Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Hardware and Software => Topic started by: Max on April 19, 2013, 07:30:57 AM
-
I'm considering upgrading my current homebuilt desktop, circa2008. Original componants include:
Intel Core 2 Duo Conroe 3.0 LGA 775
Abit IP35 Pro LGA Intel P35 ATX mobo
Nvidea 9800 GTX/GTX+
Antec 900 case
PCPower & Cooling 610W Continuous PS
CORSAIR (2 X 1gb) ddr2 sdram 24O PIN RAM
How dated am I in today's world? Would it be possible to simply upgrade the CPU or do I need a new MOBO as well? Suggested replacements?
My Nvidea card runs AH at a 59/60 FPS though not all of the advanced options are slected in-game. Should I consider a new card? Suggestions?
Assumably, adding RAM would be a good idea, no? Do I match up to what I already have or start new?
Win7 Ultimate (64bit) was clean installed about a year ago.
I don't have any overt issues with the current system other that it seems slow to boot and the vid card seems a bit overtaxed if I try to run AH graphX at full bore.
Thanks in advance for any suggestions.
-
tossing any money at what you have now would be pretty much tossing good money after bad. the socket 775 cpu/mobo is at least 4 generations behind the curve, as is that video card.
upgrading the cpu, would be not bring any performance value to the system. considering the one you have is running 3.0ghz per core, you could buy 2 newer cpu's with better specs for what it would cost you to get a core 2 quad unless you want to buy used.
you could garner some very minor performance improvements by at least doubling your ram but ddr2 memory is expensive compared to the newer ddr3...$50+ for 4gb ddr2 800mhz vs $40 for 4gb ddr3 1066mhz.
your mobo specs aren't bad but, the pci-e x16 slot is a first gen slot and tossing a better video card in there would not get you the performance increase you would expect.
if you have the money, replace the cpu, mobo, memory and video card...
-
Suggestions for those componants? Thanks
-
it's going to depend on your budget and usage plans...i'm running a low budget amd setup (less than $1000) that will handle my needs for the next 2 years or so. but i tend to replace my systems every 2 to 3 years...and i don't do big money builds.
-
If you still can get a solid 59 fps with decent eye candy, why bother. Even the best rig money can buy wouldn't do any better, unless you really want those moving cockpit shadows without jagged edges. Most of us seem to disable them for good...
As opposed to Gyrene I think that adding RAM could improve both your overall experience and your gameplay without costing too much. After all, ddr2 isn't that much more expensive than ddr3 and the better bus speed only helps if your other components support it. 2gb really isn't much for the 64 bit Win7. Before you upgrade, check how much your motherboard can take - just checked, 8 gb is the maximum. If you find a good bargain, 2 x 2gb into the two now empty slots might really make a difference.
IMO slow boot time isn't that much of an issue, but I guess I'm in the minority here. Nevertheless, if your rig takes a couple of minutes to boot, you can use the time to go for a leak and prepare yourself with "kerosene" for a nice flight.
-
I personally don't like the shadows, I feel like they cause a distraction for me but ymmv. The optimal route would be to start new. Even if you didn't have money for an all new computer right now you could still reuse the video card, hard drive. Etc for a short while.
-
i don't know biz...increasing the amount of memory would probably improve the amount of time it takes to boot that system, but it won't make much difference in gameplay. looking at the price of ddr3 pc2-6400 memory 2gb sticks, there isn't a "good bargain". it's at least a $50 bandaid at best for 4gb.
-
You might be right, Gyrene. Although I still think that 4 gb for $ 50 is dirt cheap and the price difference to the newer type is marginal. Maybe I'm still stuck in the times when 128mb sdram cost more than that in today's money. Anyway I think that memory is the only thing upgradeable in that system, everything else would be either waste of money or building a new rig component by component. As Microsoft says, 2gb is the minimum amount of ram for a 64 bit Win7, so doubling/triplicating that might be a good investment for $50. Otherwise I wouldn't change that rig.
-
max why not just think about what your budget is going to be. and you can get better advise from there. we can sit here and argue to death about price of ram and you may have thousands of dollars gathering dust in boxes up in the attic which would make the ram advise moot. in which case you can build a better computer that will serve you for the next 4 or 5 years.
or maybe your budget is only 50 bucks which makes the ram option more advisable.
semp
-
LGA 775? Yes you can have more power by using a QX9650, or Q9650, especially if your MB allows you to overclock. You would also need to run a later gen GPU, like the 680 or one of the Ati cards. I would also, certainly, jump to 4GB, or as much as 8GB of RAM.
Now, consider how much that would cost you and compare that to what new would run and base your decision on the age of what you would have to carry forward (MB, PSU, etc.) and having to upgrade within three years anyway. Probably it's time to change the GPU either way, so consider that also.
-
LGA 775? Yes you can have more power by using a QX9650, or Q9650, especially if your MB allows you to overclock. You would also need to run a later gen GPU, like the 680 or one of the Ati cards. I would also, certainly, jump to 4GB, or as much as 8GB of RAM.
Now, consider how much that would cost you and compare that to what new would run and base your decision on the age of what you would have to carry forward (MB, PSU, etc.) and having to upgrade within three years anyway. Probably it's time to change the GPU either way, so consider that also.
A 680 would be a horrible match for any CPU you can put in that motherboard. I can kind of see a 670 if you plan on upgrading the CPU-Motherboard-Memory combo in the near future, because a GTX 670 fits in a great place in the price-performance curve, but a 680 has no place unless you're upgrading to a top of the line modern CPU.
I think you should just save up until you can do a complete motherboard-CPU-memory-GPU at once upgrade, and in the mean time just play with what you have. People play AH currently with a lot worse. Do you live near a Microcenter? They've gotten a pretty awesome reputation for having PC parts for cheap lately... cheaper than you can find even online. Unfortunately I've yet to go to one myself.
-
I don't know about THAT motherboard, but your wrong about LGA 775's over all. AND, then if you plan on upgrading down the line why limit yourself to second best? I have seen the setup I suggested actually perform in AH, and it's not a bad option.
