By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
haxxiy said:
Mr_No said:

Agreed. What's not to say that some parts of this budget PC won't have to be changed on the long (or short) run? I mean, if players would want a better PC experience without hassles and continuous upgrading, they'd want to spend more on the parts, and it wouldn't be a budget PC anymore. Sure, it can run Fallout 4 and GTA V decently as of now. But what about GTA 6? Or the next Fallout? The next Battlefield? The next Elder Scrolls? What about the future games we don't know about? Of course some upgrading will have to be done eventually. But wouldn't it be better for the gaming PC to be futureproof?

Well, the point is making a PC to run GTA V and Fallout 4, isn't it? Little to no point claiming it probably won't run on max games that doesn't even exist yet. Not to mention that when they do, the build will still outperform the graphic settings of PS4/X1 on every game bar the very few oddballs like Arkham Knight, which are complete clusterfucks. The build is fine, and it uses some of the best, if not the best, price/perf ratio pieces in the market. As for those claiming it is a weak build, it probably still outperforms over 90% gaming PCs in the planet, as per Steam data on hardware.

I can't speak for the rest of the people in this thread, but I don't think this is a weak build. Sure, the point is to make a PC that can run GTA V and Fallout 4 properly, but what about future games? Will they run on this build? If it doesn't, will the people buy more cheap parts to make it run recent games or will they just try to futureproof it by going for the recently released expensive parts?

Also, I know why people want to prove that PC gaming doesn't have to be as expensive as others claim, but I don't believe just showing them builds and how inexpensive they can be could convince the overwhelming majority to build a PC. After all, 90% of gaming PC's in the planet still perform lower than OP's build.