostly a crapshoot and gaming PC SSDs never, ever come close to hitting the rated r/w durability unless you are constantly adding and removing games for a decade or longer).

 

For the CPU, they review just says that it's a bad value compared to the 5600 and 3600.  Which it was at release given the prices of all 3 when it was released.  Now, it's a better value.  Those benchmarks are also with a way faster GPU.  A 6650xt would be extrememly unlikely to run into a situation where you ever see a meaningful performance difference.

 

8 minutes ago, Why_Me said:

OP's budget doesn't call for a 1440P monitor unless the OP plans on doing nothing other than surfing the internet and watching youtube vids.

Really?  So WoT and maybe branching out to some other games is just not doable at 1440p?  You know the PS5 has a 3700x that runs like a 2700 paired with a downclocked 6600xt and people are using it to play all the new AAA titles at 4k or 1440p upscaled to 4K, right?  That stuff is WAY more intense than WoT and 'maybe branching into some other games'.  I know they often run at medium settings on consoles, but that's OK.  If the person recievin this PC decides to maybe branch into AAA games, they'll still run very well (better than they would on a new console).  And their main usage (WoT) is gonna run at ultra flawlessly, and look better with a higher resolution monitor.  I'm personally using a 5700xt for WQHD 75Hz and I don't have any games that don't hit my refresh rate at ultra.  The 6600xt is quite a bit faster than that.  My living room system uses a 1070ti and a 1600 for 4K60 and 90% of the games I play on there also run at the refresh rate, I just have to tinker with the settings a bit on newer stuff.  The 6600xt/5500 combo is quite a bit faster than that system.

 

bOtToM LiNe iS: It really depends on use case.  For OP's brother's use case, having a higher resolution monitor is probably gonna be a lot bigger deal than little details about theoretical performance that reviewers pick out when they're getting into the weeds on the specific difference between cheap hardware and expensive hardware.  For a large, large segment of users (a lot more people than tech forum crawlers probably realize), that stuff barely ends up mattering in real-world usage.  But resolution, screen size, and straight-up GPU power do.

 

[Why_Me]

2 minutes ago, Queen Chrysalis said:

I understand that these reviewers get extremely nitpicky about stuff like this (it's their job to find differences in new hardware, regardless of how much those differences actually matter), and when all this custom computer stuff is new to all those things seem like a big deal, but in context it matters a lot less. 

 

For the SSD, those synthetic benches have very little relevance to real-world gaming workloads, and IDK why they even got away with putting 'risky' in the headline, other than the length of the warranty.  THere is not enough information in that review to actually make heads or tails of durability (spoiler alert: it mostly a crapshoot and gaming PC SSDs never, ever come close to hitting the rated r/w durability unless you are constantly adding and removing games for a decade or longer).

 

For the CPU, they review just says that it's a bad value compared to the 5600 and 3600.  Which it was at release given the prices of all 3 when it was released.  Now, it's a better value.  Those benchmarks are also with a way faster GPU.  A 6650xt would be extrememly unlikely to run into a situation where you ever see a meaningful performance difference.

 

Really?  So WoT and maybe branching out to some other games is just not doable at 1440p?  You know the PS5 has a 3700x that runs like a 2700 paired with a downclocked 6600xt and people are using it to play all the new AAA titles at 4k or 1440p upscaled to 4K, right?  That stuff is WAY more intense than WoT and 'maybe branching into some other games'.  I know they often run at medium settings on consoles, but that's OK.  If the person recievin this PC decides to maybe branch into AAA games, they'll still run very well (better than they would on a new console).  And their main usage (WoT) is gonna run at ultra flawlessly, and look better with a higher resolution monitor.  I'm personally using a 5700xt for WQHD 75Hz and I don't have any games that don't hit my refresh rate at ultra.  The 6600xt is quite a bit faster than that.  My living room system uses a 1070ti and a 1600 for 4K60 and 90% of the games I play on there also run at the refresh rate, I just have to tinker with the settings a bit on newer stuff.  The 6600xt/5500 combo is quite a bit faster than that system.