Sorry, in this case your advice is slightly off the mark.
My suggestion was for him to engage in consideration of his options, versus price point. Sorry you skipped over that part.
-
Max, my systems pretty close to yours:
EVGA 780i Motherboard
Intel E6750 Conroe 2.66 Ghz OC'd to 3.2 Ghz
4x1 Gb Kingston HyperX DDR2 800
EVGA 8800 GTS
Corsair TX-850 (Fried my PCP&C 750 Silencer)
IMO my sytem still runs the game just fine with hi res textures at a steady 59 FPS. I don't get ALL the eye candy. I've turned off shadows (don't like them), grass (I can run it but it's better turned off), reflections and some of the newer bump mapping. That's really not that big a loss. Everything else is turned up.
Here's what I'd do (cheap options first):
- Add 2 Gigs of RAM (or more depending on price matched to what you have).
- OC your CPU (you should be able to easily get a solid 3.6 Ghz. If you do you'll want DDR2 1066 RAM which you may be able to then underclock to 900 and tighten timings).
- OC your GPU (Use Ntune to automatically OC to optimum performance).
These options will be more expensive but can be moved to a newer platform later:
- Buy a new video card (The increased memory alone will help).
- Buy an SSD to improve boot times.
Here's things you could do but might not be worthwhile:
- Add a soundcard to take pressure off the CPU. This will depend to some degree on the card.
And here's what NOT to do:
- Upgrade the CPU. Socket 775's are obsolete.
You may also need a more powerful PSU but that can also be moved at a later date.
The alternate is replace the motherboard, CPU, RAM and GPU. If you go that route you might be able to salvage your PSU as the newer components are more energy efficient.
-
Thanks for all the replies.
I'm guessing that an update of CPU, GPU, MOBO and memory will run about $800. Tough call to make but I'm considering the remake vs. adding memory now and overclocking the CPU and GPU, which I've never done. I did download NTune and tried running it with the manual sliders...moved 'em both up about 10% and my screen went grey. Rebooting brought up a CMOS error and my clock/date was reset to 2006 :headscratch: The download from CNET included add-on rubbish which I trashed. It appears that you can run the NTune in auto mode which takes about 3 hrs. Given my techno-ignorance, that's probably the best way to OC the GPU, no? How does one go about OC'ing the CPU without risking damage?
If I decide to go with an $800 +/- budget upgrade, what suggestions do ya'll have for the componants?
-
Thanks for all the replies.
I'm guessing that an update of CPU, GPU, MOBO and memory will run about $800. Tough call to make but I'm considering the remake vs. adding memory now and overclocking the CPU and GPU, which I've never done. I did download NTune and tried running it with the manual sliders...moved 'em both up about 10% and my screen went grey. Rebooting brought up a CMOS error and my clock/date was reset to 2006 :headscratch: The download from CNET included add-on rubbish which I trashed. It appears that you can run the NTune in auto mode which takes about 3 hrs. Given my techno-ignorance, that's probably the best way to OC the GPU, no? How does one go about OC'ing the CPU without risking damage?
If I decide to go with an $800 +/- budget upgrade, what suggestions do ya'll have for the componants?
Download NTune directly from Nvidia or EVGA (if that's what your card is). There's a quick OC option that takes about 10 seconds then you can save it as a profile.
OCing the processor is time consuming as you want to take small steps and test between them for stability and temperature with a program like Prime95. If you decide to go that route PM me and I can walk you through it. It's not that hard, only time consuming. You'd be able to OC with the stock HS/Fan but an aftermarket unit (I paid $35 for mine) would allow you to go further.
You're about right on the cost of new... $700-800 for something you'd like. Intel Core I5 Ivy Bridge K series CPU, appropriate mobo for your needs, 1600+ DDR3 RAM and about $300ish for a 6xx series NVidia card (I'm not familiar with AMD). Tweak to budget.
-
Just to add a little tidbit to this discussion............
On the Abit IP35 Pro mobo...........
This mobo had issues when a 45nm C2D CPU was used & was fixed w/ a BIOS update back in the day.
I have 1 still in use (wife's box) w/ a C2D Quad 6600 w/ 3D0 stepping (65nm).
I don't have the BIOS update (which is why I'm still holding on to a spare C2D 6850 Conroe 3.0 65nm CPU for it) & this mobo (along w/ Abit) is no more.
As was already mentioned, I wouldn't mess around w/ a CPU upgrade for that Abit mobo unless you can aquire the BIOS fix for 45nm C2D CPU's..............
Hope this helps.......................
:salute
-
Download NTune directly from Nvidia or EVGA (if that's what your card is). There's a quick OC option that takes about 10 seconds then you can save it as a profile.
OCing the processor is time consuming as you want to take small steps and test between them for stability and temperature with a program like Prime95. If you decide to go that route PM me and I can walk you through it. It's not that hard, only time consuming. You'd be able to OC with the stock HS/Fan but an aftermarket unit (I paid $35 for mine) would allow you to go further.
You're about right on the cost of new... $700-800 for something you'd like. Intel Core I5 Ivy Bridge K series CPU, appropriate mobo for your needs, 1600+ DDR3 RAM and about $300ish for a 6xx series NVidia card (I'm not familiar with AMD). Tweak to budget.
I think ntune was replaced by evga precision x.
semp
-
Max, OCing your old machine wont result wonders, even though a good +15% performance can be gained rather easilyand safely.
From 800$, you would like to get the best gaming performance, right? Then i would say, i5-3570K, suitable mobo, 550W <quality> PSU, 8 gigs of DDR3-1600 and the best ATI VGA what fits in the budget. The whole 7800-7900 series are pretty decent and the last time i checked, they were cheaper than the NVidia cards with the same performance.
But just as Bizman said above, if your rig can run your game well enough, why bother?
