JackBeech903
Member
Ok thanks. The last build I posted, this will net me high performance for multiplayer games (fps, etc) and good quality graphics for single player games (also good frames)?
First gaming PC
- Thread starter JackBeech903
- Start date
SpyderTracks
We love you Ukraine
You've downgraded the CPU, @FigmentOfYourImagination was a better build overall
The 7800X3D is the best gaming CPU on the planet
I really wouldn't worry about frames until you have actually experienced PC gaming as you're getting hung up over something that's largely irrelevant for you for a good few years to come.
It's going to far outperform anything you've previously experienced, by a country mile.
JackBeech903
Member
It’s the same as he recommended but with the 7900 because he said the 7800 isn’t available.
Roger that. Thanks again, really appreciated.
SpyderTracks
We love you Ukraine
Yeah, so the 7900x3D is actually a downgrade, it's just a placeholder until the 7800X3D comes back in stock, don't order it with that as it would be poor performance (only 6X3D cores vs 8 on the 7800X3D)
JackBeech903
Member
I see, what can I use as a like for like instead of the 7800X3D?
TonyCarter
VALUED CONTRIBUTOR
The only other, current CPU with 8 X3D cores is the 7950X3D...but that's also got 8 non-X3D cores which won't help in gaming, so you'd just be paying extra for no reason.
JackBeech903
Member
@SpyderTracks I see you recommended the
Alienware 27 Gaming Monitor - AW2723DF in a different post, would you recommend that for my build too?
JackBeech903
Member
Bummer. I might just have to take that extra cost on the chin, doesn’t sound like I have another choice other than to wait.
SpyderTracks
We love you Ukraine
Just wait, this is a 10+ year investment, rushing into it is not a sensible choice
SpyderTracks
We love you Ukraine
Not for this system, no. This would be a far better investment
JackBeech903
Member
For better or worse I’ve ordered a 360hz Alienware. Read a lot of really good reviews. I’m going to run with what I have, play call of duty with medium settings and eventually buy a better graphics card and CPU.
SpyderTracks
We love you Ukraine
Oh well, all fell on deaf ears then!
Medium settings is far too high for competitive, but it’s clear you’re going at this blind
JackBeech903
Member
I’m playing call of duty mostly and everything I’ve read tells me the 360Hz is the best, despite probably being overkill at this point in time in terms of what my GPU can produce. I know 1440p 160Hz is fine for most people, but I want a monitor that is competitive as currently im in the top 1% of players. 240hz is the minimum for me and those monitors are all priced around £500 anyway, so I figured why not future proof until I can get a better GPU.
I appreciate your help. I just want to know if the RTX 4070 or 4070 ti is sufficient to get the 360fps. If not I will make do with 240hz, on a monitor where the colours and visuals are insane, until I can upgrade.
Martinr36
MOST VALUED CONTRIBUTOR
Well if you are in the top 1% of players you wouldn't need to save for a monitor as your fee for playing would pay for it many times over
JackBeech903
Member
You’re thinking of the top 0.05% of players there, probably less. Can I get your thoughts on the GPU requirement?
Even the elite don't get a benefit from 360hz. It's all snake oil I'm afraid. If the features surrounding the monitor are as good/better than a more standard monitor then it's definitely a no brainer to just take all the frequency you can get. When you're paying more for more frequency and getting less clarity or less features than you would with a more standard resolution it's a poor choice.
Even the 1% of the 1% don't benefit greatly from anything over 240hz. In COD it's going to be completely pointless as it's more typically CS players that utilise the extra frequency.
You'll want very low settings and 1080p to compete. By compete, I mean make money.
Even the 1% of the 1% don't benefit greatly from anything over 240hz. In COD it's going to be completely pointless as it's more typically CS players that utilise the extra frequency.
You'll want very low settings and 1080p to compete. By compete, I mean make money.
SpyderTracks
We love you Ukraine
See the inherent terror when they realise aim assist is banned on PC, you actually have to be accurate. Reaction times will be around 60Hz for a long time until you've actually gotten used to pc and mouse. Console players have no understanding that the console is in charge of their aiming, not them.
If you're thinking you can use controller on PC, that's so heavily latency limited you'd never be anywhere near even 120Hz. Even with aim assist, the directional control is limited, not linear like on a mouse, so you physically can't be any better than say 90fps.
I'm betting you haven't actually looked at the links posted anyway but everything you've said points to the fact you don't understand what competitive refresh rate actually means on PC
Moving from console to PC is an ENTIRELY different experience, there's no similarity, unless you're sticking to controller with aim assist on in which case you'd never be able to react anywhere close to even 144Hz aside from completely wasting the benefit of PC. If you posted the links to the disinformation you're getting your opinions from, we may be able to help, but it sounds like you're pretty suckered into spending a fortune on something you'll never use and is actually going to decrease the experience.
Such a shame. Expensive lesson to learn.
If you're thinking you can use controller on PC, that's so heavily latency limited you'd never be anywhere near even 120Hz. Even with aim assist, the directional control is limited, not linear like on a mouse, so you physically can't be any better than say 90fps.
I'm betting you haven't actually looked at the links posted anyway but everything you've said points to the fact you don't understand what competitive refresh rate actually means on PC
Moving from console to PC is an ENTIRELY different experience, there's no similarity, unless you're sticking to controller with aim assist on in which case you'd never be able to react anywhere close to even 144Hz aside from completely wasting the benefit of PC. If you posted the links to the disinformation you're getting your opinions from, we may be able to help, but it sounds like you're pretty suckered into spending a fortune on something you'll never use and is actually going to decrease the experience.
Such a shame. Expensive lesson to learn.
Last edited:
JackBeech903
Member
Nobody does it because they think they’re superhuman. It’s not about reaction times and I don’t care about aim assist, I played without it for years. It’s obvious to me that you’ve never played cod. Fluidity is important, motion fidelity is important and a OLED is perfect for the dark room I play in. There are lots of reasons to get this monitor aside from the Hz output.
I read the links, and I read others. An awful lot of conflicting stuff out there and everyone claims to be an expert. What is your problem? Why are you so mad because I made my mind up and it doesn’t align with your opinion? I’ve noticed your arrogance and rudeness on other threads. Whenever someone doesn’t understand your point or makes a different one you’re belittling them and jumping down their throat.
And as far as your lapdog @Martinr36, I’m not sure if that’s your burner account or if his account existence on here is just to echo what you say, like your post and not provide any actual advice to anyone.