GPU/CPU upgrade (yay! / oh-no!)

[Aynjell]

Thanks everyone =).

I'm getting the distinct impression I should consider pawning my whole system as a set rather than piecemealing it out - again your collective insight is invaluable and appreciated!

I will contend that I was however able to play through Mass effect on my current rig (at stock CPU clocks), albeit with compromised settings (not rock bottom) and @ 1600x1200. Not to be stubborn, but the point I'd like to nail down is that nobody with an X2 should be discouraged from enjoying the game if upgrades aren't your the near future ! I'm sure I'll be playing through again with a prettier picture post-upgrades before ME:2 arrives though...

Back to the present... I'll try to do a little more homework/research into comparative CPU architecture tests to get a feel for what the current bang/buck curve feels like... should anyone feel interested in making an offer for the system in my sig feel free to PM me .

As always, I love my family here at OCF - happy holidays!

Athlon II X2's and E5300's are where it's at if you need a cheap build, unfortunately RAM prices skyrocketed again. I wish I had some spare RAM to send you.

That or get you a tri-core and a board that can handle unlocking the cores and go hog wild with it.

I'm sure you can pull something off if you try, though. I'd expect that instead of 100, you could spend about 350 for a CPU, video, and ram upgrade, and get some really strong results. Especially if you find some good bundles.

 

[Chixofnix]

Again, thanks to everyone!

I'm adding conclusions to the questions I've posed [in Cyan] to help anyone else in a similar boat get to the point =).

 

[Aynjell]

Again, thanks to everyone!

I'm adding conclusions to the questions I've posed [in Cyan] to help anyone else in a similar boat get to the point =).

BTW, if you really wanted to, you could buy a zalman CNPS-7700 for your chip, they're usually about 28$, but they're bolt through so allow for a beheaded chip. This is one of the best setups for old school AMD chips.

Beheading is very dangerous and best left to somebody who's done it before. it's unfortunate you aren't closer to omaha because honestly, if you were I'd probably be willing to trade my 3800X2 for yours. It doesn't play nice with CnQ, which is more important for it's current role as a server, so I was planning on swapping in teh chip that does 2.5ghz and see if it's okay with CnQ, if not, then it might be my board although I'm doubting that part. Either way, my 3800X2 doesn't do 3 anymore, and knowing it can, it's being wasted. I actually bought it off of downer, and was a pretty good chip aside from the CnQ issue.

 

[vgta88]

this thread is getting so long that I can't remember what my response for post 1-3 is after post 6. I backtracked from 23 to 18 and it's still too long.

here is my response. I have the 400cx corsair and a 780g chipset so I read the reviews for them. and some other reviews for a possible intel setup.

400cx: seasonic gets praise but this model has cheaper capacitors with identical seasonic designs. You have to be able to live with that. it's main cap is rated for 85°c temp so keep your system cool and the rest are ost caps (had problems before, known for crappy caps) (seasonics and vx series corsair uses the 105°c main caps and all japanese caps) 450vx for example is identical but with better caps. also more expensive. maybe not at newegg http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?item=N82E16817139003

the 780g's don't overclock very high from any review you can see so if you think you can push higher and get an upgrade later on, well it might not be possible. I might not be so right with this but all the boards I've seen don't support the better cpus or something. I might be wrong, one review says 400 bus speed, maybe what I remembered was that 780g boards have 95w limitation for quad core cpus.

I also read the reviews for 4870 4890 5770 and the other 5000 series.(these 3 are like identical with a core bump between 4870-90 and minor revisions with the 5770 just using less power, slightly less peformance sometimes, and dx11) those 3 have the same shaders and stream processors and all that stuff, suppose to be top end ati. any sub numbers under those models 48xx 57xx 58xx are just like 3 core amd chips, defective parts are disabled for a value product.

the rest of the 5000 series is 5870 is really a 5770x2
5970 is really 5870x2 (so its like 5770x4)

5770 uses around 100 watts under game load so it should be decent but 4 of them on the 5970 is a lot of power.