-
So I think I'll bite the bullit and refurbish the system with the following from Newegg -
Intel Core i5-3570K Ivy bridge 3.4 GHz $219.99
G.Skill Ripjaws X Series (2 x 4 GB 240 pin DDR3 - $79.99
Asus P8Z77 LGA 1155 Intel Z77 HDMI SATA 6Gb's USB 3.0 ATX Intel MOBO - $134.99
EVGA Geforce GTX 650 Ti Boost SuperClocked 2 GB - $179.99
Total - $614.96
Maybe a new HD as well given the 5 yr old one I'm using.
Whacha think?
-
While you're at it, why not build a totally new rig. The extra cost wouldn't be too much, all would be brand new and under warranty plus you'd have a decent spare AH capable spare computer just in case.
-
Valid suggestion Biz but between PS, HD, case, DVD, etc I'll be looking at an additional $300 + :cry
-
So I think I'll bite the bullit and refurbish the system with the following from Newegg -
Intel Core i5-3570K Ivy bridge 3.4 GHz $219.99
G.Skill Ripjaws X Series (2 x 4 GB 240 pin DDR3 - $79.99
Asus P8Z77 LGA 1155 Intel Z77 HDMI SATA 6Gb's USB 3.0 ATX Intel MOBO - $134.99
EVGA Geforce GTX 650 Ti Boost SuperClocked 2 GB - $179.99
Total - $614.96
Maybe a new HD as well given the 5 yr old one I'm using.
Whacha think?
That's pretty close to what I'd buy if I were upgrading now. It will be an improvement but It may not be a huge leap which is why I've held off considering I don't have any significant performance issues now. It will however, move you into current technology (until they change things again next year).
-
So I think I'll bite the bullit and refurbish the system with the following from Newegg -
Intel Core i5-3570K Ivy bridge 3.4 GHz $219.99
G.Skill Ripjaws X Series (2 x 4 GB 240 pin DDR3 - $79.99
Asus P8Z77 LGA 1155 Intel Z77 HDMI SATA 6Gb's USB 3.0 ATX Intel MOBO - $134.99
EVGA Geforce GTX 650 Ti Boost SuperClocked 2 GB - $179.99
Total - $614.96
Maybe a new HD as well given the 5 yr old one I'm using.
Whacha think?
That's a solid plan right there. If you don't get the hard drive and you want to spend $800, you'll see gains by spending your remaining $185.04 on the video card, a GTX660 Ti or GTX670. But for ~ $600 you've nailed it perfectly price/performance-wise IMO.
Edit: You might consider an after-market CPU cooler too, it'll help your overclock if you do that, help to keep the noise down if you don't. Plenty of reviews to choose from, here's one with some nice comparison charts: http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/02/26/phanteks_phtc12dx_cpu_air_cooler_review/3
-
Valid suggestion Biz but between PS, HD, case, DVD, etc I'll be looking at an additional $300 + :cry
I calculated that you'd be changing the hard disk anyway, five years is well over an average lifetime of a hdd. Aside from that, a solid and well ventilated case is about $50, a DVD-RW $20, a good psu $100. A hard disk would be from 70'ish to 150'ish depending on the amount of terabytes, so that would raise the addition to 300+. Oh, and I forgot: A new Windows license...
-
Good plan IMO Max. You can always add some of those other things that have been recommended later, right, but for now, those upgrades will get you back into the game, and pretty much every other game, with a good kick in the pants in terms of performance.
Be sure you O/C that system too, the 3570k is the "celeron 300" of our day, back when everyone clocked their 300 Celery up to the P2 450 mhz's speed. That MB you picked out should o/c very well with the 3570k chip, and if you need help, lots of guys like Chal and others will give you more help than you'll know what to do with if you ask here. As stated, you'll need a decent cooler, and there are lots for cheap $ for you to pick from. Don't go and spend 85$ on the DH14 or anything like that, it's overkill and over $ for your upgrade path IMO, but there are lots in the sub 40$ range that will more than do the job required. The Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo is one of the most popular budget minded coolers out there. It's not necessarily the "best", but in terms for bang for the $, it's hard to find one that is better by a huge margin. You can find it for under 30$ if you look around, and everybody and their dog sells them for 35$ max.
If you can afford another 25 or 30$, that Phanteks mentioned a few posts back is probably the best performing cooler for under 100$. If it had been available when I bought the DH14 cooler I have on my 3820 system, I would have gone with the dual fan version of it for around 60$, which is 25$ less than the DH14, and it is quieter and performs better to boot.
-
Debrody coaxed me into checking out ATI cards. A little research turned up the Radeon 7850 2G. It out performed the 650 Ti Boost with only a slight wattage increase. Price is about $20 more vs the NV card.
Any of you familiar with this card? Any one manufacturer preferred? I'm not familiar with ATI products.
Thanks
-
Six of one, half dozen of the other Max. You'll find either of those cards, the nVidia or AMD will suit your purpose just fine. If there is anyplace to stretch your budget, at least IMO, it is your GPU. If you can afford to jump up to the 7950 from the 7850, the payoff is pretty good, particularly with that 3570k CPU overclocked. For about another 100$, you can jump up from the 7850 to the 7950, or for around half that much, approx 50$ more, you could move up to the 7870.
Just floating some ideas for you - I know a TON of people with the 7950 card, in fact, the 3570k/7950/etc/etc is a very "standard" gaming and do-it-all configuration. Skuzzy has that 7950 I believe, Mace, and several other BBS persona of note, maybe ask them if they think it's worth it if you're going to go AMD for your GPU. I have a squadmate with the 7870 and we has nothing but great things to say about it, and his CPU isn't as fast as your new one will be.
As for brands, it's pretty subjective, but I've read a lot of hate from the "hardware" sites like Toms etc regarding the HIS brand. Then again, I've read a couple of guys swear by their ICE HIS cards. PNY also has a sort of shaky rep from what I've read, many people accuse them of sourcing the absolute cheapest parts available, and have an equally bad rep warranty wise. Again, subjective, but very common to see BBS posts regarding the same opinion. Asus, MSI, Gigabyte/windforce, XFX, and Sapphire all have a fairly solid rep from what I've read as well, but again, it's subjective. One thing I've read pretty much universally regarding AMD cards is the XFX has by far and away the best and easiest to deal with warranty program. If you google "best AMD brand video cards", you'll get the phone book from Tomshardware etc, spend half an hour or so reading through some of the opinions there would be my advice before narrowing down some of the question you may want to ask some of the AH players here.