 

bOtToM LiNe iS: It really depends on use case.  For OP's brother's use case, having a higher resolution monitor is probably gonna be a lot bigger deal than little details about theoretical performance that reviewers pick out when they're getting into the weeds on the specific difference between cheap hardware and expensive hardware.  For a large, large segment of users (a lot more people than tech forum crawlers probably realize), that stuff barely ends up mattering in real-world usage.  But resolution, screen size, and straight-up GPU power do.

 

There's nothing 'nit picky' about an SSD with a three year warranty.  Again I can understand when someone's budget calls for that SSD but this thread isn't one of them. 

[SorryBella]

1 hour ago, Why_Me said:

If you're building a new PC from scratch, the Ryzen 5 5500 is a hard pass, don't even consider it. For $35 less, the Core i3-12100F will easily beat the 5500 as it was 14% faster than the Ryzen 5 3600 in our day-one review, even when limited to the 58W TDP.

Did you just rephrase a launch day review to reflect current market price? Jesus fuck you really are just looking for a fight sometimes. Also, 6/12 is non-negotiable in DX12 titles nowadays.

 

Also, still waiting on OP's response currently. To me framerate before 1440p so id build 1080p144 once i can confirm between Belgium or NL.

[Queen Chrysalis]

13 hours ago, SorryClaire said:

To me framerate before 1440p so id build 1080p144 once i can confirm between Belgium or NL.

You don't think a 6650xt/5500 would do 1440p well enough with what OP's brother plays?  

[SorryBella]

3 minutes ago, Queen Chrysalis said:

You don't think a 6650xt/5500 would do 1440p well enough with what OP's brother plays?  

It should do fine, but its been A HOT WHILE since i play World of Tanks, both standard and Blitz edition. Theyve done multiple engine refreshes from the time i quit the game.

[Queen Chrysalis]

Just now, SorryClaire said:

It should do fine, but its been A HOT WHILE since i play World of Tanks, both standard and Blitz edition. Theyve done multiple engine refreshes from the time i quit the game.

I found a video of someone playing it with a 5600x and a 6600xt on ultra settings averaging 240fps at 1080p Ultra, and about 270fps on High, and 300fps on medium, and 600fps on low.  That would lead me to believe that with a 5500 and a 6650xt at 1440p would likely have no issue being around 165ish fps on 1440p ultra, as it never seemed CPU bound (util on the 5600X was at about 32%).

 

Let me put it this way:

 

I'm strongly averse to advising 1080p on new PCs, especially with 24 or 27 inch monitors, just because I really think it degrades the entire user experience to spend $1000 on anything and have it immediately look worse than someone's phone display.  Last time i did a system for a good friend with an rx 6600 and an i7 3770 and after I finished putting it together, I placed it at my desk to config it and test it. I used the 1440p monitor at my desk to do so.  When I set it up at his house with his 1080p monitor, I was just taken aback by how much crappier the system seemed with everything looking big, blown up, and blurry compared to looking smooth and refined.  I can't really emphasize enough how important I think that is to the overall user experience, especially to someone who is potentially a single game gamer, that's likely never had a high refresh rate monitor before anyway (so 100fps would probably still look smoother than smooth) but has likely definitely seen a 4k TV.  Even if they did branch into AAAs, this system would still run them about as well as a PS5.