Post 10 looks good.

For platform independant specs. I don't think the memory timings matter that much.
I'm thinking next gen will use 2 gb for a full game. games maybe using multi cores for balanced loads. and stacking gpu's into a single card(games now are gpu limited) should make most systems last until something crazy comes out like 2160 progressive resolutions. There is not any real application for anymore resources at this point unless microsoft decides to be crazy and make windows 8 use 8 gb of ram. Theres a lot of parallel processors in gpus. I hope we can see dumping some processing loads onto graphics cards to balance this crazy tech thing out.

I wonder if it would be better to wait for amd to do 32 nm and a better core for competing with i7. they are trying to do 32nm in Q1 2010. with black editions already performing near stock i7s maybe a die shrink would bring overclocking performance.

 

[aries2110]

the 780g's don't overclock very high from any review you can see so if you think you can push higher and get an upgrade later on, well it might not be possible. I might not be so right with this but all the boards I've seen don't support the better cpus or something. I might be wrong, one review says 400 bus speed, maybe what I remembered was that 780g boards have 95w limitation for quad core cpus.

Wrong, take it from experience. The 780G chipsets have near identical OCing and performance to 790s. I have compared my system to another with all comparable parts except he had a 790FX board. Benches were identical and so were our relative OC settings. The only edge he had was an extra 100MHz stable through the use of ACC.

Also I will argue that GIGABYTE 780G boards specifically aren't restricted to 95W. In fact the one I have is rated for the 140W Phenom Is and has already tested and OCd a Phenom II 945 to 3.8Ghz STABLE. I believe this one has comparable power phasing to a higher end ASUS 790FX board, and a Gigabyte 790FX board will have the best power phasing available.

any sub numbers under those models 48xx 57xx 58xx are just like 3 core amd chips, defective parts are disabled for a value product.

Wrong again. Many of the Phenom II X3s are fully functional quads disabled to meet demands. My board can't unlock but I know for a fact my chip is a fully working quad as I've had it in a capable board. Not only that but the 720BE in particular has something like a 75% successful unlock rate. Defective chip? Mine ran quad Orthos stable for 48 hours straight with 4 cores unlocked at 3.5GHz.

5870 is really a 5770x2

Nope the 5870 is a single core card.

5970 is really 5870x2 (so its like 5770x4)

Nope again. The 5970 is a 5850X2

For a solid gaming machine I'd say:

Amd Phenom II X2 550BE or X3 720BE
Gigabyte 780/785G board
4GB of the cheapest decent quality RAM(DDR2 vs DDR3 not a big issue)
5770 or 4870(comparable prices and performance, get the best deal).

And that would be a solid rig that will last you a while and play most games at maxed or near maxed settings for a few years. Not to mention if you can deal with lowering graphics (given the age of your hardware) then it theoretically stretches the life of it to 4 or 5 years before you might feel an upgrade is necessary.

 

[Bobnova]

The 5970 is two 5870s at lower then normal clock speeds (ATX specs demand sub-300w draw). The 5850 has fewer shaders then the 5870, and hence were it a 5850x2 it wouldn't have 3200 shaders.


As stated above, the 5870 is a 5870.
There is only one dual die 5xxx GPU, and that is the 5970 which is two underclocked 5870s.

 

[Chixofnix]

It sounds like at this point the discussion has driven to the minutiae between ATI's current lineup, of which I have been reading a lot about these last few weeks.

For everyone's mutual benefit/agreement/clarification... here's two recent articles from anandtech that pretty concisely throw all of the 57xx through 59xx against each other for relative comparisons, including some crossfire pairings and nVidia solutions:

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3658&p=12
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3679&p=15

These links are specifically to Left 4 Dead pages - of note, scroll to the last chart of the first link for matching settings.