Other than that, I would ask Debrody, he reads and knows a lot about the AMD cards and their value/performance/quirks, or Chalenge as well. My vid cards are all nVidia now, but I ran an ASUS 5770 for a year or so back when it was "the" card, and it punched way above its weight for a long time. As I said, there are a lot of AH players who have all three of the AMD cards you should probably be considering. Sorry to blather on, but like I said, the GPU is the most important decision you have to make now that you've picked the CPU you have, and if you plan on keeping it as long as your last system, you should make it with the most and best info you can get IMO.
-
Max,
Just like as Tundra said, you cant go wrong with Asus, MSI, Gigabyte, XFX, or Sapphire, among from theese, i would choose the cheapest one with the longest warranty.
One thing that stands behind the 7850/7950: they are a bit clipped down versions of the 7870/7970, but they are also greatly downclocked, while the 650 Ti Boost is clocked pretty high. So it has a very good chance that the 7850 can easily run at 1GHz instead of the stock 850MHz, giving you some extra performance.
But the 650 Ti Boost for 170-180$ is a fair deal, if you have any reason to stay with the NVidia, choose this. The 680 for 500 what is overpriced, since there is an about 5-7% faster 7970 GHz edition for ~450$.
-
See Rule #4
-
Dear Mr WhatchYourLanguage,
true, its a hungarian test site of a GTX Titan test, but the graphs might be pretty understandable, what games they tested, and under which settings. Also, there is a test cofiguration description on the 5th page.
http://prohardver.hu/teszt/nvidia_geforce_gtx_titan_az_egy_gpu-s_goliat/erodemonstracio_nvidia-modra.html
To sum it, in that case if you dont have the patience to scroll it through, here is the summing page:
http://prohardver.hu/teszt/nvidia_geforce_gtx_titan_az_egy_gpu-s_goliat/osszegzes.html
The first graph shows the relative speed of each cards while the second shows the performance/consumption. The larger bar is better in both cases.
Sorry good sir, i was wrong, the 7970 GE is not 7, but 20% faster than the 680 in the modern, dx11 games. And as for AH, true, it isnt in the test package, but isnt it totally equal that it runs with 200 or 220 fps? Max said it earlyer that his 9800GTX is running this game well. Also, in 2013, its pretty funny to judge a card's performance only by its texel fillrate.
I wouldnt buy a Titan to play CoD2, but thats just me ;)
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #4
-
Let's not start a fuss here gentlemen. Everyone's entitled to their opinion.
I recall back in '08 when I built the rig, going thru the same process, e.g. "for only $50 more..." ...the ATI vs Geforce decision...deciding on a budget and parts, only to retool half the list as prices drop, etc etc etc.
It's all part of the fun and learning curve in building/retooling your own rig. Kinda fun tho :banana:
Your posts...all of them have been educational...appreciate the time and input. :aok
-
can't understand all these suggestions of overclocking...it's a luxury not a requirement, and arbitrarily telling someone to do it is dumb. a quad core cpu running at 3.4ghz is more than enough to handle ah (or any other game for that matter), especially with a good video card.
your list looks good max. you're going to have a good performance boost with just the new hardware, without overclocking. make sure you get low profile memory sticks. you should plan to replace that hard drive soon-ish too...use the existing one as a secondary data drive. no need for a massive multi-terabyte drive either. go for quality, not quantity. definitely get a good aftermarket cpu cooler as well. i know a lot of people running the coolermaster hyper212 evo and combined with some really good thermal compound even overclocked cpu's stay very cool...for $35. i messed up and bought the vortex2 which keeps my amd cpu cool enough but, it could be better.
if you're going with an amd/ati video card, xfx has the best warranty (lifetime) but not the fastest gpu's. i've run nothing but xfx and evga video cards for the past 10 years. the one warranty replacement i needed was an xfx after 3 years of use and it was relatively painless, the replacement was an upgrade from the original. a friend of mine just had an evga mobo replaced under warranty after 4 years, and since they didn't have any of his original mobo's in stock any longer he got a brand new z77 mobo...for nothing but the cost of shipping the old mobo back to the company.
-
can't understand all these suggestions of overclocking...it's a luxury not a requirement, and arbitrarily telling someone to do it is dumb.
Agree with your post, with exception to this. We'll have to agree to disagree that's all. I would say that when nearly every major manufacturer includes overclocking utilities with their motherboards, and detailed instructions on how to do it, that it is now mainstream, and it's almost "expected" as a value added sort of thing. It's actually a marketing thing, engineered to make people think they are getting more value for their money, being "sneaky" and getting more than what they've paid for. You can google it and read all about it if you wish.
You're right, it isn't a requirement, but it certainly isn't a luxury. With the 3570k in particular, I won't bother posting all the thousands of charts and benchmarks you can find at your fingertips with google, but suffice it to say, by not overclocking, you're missing out on at least 15 percent, and up as high as 25% in some instances, a full quarter, of the performance available with all kinds of games and applications.
If you were to argue that it could possibly void your warranty, then I would agree with you 100%. You are correct like I said that the OP will see huge performance gains, O/C or not, but just IMO he'll be missing out on that little bit extra. Games like ARMA 3's playable beta/alpha right now that are very CPU intensive, you can see an obvious and measurable drop in FPS when I downclock my 3820 and 3930 systems to stock from their overclocked states, and I imagine it would be the same with the 3570k.
Just my opinion, there isn't a right or wrong answer really. However, calling somebody "dumb" over it is uncalled for, and also a violation of the rules the last time I checked.
-
Just my opinion, there isn't a right or wrong answer really. However, calling somebody "dumb" over it is uncalled for, and also a violation of the rules the last time I checked.
