Build a new PC or Upgrade current setup?

jcox

jcox

jcox

Associate
Joined
29 Jun 2020
Posts
2
Hi guys,
I'm pretty new to PC building, and I want to either build a new PC from scratch, or totally upgrade my current build to be able to run the latest games at 1440p (144Hz) at decent frames.
My current build is:
1x NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti 4GB Graphics Card
1x Aerocool 80 PLUS 500W PSU
1x Asus PRIME B250M-A Motherboard
2x 4 GB DDR4 2133 MHz Memory
1x Seagate 1TB BarraCuda 7200RPM Hard Disk
1x 250GB Samsung 850 EVO Solid State Drive
1x Intel Pentium G4560 Kaby Lake CPU, 2 Cores, 3.5GHz

I'm considering buying either an RTX 2070 Super (£489) and an intel i5 9600k (£200) as a new build PC, or an i5 7600k (£150) and a 2060 super (£379) as an upgrade to my current build.
Are both of these options going to be powerful enough to run say games like Shadow of the Tomb raider and Star Wars Jedi:Fallen order at good frames at 1440p (144HZ)?
 
Last edited:
Welcome abord.

There's no updating that.
Any fitting CPUs are "dead on arrival" level low end by today's standards and literally half the CPU power in next-gen consoles.
(7600K is under half)
Only thing certainly reusable are mass storage and that SSD is just tiny for big AAA games.
Maybe case also.

9600K is also less CPU than in new consoles coming before Christmas and platform would share same lack of upgradability.
Ryzen 3600 would at least give proper upgradability on platform (+prices of CPU droppnig over time) if that £200 is budget for CPU.
(next-gen consoles come with variant of 3700X)

In graphics card's it's now bad time to pay any higher prices.
GPUs of next-gen consoles and especially Xbox trounce most graphics cards and next-gen graphics cards are coming out in few months.
 
EsaT said:
Welcome abord.

There's no updating that.
Any fitting CPUs are "dead on arrival" level low end by today's standards and literally half the CPU power in next-gen consoles.
(7600K is under half)
Only thing certainly reusable are mass storage and that SSD is just tiny for big AAA games.
Maybe case also.

9600K is also less CPU than in new consoles coming before Christmas and platform would share same lack of upgradability.
Ryzen 3600 would at least give proper upgradability on platform (+prices of CPU droppnig over time) if that £200 is budget for CPU.
(next-gen consoles come with variant of 3700X)

In graphics card's it's now bad time to pay any higher prices.
GPUs of next-gen consoles and especially Xbox trounce most graphics cards and next-gen graphics cards are coming out in few months.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply, I have a couple of follow up questions (again, I'm still very new to PC building)

https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i5-9600K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-5-3600X/4031vs4041
Looking at the UserBenchmark for these 2 CPU's, I can't see any incentive to go for the AMD over the Intel.
Also, would you care to expand on the statement "proper upgradability" when talking about the CPU's.
Thanks. :)
 
Luserbenchmark is Intel paid scam site, which keeps changing criteria every time AMD brings out new improved CPU.
With another scoring change expected in fall when AMD brings out improved Zen 3 architecture. (instead of rebrand like Intels)
Whole site is actually banned in Reddit's Intel subforum.


8 core as platform's top model is dead end and at most Intel Cash Cow Race product instead of PC Master Race product.
Star Citizen gives good workout for 12 core/24 thread and without SMT's extra threads majority of cores would be fully occupied.
https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/dkac5j/i_knew_star_citizen_utilizes_multicore_well/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom