General Upgrade advice

S

Spetsdod

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 7, 2008
Messages
181
I've been flying my current rig for almost two years now and I'm getting the itch to upgrade (again) but after looking at performance numbers I'm not convinced that I'm going to see a justifiable performance boost. My current machine works very well for nearly everything I throw at it, with some performance issues related to graphic lag and load times. I'm hoping to get some input, not on specific hardware, but in general about realistic expectations for performance differences between my machine and a class of upgraded machine.

Gaming is my primary at home use. WoW, W:AR, Insurgency, L4D. I'd like to try Crysis or some of the newer crop of games, but I haven't made the jump yet from lack of confidence in my hardware to run them.
Occasional photo editing or rendering
Internet

Current build
Intel 965 mobo
C2D 2.4gHz 6600
(NO overclocking)
2gb PC2-5400 RAM
Zalman cooler (dunno exactly which one, big brass thing that cuts knuckles)
BFG 8800GTOC2 stock
700GB SATA II drive
BFG 600W PS
24" HP monitor
Currently Vista 32
Antec Lanboy case

Intended build class (not specific hardware yet)
Core i7 mobo and CPU (something in the 3.0ghz range I think)
OR
C2Q mobo and CPU (if the i7 combo is too expensive)
(again, not interested in overclocking)
nVidia video 280 or 285 (depending on what I find at a good price)
4-6 GB RAM (depending on prices at purchase time)
PS as appropriate for hardware
probably keep the case, as it is a good case in good condition
I would consider Vista 64 if Win7 wasn't so close to release, but I have a Win7-64 beta license so I could run that for a while. I'm willing to buy a 64bit license if necessary, but I have a legal XP Pro license and a Vista Business 32 license currently.

I've never been very fond of OS drive / Data drive builds but I might consider that. I have had two RAID0 configurations fail and result in data loss so I'm not very keen on that, and I wasn't very impressed by the performance boost over a fast single drive config. That being said, I might consider something like a 500GB OS and data drive, and a pair of fast 500gb drives in RAID0 for game directories with no data storage.

So, for budget, I haven't committed to buying anything yet and I'm not really expecting specific component suggestions yet, but I would probably be spending between $1000 and $1500. I will build everything myself unless the perfect prebuilt comes along. I've been building systems since the very early 90's.

Based on my current rig configuration, and the planned configuration, I would appreciate any speculation on real world performance expectations. I don't mind spending the money to do this, but if I'm going to spend it I would like to see an improvement in performance that justifies the cost, the effort, and having to explain to my GF why I need MORE computer upgrades. =)

Thanks in advance.

edit: speeling
 
With your current motherboard, your best options are...

-Q6600 and overclock it 3.0 Ghz
-4GB of DDR2 800
-4850 x 2
 
I'm not necessarily keeping my current motherboard. I am considering upgrading the board and CPU. Also, I don't like ATI video cards very much.

That being said, what I'm looking for is not suggestions on WHAT hardware to buy, but rather what PERFORMANCE increase I can expect to see between my current config and a theoretical upgrade (with suggestions on equipment happily accepted).

Thank you for replying just the same.
 
The biggest performance boost you'll get is switching to a newer video card.. GTX260 takes my pick. You'll experience definite smoother gameplay for those newer games, as well as being able to stay on a high[er] resolution without toning down the eye-candy.

Going to a Quad won't really provide a night and day boost since you're on the topic of "realistic" expectations. If you have a practical use for quads outside of games that will benefit your productivity then that would be a logical step up.

A $1500 budget will build you a complete new system with money left over to screw around with.
 
My intent with going to a Quad or i7 would be gaining access to a faster class of RAM than my current PC2-5400 stuff. Of course, a new mobo would be necessary to do either, so there it is. And a newer video card and mobo will probably want more power.

You like the 260 over the 280 or 285? Is that a price point factor or a real application factor?
 
Refer to the benchmarks to get an idea of the difference between them.