The way I always looked at overclocking is, if you can afford to possibly (low possibility, but still a possibility) fry or at least significantly shorten the lifespan of your components, go hard. If you're not planning on spending money or don't have the money to spend on your computer for a good long while, it might not be worth it to you.
Wiley.
-
I'd look into SSD's before final HD choice is made. Not necessary for AH but, will give the best disc performance for the game.
Why OC?
Well I have an Intel i7 920 D, 2.6MHz spec cpu, cost $280.
At time of i7 purchase, the high end intel i7 chip was $1000+.
I have the 920 clocked to 4GHz, on air cooling only. So thats $1000 performance for $280.00.
This is why you OC, cuz your a cheap bossturd like moi. lol
-
The way I always looked at overclocking is, if you can afford to possibly (low possibility, but still a possibility) fry or at least significantly shorten the lifespan of your components, go hard. If you're not planning on spending money or don't have the money to spend on your computer for a good long while, it might not be worth it to you.
Wiley.
It depends on the components as to what could happen. If the builder goes to the trouble to select good supporting equipment (I'm talking PSUs in particular), then the minor overclocks may take a few months off of the life of a CPU. CPUs can last for a decade easily, so I don't see much danger. I suggested the QX9650 and the Q9650, both of which take a minor overclock (from 3.0 to 3.6GHz) like you take a walk in the park. It's nothing to them. In fact, both CPUs will do that at factory recommended voltages, which should take nothing off of their lifespan. The only real concern is heat, and if your cooler dies on an overclock CPU the result would be the same on a normal clock.
Either of those processors is also very capable of playing AH without breaking a sweat. Is it smart money spent? If it was just a matter of CPU and the CPUs could be had at a bargain, then yes. The problem I had coming into the thread was everyone immediately suggesting a full upgrade was in order. Looking at the choices made I think a good MB with the CPU and GPU I recommended would be on par. Certainly it is possible to buy a new system that beats it all the way round, but that is not the case here.
-
It depends on the components as to what could happen. If the builder goes to the trouble to select good supporting equipment (I'm talking PSUs in particular), then the minor overclocks may take a few months off of the life of a CPU. CPUs can last for a decade easily, so I don't see much danger. I suggested the QX9650 and the Q9650, both of which take a minor overclock (from 3.0 to 3.6GHz) like you take a walk in the park. It's nothing to them. In fact, both CPUs will do that at factory recommended voltages, which should take nothing off of their lifespan. The only real concern is heat, and if your cooler dies on an overclock CPU the result would be the same on a normal clock.
Either of those processors is also very capable of playing AH without breaking a sweat. Is it smart money spent? If it was just a matter of CPU and the CPUs could be had at a bargain, then yes. The problem I had coming into the thread was everyone immediately suggesting a full upgrade was in order. Looking at the choices made I think a good MB with the CPU and GPU I recommended would be on par. Certainly it is possible to buy a new system that beats it all the way round, but that is not the case here.
Yep most people will want to upgrade many years before the actual lifespan of the CPU will end. So if you push it through OC and you lose a few years it mostly just means that the CPU would theoretically die 2 years after it's been thrown away instead of 6 years.
-
Just so you know, Intel is coming out with a new series of desktop CPUs on June 2nd. The older series will eventually drop in price because of this. The new series is only about 10% faster, so you don't need to wait for them to come out, but it might be worth waiting to save some money on the older CPUs.
Personally I think AMD has too many compatibility and driver problems, so I would go with Intel and Nvidia for any new build except for the low end. I never overclock my GPUs (all the games I play are CPU bound anyways), but it isn't a horrible point about the 650 Ti Boost being highly clocked with little overhead. I would look more towards a GTX 660 if that's a concern.
-
Just so you know, Intel is coming out with a new series of desktop CPUs on June 2nd. The older series will eventually drop in price because of this. The new series is only about 10% faster, so you don't need to wait for them to come out, but it might be worth waiting to save some money on the older CPUs.
Personally I think AMD has too many compatibility and driver problems, so I would go with Intel and Nvidia for any new build except for the low end. I never overclock my GPUs (all the games I play are CPU bound anyways), but it isn't a horrible point about the 650 Ti Boost being highly clocked with little overhead. I would look more towards a GTX 660 if that's a concern.
I'd like to hear some examples of those compatibility and driver problems. Been using only ATI/AMD for the past 10 years without a single problem so far. The only place where nvidia really wipes the floor with ATI is linux drivers.
-
Personally I think AMD has too many compatibility and driver problems <snip>
:headscratch: say whut? complete b.s.
-
can't understand all these suggestions of overclocking...it's a luxury not a requirement, and arbitrarily telling someone to do it is dumb. a quad core cpu running at 3.4ghz is more than enough to handle ah (or any other game for that matter), especially with a good video card.
I suggested OCing as an alternative to buying a "quad core cpu running at 3.4ghz" which is not what he has now.
Intel for years now has allowed for an easy 20% OC on most of their CPU's. Mine's been OC'd for heading on six years now with no ill effects.
A little OC, a little more RAM and a new GPU provides a lot more bang for the buck than buying new components and the RAM is the only thing that can't be used in the future.
-
I suggested OCing as an alternative to buying a "quad core cpu running at 3.4ghz" which is not what he has now.
Intel for years now has allowed for an easy 20% OC on most of their CPU's. Mine's been OC'd for heading on six years now with no ill effects.
A little OC, a little more RAM and a new GPU provides a lot more bang for the buck than buying new components and the RAM is the only thing that can't be used in the future.
that suggestion makes sense sir. though i'm not sure what the net effect would be on an 800mhz mobo, still worth a shot. a new gpu, would be a crap shoot on that system. tossing a current pci-e x16 3.0 gpu in that pci-e x16 1.0 slot wouldn't garner enough gain to justify the cost. definitely more ram would help in several ways.
what i was really questioning is the idea of squeezing 15-25% more perceived performance out of a cpu that can already run most games at max without breaking a sweat. in a video game where 60fps steady is the goal and is easily achieved with a dual core 2.8ghz cpu on a 1000mhz fsb and a good video card, overclocking an i7 hex core already running at 3.4ghz mounted on a z77 chipset, is just wasted effort.