For a solid gaming machine I'd say:

Amd Phenom II X2 550BE or X3 720BE
Gigabyte 780/785G board
4GB of the cheapest decent quality RAM(DDR2 vs DDR3 not a big issue)
5770 or 4870(comparable prices and performance, get the best deal).

And that would be a solid rig that will last you a while and play most games at maxed or near maxed settings for a few years. Not to mention if you can deal with lowering graphics (given the age of your hardware) then it theoretically stretches the life of it to 4 or 5 years before you might feel an upgrade is necessary.

Sounds like we're in agreement =). You're correct in assessing that I have a decent (even above-average) tolerance for toning down my settings and still enjoying a game. I also have developed a wallet-healthy habit this past year of spending significant time enjoying and re-discovering gaming titles of ages past (well mid-90's forward).

The 5770 vs. 4870 issue is perhaps the only sticky point for others in my position, as it seems the well-informed out there are pretty split between which is the better value for the short/long term. Personally, since I'm buying for the relative long-term (2+ years), I'm banking the small hit in today's games to get DX11 performance gains later is the smart choice.

 

[vgta88]

@aries2110,
thanks for some corrections, i only know about the corsair psu from
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2009/02/16/entry_level_power_supply_roundup/5
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/psus/2009/04/27/corsair-cx-400w-psu-review/1
and
http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=2162


i didn't pay much attention to the 780g chipsets and was kind of hoping for some enlightenment on that part.

as for the ati thing. i just meant that as comparing the specs, not a real 5770x4. i do know about the non defective chips but as far as end users know, things are based on the same design but partly disabled and sold at a lower price. oh, i have to add 4850 to that list, it seems it's basically the same but lacks the gddr5 memory(halfing it's memory bandwidth) that the 4870 has.

and btw i think if he could find a great board, the setup you posted would be decent.

ps 5770 over 4870 is my vote since it uses less power.

 

[aries2110]

thanks for some corrections, i only know about the corsair psu from

The main problems with the Corsair 400CX will come from heat. The capacitors are of decent quality but they don't have a very high temp rating. Thankfully the 400CX is more than capable of keeping itself cool. I have recommended that PSU to many friends with widely ranging hardware and it's fully able to power even a quad core system with a single high end video card. And due to it being a Corsair you are nearly guaranteed great build quality and flawless customer support.

i didn't pay much attention to the 780g chipsets and was kind of hoping for some enlightenment on that part.

The overall capabilities of the board are down to the manufacturer. But the chipset itself is fully capable of running and OCing a high wattage CPU with ease. I made the specific mention of Gigabyte boards because Gigabyte tend do "over-build" their boards. My MA-78G-DS3HP was bought brand spanking new for $85 and it has comparable quality and performance to my friend's MA790FX-UD4P. I will always recommend Gigabyte due to their build quality and excellent board layout. And because of the solid-state Japanese capacitors they use you will rarely have a problem with heat or voltage.

as for the ati thing. i just meant that as comparing the specs, not a real 5770x4. i do know about the non defective chips but as far as end users know, things are based on the same design but partly disabled and sold at a lower price. oh, i have to add 4850 to that list, it seems it's basically the same but lacks the gddr5 memory(halfing it's memory bandwidth) that the 4870 has.

On defective chips. That's why people are always trying to squeeze the last bit of performance out of their hardware and why these "unlocked" chips are possible. The entire Phenom II line is based on the exact same chip from top to bottom. It's only natural that some of them are bound to be fully functional. This has always been the idea of overclocking as well. If other chips based on the same technology can hit 3.4GHz+ at stock, there is no reason a lower end part with the exact same specs can't do it as well.