Higher speed ram will NOT give any boost in performance other than giving overclocking headroom. This is a synthetic application, not what you keep referring to as "real application".
 
Most of what you have there still has some good life in it. I don't think I'd scrap it in favor of Core i7 if I were you. Replace your video card, add some more RAM, and OC your CPU and I think you'll see 80-90% of the improvement you'd see with the full upgrade to Core i7 for less than $300-$400. I'd say start with the video card and see if it meets your needs. If you still want more performance then you can upgrade the rest of the system to match.

Edit: Just noticed you mention you're not interested in overclocking. I still think you're better off sticking with what you have though. As others have mentioned, your video card is definitely your weakest component. Everything else, including your CPU have quite a bit of life yet. Drop a GTX 285 in there and I seriously doubt you'll still be thinking that your machine needs another $1000 worth of upgrades to meet your needs.

Edit #2: Also, what motherboard do you have? Some of the later P965 boards have firmware updates that will support 45nm CPU's if you're set on getting rid of your E6600.
 
Itchyeyes said my sentiments, just much better.

Your system isn't bottlenecked, but your video card is. Just that. You can switch to a newer P43/P45 motherboard, new ram and new HSF and overclock it with the current CPU (my E6420 did 3.4GHz easy, and that was my first time O/Cing..). If you're looking for again, "real world, perceivable" stuff, a different CPU won't do anything.
 
With $1500, I would go with a core i7 based system.

With that budget you could get...
Core i7 920 ~$270
P6T ~ $200
6gb DDR3 ~ $150
GTX 285 ~ $350
PSU ~ $100
Case, KB/M, DVDRW ~ $100

That puts you around $1200, and gives top of the line components. You should be able to play Crysis on high settings, assuming your monitor is the 2408h, 1920x1200, and have no problems.
 
lowteckh said:
Refer to the benchmarks to get an idea of the difference between them.

Higher speed ram will NOT give any boost in performance other than giving overclocking headroom. This is a synthetic application, not what you keep referring to as "real application".
Click to expand...

I have looked at several benchmarking sites, which is why I'm asking the question here. It doesn't seem to me like the performance boost of the upgraded configuration would justify the cost and I am seeking confirmation of that fact.

One bottleneck I regularly experience is load times for apps and maps. I'm fairly certain this is mostly related to my memory limitation. Wouldn't faster RAM in a larger configuration provide some noticeable improvement?

Itchyeyes said:
Most of what you have there still has some good life in it. I don't think I'd scrap it in favor of Core i7 if I were you. Replace your video card, add some more RAM, and OC your CPU and I think you'll see 80-90% of the improvement you'd see with the full upgrade to Core i7 for less than $300-$400. I'd say start with the video card and see if it meets your needs. If you still want more performance then you can upgrade the rest of the system to match.

Edit: Just noticed you mention you're not interested in overclocking. I still think you're better off sticking with what you have though. As others have mentioned, your video card is definitely your weakest component. Everything else, including your CPU have quite a bit of life yet. Drop a GTX 285 in there and I seriously doubt you'll still be thinking that your machine needs another $1000 worth of upgrades to meet your needs.

Edit #2: Also, what motherboard do you have? Some of the later P965 boards have firmware updates that will support 45nm CPU's if you're set on getting rid of your E6600.
Click to expand...

Mobo is Intel G965 Express ATX Intel Motherboard.

As for overclocking, I have never had an interest in tweaking timings or worrying about heat management and noise due to overclocking just to manage a 1 or 2% increase in performance at the expense of hardware failure. I used to OC a long time ago, but I'm don't really care about that level of performance tweaking any more. By in large, I'm happy and comfortable with stock performance and I would spend a few dollars more to get a faster piece of equipment rather than overclock a cheaper one. Not saying it's a bad idea to OC if you're into that.

Thanks to everyone for the feedback so far.
 
