I am not a tech savvy person - and my son needs a new gaming desktop that can run Monster Hunter Wilds. Could you please help me figure out if either of these two options will work? Option 1 is significantly cheaper, so I’m holding my fingers crossed for that one.
Thank you all in advance!
Specs for Monster Hunter Wilds:
- CPU: Intel® Core™ i5-11600K or Intel® Core™ i5-12400 or AMD - Ryzen™ 5 3600X or AMD Ryzen™ 5 5500
- RAM: 16 GB
- VIDEO CARD: NVIDIA® GeForce® RTX 2070 Super(VRAM 8GB) or NVIDIA® GeForce® RTX 4060(VRAM 8GB) or AMD Radeon™ RX - 6700XT(VRAM 12GB)
- DEDICATED VIDEO RAM: 8 GB (AMD 12GB)
- PIXEL SHADER: 6.0
- VERTEX SHADER: 6.0
- FREE DISK SPACE: 140 GB
OPTION 1:
- Intel Core Ultra 7 265F (1.8GHz) Processor
- 32GB DDR5-5600 RAM
- NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Dual Graphics Card
- 1TB PCIe M.2 NVMe Gen4 SSD
- Link: https://www.microcenter.com/product/699104/asus-rog-g700-(2025)-g700tf-ds766ti-gaming-pc
OPTION 2:
- AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D (4.2GHz) Processor
- PRO B650-VC WiFi III Motherboard
- 32GB DDR5-6000 RAM
- NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Graphics Card
- 2TB M.2 NVMe Gen4 SSD
- Link: https://www.microcenter.com/product/692344/msi-aegis-zs2-c7nvp-1446us-gaming-pc
First one is more than good enough to play this game, not sure why they mark the cpu as 1.8ghz but it can actually do 5.3.
That said, the second one will last a bit longer, maybe.
As others have said #1 will do the job, but their expectations should be tempered. Even people with extraordinary computers struggle with performance issues with that game specifically. The engine that game was designed on was not made for the type of game they made and it has been struggling since day 1.
I love the game, put many many hours into it, but even with a brand new rebuild that is closer to option #2 but a better processor, slightly worse graphics card, and more memory, my computer struggles a bit with it and I get noticeable performance drops.
I’d suggest a little of both. A 7600x is $150. A 5600ti 16gb is $429. 1tb SSD is fine.
This will cost the same as option 1. It will last years and then you’ll be able to upgrade the CPU, GPU and SSD.
There’s no Ultra 7 as good as the best AMD for gaming right now. So in 5 years you’ll definitely be able to pick up a better AMD for cheap but there won’t be an equivalent cheap Intel without replacing the Motherboard.
Option 1 is fine. It can run the game at 1080p
Neither of the PCs you linked come with a monitor. These questions are hard to answer without knowing what resolution you want to run the game at. Running it at 1080p is very different from 1440p and 4k.
Make sure you check out their PowerSpec line, its Microcenters own custom builds and they tend to go above and beyond supporting them with any issues you might have. MSI and ASUS can be hard to deal with their customer service.
Ive also seen Asus stuff returned at a higher rate than other brands so that could be a sign of build quality.
I currently work at Microcenter so if you have any questions feel free to ask.
Got any inside tips for shopping there? Like good ways to save some money?
I’d argue option 2 is the better choice overall. It’s going to hold up to new games better in the long run
Option 2.
Buying less expensive things can be more expensive in the long run. With option 1 you’re already behind the curve and will be needing upgrades sooner than option 2.
I would agree but at least from those links, option 2 is almost 2x the price. Sadly wilds will run like shit no matter the machine you got, option 1 would be better value even in the long run (and I hate Intel)
Option 1 will work for a while. The only thing you will need for the near-ish future is larger storage. Games nowadays take up so much space and 1 TB won’t last long. Would recommend buying a 2-3TB HDD while you’re at Microcenter. They may even be able to install it for you
you would not want a hard disk drive as reading data off of that will vastly slow the system performance.
A solid state drive would be recommended. . Preferably an SSD that has caching.
Most modern games will barely run when installed on a HDD as well. Especially open world games
Got it, thanks!
Please, don’t buy an extra HDD, buy an SSD. The difference is that an HDD has a physical spinning disc inside of it (picture yourself a CD) while an SSD doesn’t rely on physical moving components like that, which makes them literally 10 or more times faster. If you have an old computer that is slow it’s very likely that it has an HDD and swapping it out for an SSD would make it feel like new. Do not fall into the “HDDs are a bit cheaper” trap, it’s not worth it especially with those two machines
Very helpful, thank you!
2TB HDDs, what is this the 2010s?
Get a 1TB SSD for OS/games and 10TB HDD for media/cold storage. Neither are particularly pricey these days.
I guess 2 TB is also relatively small. However, considering that OP only mentioned one specific game their child wanted to play, I think it’s not an unreasonable amount of storage.
If their kid also wants to do things like download/edit movies, graphic arts, or other storage heavy activities then of course they could go for a larger storage. It all depends on their needs and budget.
2TB is SSD range now, is my point. Buying an HDD that small is kinda pointless. It’s massively outclassed in both speed and capacity by modern drives. It will be replaced quickly and end up being more expensive in the long run for more effort and a subpar experience.
If you don’t want to have to buy a gaming rig;
https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/geforce-now-thursday-monster-hunter-wilds/
Basically you stream your games from a rig.
Yeah but a while back they capped your monthly hours for the paid tiers to 100 (i think you pay to keep streaming after). I was easily averaging 3 hours a day as a kid, especially with weekends and summer vacations.
What about Sunshine/Moonlight instead? Assuming they have a good PC themselves.
I am judging a book by it’s cover here, but they said they’re not tech savvy, and asked the question in the post, so my assumption is that they themselves do not own one.