-
Just so you know, Intel is coming out with a new series of desktop CPUs on June 2nd. The older series will eventually drop in price because of this. The new series is only about 10% faster, so you don't need to wait for them to come out, but it might be worth waiting to save some money on the older CPUs.
Personally I think AMD has too many compatibility and driver problems, so I would go with Intel and Nvidia for any new build except for the low end. I never overclock my GPUs (all the games I play are CPU bound anyways), but it isn't a horrible point about the 650 Ti Boost being highly clocked with little overhead. I would look more towards a GTX 660 if that's a concern.
I have recently purchased a GTX 660. Love the card so far. The only thing I have noticed is that I still get a small FPS drop when i am in a congested area. I.E. When a lot of things happen at once. Like a lot of Graphics in a short span. However, could this be my CPU holding it back? Or even my mobo?
-
OP - Max, I would stick with your plan you posted, and go with whatever video card you can afford, and stretch to get the best one if possible. I would also O/C your system for all the reasons stated in this thread by many others. Try playing AH2 with and without it o/c'd and decide for yourself if you think it's worth it, that's the best way to proceed if you have any doubts about doing it IMO.
-
There is also this.
If the puter you use now, plays the game with mostly 60FPS, then your good to go. Modern hardware is not gonna all of a sudden make you into a hit monster. Your ISP is what it is, unless your still dial up. A new puter will only up the games, eye candy. It will however help, with all the other things one does outside of gaming with a computer. Things are cheap, newegg always has sales, patience can be rewarded. There are a lot of new goodies available.
I use an SSD array with a 4GHz processor. All things, are snappy as hell on the machine. I do not like using others machines now, to slow.............lol
:airplane:
-
If you're searching for components, try pcpartspicker.com. It helped me search for websites with the lowest price for each component. Someone here also recommended looking at MicroCenter. If you have one near you, it can save major $ if you get a motherboard and CPU from them. You need to go into the store to get the best deal though. I saved $100 off newegg on an Intel 3570K cpu with an Asrock Eztreme4 1155 motherboard. Overclocking with that set up is easy. I also saved $20 on my case - Coolermaster HAF 912 - no USB 3 connector, but otherwise a good, inexpensive case. I listened to DeBrody and got an AMD 7870 (XFX) and have been really pleased with it. This runs off a Seasonic 620 watt modular ps. I have most of the eye candy turned up and am using hi res with a rock solid 60 fpm in furballs, through burning fields, etc. My setup cost around $930 in early January including OS, 1 TB hard drive, and an optical drive.
-
"rock solid 60 fpm" - That is a solid 60fps I'm getting. :bhead I built new because anywhere near fires or large furballs I was dropping to 25 fps or less on my 7 year old Dell with all eye candy turned off. Definitely pay attention to the advice on this board. Do your own research and figure out what meets your needs and who makes the most sense here for you. I could not have done my build without the help and advice on this board.
-
After some further tweaking, this is the current upgrade list ~
Intel Core i5-3570K Ivy bridge 3.4 GHz $219.99
G.Skill Ripjaws X Series (2 x 4 GB 240 pin DDR3 - $79.99
Asus P8Z77 LGA 1155 Intel Z77 HDMI SATA 6Gb's USB 3.0 ATX Intel MOBO - $134.99
Seagate Constellation I TB 7200 SATA - $114.99 (budget cut from SSD)
Sapphire Radeon 7850-OC 2 GB - $185.99
Cooler Master Hyper 212 - $36.99
Total cost $772.94
Assume I have to do a clean install of Win7?
Opinions? Thanks for all the help & suggestions. You guys rock :aok
-
Looks both sensible and efficient for multiple uses.
And yes, you'd better do a clean install. There's more than one reason why it'd be wise. If you want to know the reasons, ask. The community knows!
-
what Bizman said... :aok
-
Since you are only keeping peripheral components a new instal is mandatory.
Silly.
My socket 775 machines are becoming quite dated. Although the 8400 is still pulling right along, the 6750 is having a hard time with even coping with my wife's online games.
If I had $750 laying around I would do almost exactly what you have listed. Should be strong for many years.
-
After some further tweaking, this is the current upgrade list ~
Intel Core i5-3570K Ivy bridge 3.4 GHz $219.99
G.Skill Ripjaws X Series (2 x 4 GB 240 pin DDR3 - $79.99
Asus P8Z77 LGA 1155 Intel Z77 HDMI SATA 6Gb's USB 3.0 ATX Intel MOBO - $134.99
Seagate Constellation I TB 7200 SATA - $114.99 (budget cut from SSD)
Sapphire Radeon 7850-OC 2 GB - $185.99
Cooler Master Hyper 212 - $36.99
Total cost $772.94
Assume I have to do a clean install of Win7?
Opinions? Thanks for all the help & suggestions. You guys rock :aok
One last suggestion. I didn't look at the RAM you're buying but if you can find similar (same speed) RAM at the same price with tighter timings you might pick up another marginal bit of performance. CAS latency is the biggest factor. It's the last number in that string of four (like 5-5-5-24 for instance).
-
The only thought I have is to make sure the ram fits on the MB with the aftermarket cooler. I picked up corsair vengeance low profille ram just to be certain. I'm also paranoid. Others here with better expertise will weigh in, but your build looks good to me. It should run AH really well! :rock
-
After some further tweaking, this is the current upgrade list ~
Intel Core i5-3570K Ivy bridge 3.4 GHz $219.99
G.Skill Ripjaws X Series (2 x 4 GB 240 pin DDR3 - $79.99
Asus P8Z77 LGA 1155 Intel Z77 HDMI SATA 6Gb's USB 3.0 ATX Intel MOBO - $134.99
Seagate Constellation I TB 7200 SATA - $114.99 (budget cut from SSD)
Sapphire Radeon 7850-OC 2 GB - $185.99
Cooler Master Hyper 212 - $36.99
Total cost $772.94
Assume I have to do a clean install of Win7?