What do you need 8 gigs of RAM for?
For gaming, no.
If you're doing lots of rendering/editing, sure. I do a lot of VMWare so I use 8 gigs, but most people do not.
Instead of buying two sets, get one set of DDR2 1066.
 
Though, 8gigs of RAM would max out the mobo. Also, that mobo only supports a maximum of DDR2 800 ... which I think is why he went with that memory.

Consider getting 3* Western Digital 640GB 7200RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s, instead of those Seagates. Compared to the Seagates, they have 140GB more space, twice the cache (32mb vs 16mb), and 2 more years under warranty (5 yrs vs 3). I've heard that their performance is slightly below that of a WD Raptor, but I do not know if that is true.

You might want to consider also a 285 instead of a 280; a 285 is faster and consumes less power when compared to a 280.
TomsHardware said:
An average performance increase of around 6% for the base card ... has been met by a price difference of around 10%.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure if it's worth the extra ~$30 retail. Either way, you'll find it an improvement over your current 8800. Though, with respect to the future, if you upgrade your mobo to an SLI capable one, 2*285 are currently unmatched in terms of performance.
 
Master Bob said:
Consider getting 3* Western Digital 640GB 7200RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s, instead of those Seagates. Compared to the Seagates, they have 140GB more space, twice the cache (32mb vs 16mb), and 2 more years under warranty (5 yrs vs 3). I've heard that their performance is slightly below that of a WD Raptor, but I do not know if that is true.
Click to expand...

I concur with this part. The WD 640GB drives are on par if not faster than the older gen Raptors and roughly 10% slower than current Velociraptor drives.
 
With 3 of the WD 640GB drives, and a 285 instead of the 280, I'm looking at about $110 more total.

Two questions...
How much of a performance boost am I really going to see from RAID0 for a game drive? I'm using a single drive right now, so I could drop two of the drives and stick with a single, or drop one and use one for OS / data and one for games. That alone would make up for most of the price increase. Also, I don't really need that much space. I don't really have all that much on my machine right now, only something like 300GB of data / games / etc.

Yes, maxing out the RAM for the board is appealing, just because it can handle it, why shouldn't I have that much right? For gaming alone, it probably won't use that much I agree. Also, if I end up falling back to a 32 bit OS, I wouldn't be able to access all that memory anyway. I could save another $50 by dropping down to 4gb and the DDR2-800 isn't going to do me much good if I upgrade to something newer in the future. Thoughts?
 
Spetsdod said:
With 3 of the WD 640GB drives, and a 285 instead of the 280, I'm looking at about $110 more total.

Two questions...
How much of a performance boost am I really going to see from RAID0 for a game drive? I'm using a single drive right now, so I could drop two of the drives and stick with a single, or drop one and use one for OS / data and one for games. That alone would make up for most of the price increase. Also, I don't really need that much space. I don't really have all that much on my machine right now, only something like 300GB of data / games / etc.

Yes, maxing out the RAM for the board is appealing, just because it can handle it, why shouldn't I have that much right? For gaming alone, it probably won't use that much I agree. Also, if I end up falling back to a 32 bit OS, I wouldn't be able to access all that memory anyway. I could save another $50 by dropping down to 4gb and the DDR2-800 isn't going to do me much good if I upgrade to something newer in the future. Thoughts?
Click to expand...
I can't speak to exactly how much faster RAID0 is, but keep in mind that the only time your HDD speed is going to affect gaming performance is load times, which make up far less than 1% of any given gaming experience. Taking that into account, ask yourself if that money would be better spent on a component that's going to affect the other 99%+ of the game. Given that a single WD 640 already gives you a boost to speed and storage space, I would just get one of those and save your pennies for later down the line when you start itching to upgrade again.

As for the RAM, there isn't really any reason not to go with 8GB aside from price. But then again there isn't much reason to go with more than 4GB either, for your purposes at least. Again, ask yourself if there's anything else you'd rather be spending that $50 on, because it's not doing you much good with that RAM at the moment.
 