 

 

[SorryBella]

Just now, Queen Chrysalis said:

I'm strongly averse to advising 1080p on new PCs, especially with 24 or 27 inch monitors, just because I really think it degrades the entire user experience to spend $1000 on anything and have it immediately look worse than someone's phone display.  Last time i did a system for a good friend with an rx 6600 and an i7 3770 and after I finished putting it together, I placed it at my desk to config it and test it. I used the 1440p monitor at my desk to do so.  When I set it up at his house with his 1080p monitor, I was just taken aback by how much crappier the system seemed with everything looking big, blown up, and blurry compared to looking smooth and refined.  I can't really emphasize enough how important I think that is to the overall user experience, especially to someone who is potentially a single game gamer, that's likely never had a high refresh rate monitor before anyway (so 100fps would probably still look smoother than smooth) but has likely definitely seen a 4k TV.  Even if they did branch into AAAs, this system would still run them about as well as a PS5.

I absolutely understood, but i myself focus heavily on framerate because if we wanna use phone display analogy: not a lot of people running at this budget have flagship phones in their pocket that already has 1440-4K120-144hz OLED panel. Being able to make your game look like those fluid 60fps video is also magical. Many ways to skin a cat, i say.

[Queen Chrysalis]

12 minutes ago, SorryClaire said:

I absolutely understood, but i myself focus heavily on framerate because if we wanna use phone display analogy: not a lot of people running at this budget have flagship phones in their pocket that already has 1440-4K120-144hz OLED panel. Being able to make your game look like those fluid 60fps video is also magical. Many ways to skin a cat, i say.

True, but keep in mind the monitor I included was a 1440p165Hz, and I think that the system should be able to consistently put out 120-150fps average at 1440p (usually about half the framerate of 1080p, sometimes a little higher) based on the video I found. And that's at ultra.  At high it should be average the refresh rate, which I know is not ideal, but if 1% were still well over 100fps, that's gonna look really smooth IMO.  

 

I've also found the newer version of FidelityFX to work really well if worse came to worst.  That 1080 upscaled to 1440p IF 120-150fps at native 1440p was unacceptable, upscaling form 1080p to 1440p usually looks better (in my opinion) than native 1080p if framerate is consistent.

 

The monitor itself only adds $60 to the cost of the system.

[Jonathan Lee]

Just minor changes from everyone else's recommendations:

 

PCPartPicker Part List

CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 5500 3.6 GHz 6-Core Processor  (€103.85 @ Megekko) 
CPU Cooler: Deepcool AG400 BK ARGB 75.89 CFM CPU Cooler  (€36.85 @ Megekko) 
Motherboard: MSI B550-A PRO ATX AM4 Motherboard  (€119.00 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Memory: Corsair Vengeance LPX 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR4-3200 CL16 Memory  (€65.90 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Storage: Crucial P5 Plus 1 TB M.2-2280 PCIe 4.0 X4 NVME Solid State Drive  (€81.48 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Video Card: Asus DUAL Radeon RX 6650 XT 8 GB Video Card  (€276.00 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Case: Antec NX410 ATX Mid Tower Case  (€75.85 @ Azerty) 
Power Supply: SeaSonic G12 GM 550 W 80+ Gold Certified Semi-modular ATX Power Supply  (€79.66 @ Azerty) 
Monitor: Asus TUF Gaming VG249Q1A 23.8" 1920 x 1080 165 Hz Monitor  (€192.26 @ Amazon Netherlands) 
Total: €1030.85
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2023-05-06 21:41 CEST+0200

 

Fit in 32 GB (don't really need it for most games, but DDR4 is cheap right now so why not?)

 

1 TB gen 4 drive with dram. I generally recommend dram for boot drives to make the generally usability reasons (better download times/windows updates). It won't be the end of the world to go with the NV2 that other people are recommending though

 

Slightly over, but you could remove the CPU cooler and get it under 1000

 

This pairing should deal with 95% of the games in 1080p (5% is for the fringe unoptimized games) and probably a good chunk at 1440p as well.

 

For the CPU discussion going on, I think the 5500 will be fine for the GPU. Generally, I wouldn't recommend 4 cores for new PC's due to really bad frame stutters in some titles. Check what games your dad might consider playing and ask people who play these titles about CPU performance to get a better read on going 5500 or 12/13100 on intel side.