Opinions? Thanks for all the help & suggestions. You guys rock :aok
W7 64 bit clean install. Make sure you have the lan drivers ready so you can use net for other drivers required.
I have a 30 GB SSD with the OS only on it, + drivers. It herds spin drives. Fairly cheap for that size SSD. Keep your valubles on the spin drive and give the OS an SSD boost. Shame to waste that 6GB/s SATA header on a slow drive......
S good luck
-
W7 64 bit clean install. Make sure you have the lan drivers ready so you can use net for other drivers required.
I have a 30 GB SSD with the OS only on it, + drivers. It herds spin drives. Fairly cheap for that size SSD. Keep your valubles on the spin drive and give the OS an SSD boost. Shame to waste that 6GB/s SATA header on a slow drive......
S good luck
Usually 30gb ssds are relatively slow for a ssd... And that space is going to get filled up fast. Service packs, shadow copies, updates etc. do not automatically get cleaned up and they bloat the windows folder surprisingly fast.
If one should purchase a ssd 128gb is definate minimum, 256gb size recommended. There are technical reasons why large ssds are superior to small ones, involving wear leveling algorithms, overprovisioning space etc. 128 or smaller ssds are usually limited in write operations and operative age compared to the larger versions.
-
If one should purchase a ssd 128gb is definate minimum, 256gb size recommended.
I dont know much about the further technical details like Ripley does, but i have a 64 GB one, OCZ Agility II, its lightening fast, but is really getting small. My win7 consumes ~30GBs, only 30 is remaining for my programs - with a 128GB one, the remaining space is about 3 times larger.
-
SSD, what ripley says. 128 min. I bought a 60 GB for a recent rebuild last year and learned the hard way.
-
I use a 30 GB SSD for a puter. OS and Drivers only, XP Pro 32 bit. Works great, plenty room.
But to each his own. The OS is the brain, better it works..............
-
I use a 30 GB SSD for a puter. OS and Drivers only, XP Pro 32 bit. Works great, plenty room.
But to each his own. The OS is the brain, better it works..............
Ok, that's actually a second problem. Windows XP is not designed for SSD use and it lacks necessary features (TRIM support etc) required to make the SSD work properly. XP does indeed fit easily to 30Gb but then again it's not a suitable OS for SSDs.
Using the SSD with XP is going to shorten its lifespan and degrade its speed very fast. Write operations will be as slow as some laptop hdd :)
-
No problem with XP and SSD, both sector orientation of a partition and Trim should be overcome by SSD manufacturer's software. But I agree, 30GB is far too small and 60GB acceptable if you only have the OS and standard program loaded on the SSD. 128Gb should be minimum.
And a tip - ovoid OCZ SSD, they are not really known to be reliable over the long run, they are only top in the drive return rate for warranty.
-
I use OCZ vertex's, I have 8 of them. Many years old, only 1 has failed, this was recently.
OCZ firmware has garbage collection, GC. TRIM not needed. SSD works great with XP.
Ripley you are full of absolutes.
The op wants to spend less and get more. 1000 ways to get there. My suggestions, I currently use. They are not opinions.
30GB OCZ Vertex SSD, $80. read/write speed, 230Mb/s/175Mb/s???
Only OS and drivers!, will get more peformance than a 1 TB spin drive. Granted, you do want SSD performance for all applications, so you want apps on the SSD, but your on a budget.
OP its not that expensive for SSD. Just keep it simple and stay away from the current releases. Ultimately it about how you use your machine. Some AH and a little web surfing, or heavy intensive application editing.
-
I use OCZ vertex's, I have 8 of them. Many years old, only 1 has failed, this was recently.
OCZ firmware has garbage collection, GC. TRIM not needed. SSD works great with XP.
Ripley you are full of absolutes.
The op wants to spend less and get more. 1000 ways to get there. My suggestions, I currently use. They are not opinions.
30GB OCZ Vertex SSD, $80. read/write speed, 230Mb/s/175Mb/s???
Only OS and drivers!, will get more peformance than a 1 TB spin drive. Granted, you do want SSD performance for all applications, so you want apps on the SSD, but your on a budget.
OP its not that expensive for SSD. Just keep it simple and stay away from the current releases. Ultimately it about how you use your machine. Some AH and a little web surfing, or heavy intensive application editing.
It's not only trim, XP doesn't make automatic optimizations for SSD like Win7/8 do. Using XP and SSD _will_ wear the SSD down faster. The problem is worse when the SSD is small and the overprovisioning space is limited. There are often huge performance differences between different SSD sizes of the same model even if we leave OS out of the picture.
-
After some further tweaking, this is the current upgrade list ~
Intel Core i5-3570K Ivy bridge 3.4 GHz $219.99
G.Skill Ripjaws X Series (2 x 4 GB 240 pin DDR3 - $79.99
Asus P8Z77 LGA 1155 Intel Z77 HDMI SATA 6Gb's USB 3.0 ATX Intel MOBO - $134.99
Seagate Constellation I TB 7200 SATA - $114.99 (budget cut from SSD)
Sapphire Radeon 7850-OC 2 GB - $185.99
Cooler Master Hyper 212 - $36.99
Total cost $772.94
Assume I have to do a clean install of Win7?
Opinions? Thanks for all the help & suggestions. You guys rock :aok
Good morning Max,
Just a few questions , Sir...
* have you ordered your pc parts yet?
* I am assuming you are going to use your existing Antec 900 case, correct?
* are you still on the old mail list? if so, I'll email you my thoughts/ideas/suggestions/and reasoning
Also, is there any specific reason you rather use that listed Seagate HDD, over using a WD caviler black model???