1) Not that much to be honest. You'll see faster load times but we're talking a decrease in seconds, not minutes.

2) Stick with 4GB of RAM if you're on a 32bit OS. If you are going with a 64bit OS, then go with 8GB of RAM if you feel like spending the cash.
 
New Ram 4 gig kit.

If you are running 22" or larger then you'll want to pick up a 260gtx or 4870.

Your system will work fine for most games there is no real justification for a full out new pc other than I want more FPS in crysis.

Icore7 will have some smoking deals come next year, and ATI is killing NVIDIA in gpu price for performance right now which could result in some better products to go with your 2010 Icore system.
 
BFG GS-650W power supply is what I have in my machine currently. With a C2D 6600, and the 285GTX, will this be enough power? The specs on the GPU call for a combined 42A on the 12V rail (when coupled with an i7 920), but from what I can tell the PS only has 40A.

Dropped 1 drive, dropped 4GB RAM.
Config is now:
2x WD 640GB drive
1x 2x2GB Mushkin DDR2-800
1x BFG 285GTX 1GB

edit: $635 shipped
 
Spetsdod said:
BFG GS-650W power supply is what I have in my machine currently. With a C2D 6600, and the 285GTX, will this be enough power?
Click to expand...

No. The GS-650 is rated at peak and 25C. It also only has 38A on the +12V rail, not 40A. If you look at the specifications in that link, you'll see this: "+12V Max. Combined Wattage = 456W" Divide that by 12 and you get the total amperage of 38A. So considering that the PSU is rated at peak and at 25C, it may not be able to provide even 30A on the +12V rail once inside a real PC where the PSU can heat up.

So I recommend replacing the PSU with this siginifcantly better quality BFG LS-550 PSU:
BFG Tech LS-550 550W PSU - $80

The BFG LS-550 has 41A on the +12V rail and is rated at continuous and 40C. So it can actually provide that 41A in a real world scenario.
 
As previously mentioned, your biggest performance benefit will be in the graphics card. Instead of the RAM you selected I'd go with a similar pair by G.SKILL> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231209 < the only difference is faster stock timings.

I think Itchyeyes may have a good point with respect to only getting one of those WD Black drives. Offloading your games to the second hard drive will help out as Windows won't need to search one drive for the program and OS stuff.

I also can't believe this hasn't been mentioned yet, but you are running an E6600 which has a FSB off 1066MHz/s (266MHz *4=1066)which means that DDR2-533 (266*2 = ~533) is optimal for that system. Your not really going to see much of a performance boost by using faster RAM, UNLESS you also overclock your E6600 by bumping the FSB to 400Mhz. More info here
 
Master Bob said:
I also can't believe this hasn't been mentioned yet, but you are running an E6600 which has a FSB off 1066MHz/s (266MHz *4 )which means that DDR2-533 is optimal for that system. Your not really going to see much of a performance boost by using faster RAM, UNLESS you also overclock your E6600 by bumping the FSB to 400Mhz. More info here
Click to expand...

Yeah, can't believe I missed that part either. Also, the OP has an Intel built mobo so he can't even OC to begin with. however if the OP needs more RAM, no problem with going with the cheapest DDR2 800 RAM set he can find since RAM do downclock and DDR2 800 RAM prices are about the same as DDR2 533
 
General upgrade advice:
Wait as long as you can before buying new stuff. When your system no longer performs the way you want it to, then buy what you can afford to give you the most performance for your money. You'll notice more of a performance difference the longer you wait between upgrades. If all you do is game, chances are, you simply need a new vidcard.

Specific parts for your system:
I agree, the 640GB WD's are the way to go. They use 320GB platters and are much faster because of them. If you want to RAID0 two of them, knock yourself out. How much performance will you gain? just look at benchmarks... if you don't mind dealing with the data loss risk, then it won't be any worse than a single 6400AAKS.

8GB of RAM won't help much for gaming unless you install games onto a RAMdisk. :p 4GB is all you need.

What is the model # for your PSU?
 
