Homebuilt CPU upgrade advice appreciated

[Chalenge]

See Rule #4

[Debrody]

See Rule #4

[Chalenge]

See Rule #4

[Max]

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 

Your posts...all of them have been educational...appreciate the time and input. 

[gyrene81]

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.

[Gman]

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.

[Wiley]

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.

[MADe]

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

[Chalenge]

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.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

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.

[BoilerDown]

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.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

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.

[gyrene81]

Personally I think AMD has too many compatibility and driver problems <snip>

  say whut? complete b.s.

[BaldEagl]

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.

[gyrene81]

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.