Cheers
TC
-
It's not only trim, XP doesn't make automatic optimizations for SSD like Win7/8 do. Using XP and SSD _will_ wear the SSD down faster. The problem is worse when the SSD is small and the overprovisioning space is limited. There are often huge performance differences between different SSD sizes of the same model even if we leave OS out of the picture.
and yet, mine works fine. SSD runs on XP as well as on W7 equally well. hmmmmmmmm. Proper installation is required for any piece of hardware. Something does not have to be automatic to be of use.
OP,
do the research, make sure your hardware choices will work with each other, see the QVL for mobo. Update mobo firmware before OS install. Enjoy the new goodies. The new boards use QPI, so set ups are a little different from pre X58 mobos.
S
-
Set up is fine. I would get a SSD like OCZ's latest. Prices are just over a dollar a gig now. Before installing set your mobo to AHCI mode in the storage section and Win7 will boot up in 15 seconds. No kidding. Fresh install required no way around that. A 240 Gig SSD is all you need. Apps on the SSD open instantly. You'd be surprised how quickly AH opens. I only have iTunes, AH, and my OS on my first SSD.
Win 7 64 bit is also a better option. It can see as much ram as the mobo allows.
:salute
-
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00A9YQPME/cupcre06-20
I ran across this looking for other info.
Great prices now. 500Mb/s reads.
-
and yet, mine works fine. SSD runs on XP as well as on W7 equally well. hmmmmmmmm. Proper installation is required for any piece of hardware. Something does not have to be automatic to be of use.
OP,
do the research, make sure your hardware choices will work with each other, see the QVL for mobo. Update mobo firmware before OS install. Enjoy the new goodies. The new boards use QPI, so set ups are a little different from pre X58 mobos.
S
Define 'runs well'. Does it 'run well' if it dies prematurely 1 or 2 years from now? Does it run well if it benchmarks at 20% the rated speed at the moment? Have you benchmarked your drive to see how much it has degraded?
-
Define 'runs well'. Does it 'run well' if it dies prematurely 1 or 2 years from now? Does it run well if it benchmarks at 20% the rated speed at the moment? Have you benchmarked your drive to see how much it has degraded?
Does what its suppose to do.
Its well past the 2 year mark.
You sir are a bummer. You act as if your word is law, it is not.
Buy the right product, install it correctly and walla, enjoyment.
Maybe your an industry professional, I do not know. I am not and yet I am using the equipment as I described. I do not baby the drives and I have only had 1 of 8 fail, and I bet a destructive FW flash will bring it back. Been over 4 years now. I even use the XP machine with GIMP, edit a lot. I use it as a bench machine as well to keep up with my game machine. Way too many people use SSD's with XP for your statements to be a concern.
Yes, W7 was coded with SSD's in mind. XP was not, considering it was coded way before SSD's were available to the masses, but so what. The reads and writes happen the same way with either OS, they are more the same than not. W7 is coded to make install of SSD easier but thats it, I use both, have installed with both W7 and XP. TRIM is unnecessary because the SSD FW handles maintenance by it self. You cannot even use TRIM when you RAID SSD's. When the XP SSD drive fails, I will lose the OS only, all else is on other drives. I will then use another small SSD and re-install the XP OS and move on.
It will cost me less than the 1st SSD purchase, to boot.
An SSD will not run AH better than a spinner. I will load faster but thats it. Pagefile use will be faster but who can really tell the diff. The SSD will however make other computer things nicer. It will work with the modern rams, vid cards and such, speeding up browsing and other apps. Why use a mobo with a 6GB/s SATA headers with a spin drive that cannot come close to using the pipe available.
The OS is the foundation for all that comes after. Giving the OS its best working environment is the battle. All apps work inside the OS. The OS works with the hardware provided. Its a no brainer.
But to each his own. I know it works, and any test or benchmark of an SSD will surpass that of a spinner.
The op wanted options, I tried to offer some.
-
I benchmarked my hard drives.......I get the numbers advertised. There are several benchmark apps for free at pcworld and cnet. Take your pick.
-
Does what its suppose to do.
Its well past the 2 year mark.
You sir are a bummer. You act as if your word is law, it is not.
Buy the right product, install it correctly and walla, enjoyment.
Maybe your an industry professional, I do not know. I am not and yet I am using the equipment as I described. I do not baby the drives and I have only had 1 of 8 fail, and I bet a destructive FW flash will bring it back. Been over 4 years now. I even use the XP machine with GIMP, edit a lot. I use it as a bench machine as well to keep up with my game machine. Way too many people use SSD's with XP for your statements to be a concern.
Yes, W7 was coded with SSD's in mind. XP was not, considering it was coded way before SSD's were available to the masses, but so what. The reads and writes happen the same way with either OS, they are more the same than not. W7 is coded to make install of SSD easier but thats it, I use both, have installed with both W7 and XP. TRIM is unnecessary because the SSD FW handles maintenance by it self. You cannot even use TRIM when you RAID SSD's. When the XP SSD drive fails, I will lose the OS only, all else is on other drives. I will then use another small SSD and re-install the XP OS and move on.
It will cost me less than the 1st SSD purchase, to boot.
An SSD will not run AH better than a spinner. I will load faster but thats it. Pagefile use will be faster but who can really tell the diff. The SSD will however make other computer things nicer. It will work with the modern rams, vid cards and such, speeding up browsing and other apps. Why use a mobo with a 6GB/s SATA headers with a spin drive that cannot come close to using the pipe available.
The OS is the foundation for all that comes after. Giving the OS its best working environment is the battle. All apps work inside the OS. The OS works with the hardware provided. Its a no brainer.
But to each his own. I know it works, and any test or benchmark of an SSD will surpass that of a spinner.
The op wanted options, I tried to offer some.
My 5400rpm laptop harddrive does what it's supposed to. But if I benchmark it I can see it doesn't perform very good. You have to realize that if you don't treat the SSD properly it will use up all it's fresh blocks for writing and then write performance will collapse badly. The problem is especially affecting smaller drive capacities.
I'm just saying that you could have planned the SSD setup better by doing some research in advance.