Master Bob said:
As previously mentioned, your biggest performance benefit will be in the graphics card. Instead of the RAM you selected I'd go with a similar pair by G.SKILL> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231209 < the only difference is faster stock timings.

I think Itchyeyes may have a good point with respect to only getting one of those WD Black drives. Offloading your games to the second hard drive will help out as Windows won't need to search one drive for the program and OS stuff.

I also can't believe this hasn't been mentioned yet, but you are running an E6600 which has a FSB off 1066MHz/s (266MHz *4=1066)which means that DDR2-533 (266*2 = ~533) is optimal for that system. Your not really going to see much of a performance boost by using faster RAM, UNLESS you also overclock your E6600 by bumping the FSB to 400Mhz. More info here
Click to expand...

The specs for the Intel 965 board state that only 1.8V RAM with 5-5-5 or 6-6-6 timings will work, which is why I opted for the Mushkin RAM.
Intel 965 motherboard - down in the features

Corsair OCZ 2x1GB is the RAM I have in it now. Figured going with four DDR2-800 @ 5-5-5 would work. I could just pick up 2GB of G.Skill PC2-5400 and add that, but I'm not sure what the downside of mixing RAM brands is.
 
Spetsdod said:
The specs for the Intel 965 board state that only 1.8V RAM with 5-5-5 or 6-6-6 timings will work, which is why I opted for the Mushkin RAM.
Intel 965 motherboard - down in the features

Corsair OCZ 2x1GB is the RAM I have in it now. Figured going with four DDR2-800 @ 5-5-5 would work. I could just pick up 2GB of G.Skill PC2-5400 and add that, but I'm not sure what the downside of mixing RAM brands is.
Click to expand...
Oh. That sort of sucks on the Intel board, sorry for not noticing that.

In terms of mixing RAM brands, you might run into compatibility problems, ie it not working at all. I think you might be just better off going with the buying 4GB of DDR2 800 RAM and then not have to worry about compatibility.
 
Danny Bui said:
So I recommend replacing the PSU with this siginifcantly better quality BFG LS-550 PSU:
BFG Tech LS-550 550W PSU - $80

The BFG LS-550 has 41A on the +12V rail and is rated at continuous and 40C. So it can actually provide that 41A in a real world scenario.
Click to expand...

Digging up this old post. I have a cart built at NE and I'm tenatively pulling the trigger on it but something doesn't feel right.

Western Digital Caviar Black WD6401AALS 640GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s x 2
BFG Tech LS SERIES LS-550 550W Continuous @ 40°C ATX12V 2.3 / EPS12V 2.8 SLI Certified CrossFire Ready 80 PLUS Certified Active PFC Power Supply
BFG Tech BFGEGTX2851024OCE GeForce GTX 285 1GB 512-bit GDDR3 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Supported Video Card
mushkin 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory x 2 (or maybe only x1)

The GTX285 states it needs 575W minimum (but in the asterisk notes it says based on an i7 build). The LS-550 is short of that but I'm staying with my E6600. Can I expect this to be sufficient power? I don't plan on going SLI anytime soon, and probably wouldn't do that with this computer anyway, I would rebuild if I did that.

Thanks for the [H]elp.
 
Google "GTX285 power consumption." Alternatively, go to www.gpureview.com; they have the max power draw listed at 183W... you can also click on some review links on the bottom. You should find the power consumption and the test system used in each review. From what I can see, each system, either i7 or C2, used around 350W with a single GTX285, so you should be fine.
 
enginurd said:
Google "GTX285 power consumption." Alternatively, go to www.gpureview.com; they have the max power draw listed at 183W... you can also click on some review links on the bottom. You should find the power consumption and the test system used in each review. From what I can see, each system, either i7 or C2, used around 350W with a single GTX285, so you should be fine.
Click to expand...

I concur 100% with this post.
 
Everything bought. I think I missed the deadline to get it this by weekend though. =( Thanks for all the input.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top