On ATi choices there are purely personal. I am a great fan of the 4870 myself but the 5770 does offer DX11 support and better power efficiency. I just look at it the same way I see Dx10 in general. It was introduced what 3 years ago now and we're still seeing even the very newest games released in Dx9 native. Even Crysis was developed entirely with Dx9 in mind and Dx10 was tacked on at the end. If Dx11 turns out to be worth the effort I can definitely see a 5770 being beneficial. But the 4870 is theoretically a slightly more powerful card and has rock solid proven performance. Heck my next upgrade is already going to be a 4870 1GB and this I know for sure.

and btw i think if he could find a great board, the setup you posted would be decent.

I'm looking at it from a budget perspective. Where do price and performance intersect you know? IMO the setup I posted represents a solid rig that can play just about everything on a reasonable budget. And not just because I use some of the parts myself. I chose the parts I have because they were the best bang-for-buck I could find. And this PC I would consider to be very fast if not a bit excessive for even the newest games. Hell, CoD:MW2 came out very recently and I play it maxed problem free at 1680 x 1050. 50-70FPS with 4xAA is nothing to laugh at and my PC isn't even particularly high end.

Plus I got lucky and got my 9800GTX for free and it has served me very well so far. So a 4870 should be quite adequate for anything you can throw at it.

 

[Bobnova]

Everybody does the defective chip dance, it makes very good economic/business sense.

What do you think the Intel celeron/pentium dual core line is? Defectives!
In theory all core2duos (and core2quad) should be e8700's. The dies that are particularely low wattage go into quad cores, the good duals with normal watts are e8xxx based on the speeds they'll run, partially defective chips go into the e7000 line. Chips with lots of defective cache and FSB issues go into the e5000 line, and so on.
The big difference is that Intel, ATI, and Nvidia lock down the defective sections so they can't be touched, and AMD doesn't.

 

[Chixofnix]

Everybody does the defective chip dance, it makes very good economic/business sense.

What do you think the Intel celeron/pentium dual core line is? Defectives!
In theory all core2duos (and core2quad) should be e8700's. The dies that are particularely low wattage go into quad cores, the good duals with normal watts are e8xxx based on the speeds they'll run, partially defective chips go into the e7000 line. Chips with lots of defective cache and FSB issues go into the e5000 line, and so on.
The big difference is that Intel, ATI, and Nvidia lock down the defective sections so they can't be touched, and AMD doesn't.

I'm on the ball for this issue - I played the fun games of doubling/tripling the "effective value" of Athlon 2500/2700's a few years back with great results by pushing those chips to their true potential.

That said, I've looked hard at the gains made with unlocked Phenom cores from various sources. The most concise single article/review/thread that seems to give a good perspective for the Phenoms is here though at ol' THG:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/unlock-phenom-ii,2273.html

Looks like the gains made are not nearly as impressive (in terms of clocks-per-dollar) as they used to be... I'm well aware that a certain "value-deduct" comes from a less stable system, and I'm less tempted to spend less than I plan to budget for CPU, gambling for a higher unlock/clock than I used to be.

My plan, and what I'll advise others to do with today's Phenom II options, is to find a #ofcores/clock/price sweet spot to fit the budget, and to then shell out for as many working cores desired.

To that end, I've settled on a Phenom II X3 720. If I can unlock a 4th core stably, then that's awesome and icing on the cake, but I won't be unhappy sticking with stock speeds warranted to be stable . I would be unsatisfied getting an X2 and finding I'm stuck with 2.

 

[aries2110]

To that end, I've settled on a Phenom II X3 720. If I can unlock a 4th core stably, then that's awesome and icing on the cake, but I won't be unhappy sticking with stock speeds warranted to be stable . I would be unsatisfied getting an X2 and finding I'm stuck with 2.

Well that was my stance on it as well. If I was able to unlock then party time right? But the tri core also offers many of the advantages of multi-core in stock form. And you most certainly should overclock either way. Especially because it's a Black Edition and basically advertised to do it. 3.4GHz is very easily within reach and 3.6-3.8 is doable with a good chip. And with them unlocked I've seen about 3.2-3.5 doable depending on how good an OCer it was to begin with.