Posts by David Sanders4

Since his motherboard supports an FSB overclock up to 1600MHz while the processor currently runs at 800, he could theoretically push it all the way to a maximum of 4.4 GHz.

Honestly, you might as well just lay out the entire quote so we can actually see if it's overpriced... because from where I'm sitting, it definitely smells fishy to me.

The difference between DDR3 and DDR5 memory
Don't even bother looking at DDR3; it’s ancient history now...
just like crimsonstag84 suggested

Honestly, just go for that Asus. It isn’t any less reliable than those overclocked models, and you're only losing a few measly frames per second. Plus, it's significantly cheaper. That Palit card isn't a bad choice either, though—you could even look at getting two of them if you wanted to.

You’ve got a GTX 660, which sits about $417 above your current GTX 570. If you can swing roughly $1700, you could look at a GTX 660 Ti or even a GTX 760, both of which offer a nice 20% bump in speed. Personally, I’d lean toward the GTX 760. That said, you aren't losing much ground if you stick with the GTX 660; you'll just end up saving about $167
in the process.

If you're seeing vertical lines that look like some kind of "death line," then the card has officially reached its limit.

$250 max. For $400, you could go with a new ASRock 970 Extreme3 paired with an FX-6300

A CPU isn't quite like a car engine. It can spike in temperature relatively quickly and lose efficiency, but that’s a separate issue entirely. Your trouble might not even be rooted in the processor itself; it could easily be a power supply issue. That said, if you haven't swapped out the thermal paste in years, you should definitely do that regardless. You might want to apply the same logic to your graphics card too. There are plenty of tutorials on YouTube showing you how to remove a heatsink and reapply paste. Honestly, it's pretty straightforward.

Should I go with the HD 7790 or the R7 270X for roughly $300? The next step up would be the Radeon HD 7850, which is about 1150 bucks if
.

And when was the OS actually installed? If I were in your shoes, I’d probably just opt for a fresh OS installation from scratch.

Freezing can sometimes be a software issue, but it could just as easily be hardware-related. I’d suggest downloading a temperature monitoring app to see how things hold up under a heavy load. Besides, when was the last time you actually replaced the thermal paste? It might also be worth testing the drive itself—maybe run HDD Tune Pro trial—and using something like HWMonitor to keep an eye on those temps. I once dealt with a system freezing because an old-school admin didn't apply the thermal paste correctly to the CPU; they basically just

Any HD 7750 or even something a bit more entry-level would work, provided the power draw stays roughly the same.

Looking at your current setup, I see you're running an Intel Core 2 Quad. Honestly, unless you decide to part ways with that chip, you might want to reconsider this move. If you were to sell it, you could potentially pick up something like an Intel Core i5-4460 or even an Intel Core i7-4770K. With an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 paired with those, you aren't going to see a massive performance leap regardless of which of those three processors you choose. My main concern was just the potential downside—the unnecessary power draw, the extra heat from higher clock speeds, and the small chance of hardware failure down the road.

I suspect overclocking an HD 7770 isn't going to net me much of a gain, and honestly, I have a feeling I might actually end up losing performance instead...

Given the motherboard you're running and the current price gaps, picking up an fx 6300 would be a solid best buy, especially since the fx 6350 is asking quite a bit more...

I don't think that really matters, honestly... if you plug in an old-school PS/2 mouse with a trackball, it works just fine, so I seriously doubt this one wouldn't be compatible either.

He’ll likely be stuck at 720p on High settings, provided he turns off AA and those other "unnecessary" little details. At High, you'll probably lose some particle effects, though volumetric clouds seem to stay intact from what I can see, and shadows might vary slightly—but it's hardly a dealbreaker.
the difference (low, medium, high, ultra)
In that second image below the benchmark, you can see the gap between High and Ultra; the main thing is seeing those particle effects flying around on Ultra, whereas they're missing entirely on High.
Here is the benchmark from TechSpot using an AMD Radeon R9 290 on High settings.
cpu scaling
Your setup falls right in that mix with the AMD Athlon X3 455; it shows a 25% drop, which confirms what the benchmarks suggest: processors without four cores really struggle here.
PS3 vs PC Battlefield 4
You can see a massive difference in fluidity between the PlayStation 3 (chugging at 20-30 fps in HD) and the PC (hitting 60 fps at Full HD). Of course, now that the PlayStation 4 is out, it runs similarly to a PC, making the experience almost identical, even if the PC maintains a slight edge.

Kimberly Gomez34 said:Look, you aren't going to hit 60 FPS in Battlefield 4 at 1080p max settings with that CPU, no matter which graphics card you throw at it.

If you're lucky and have a motherboard that actually supports it, you might be able to unlock four cores on those chips—provided the silicon is good enough.

Grace Peterson17 said:If you're banking on hitting 60 fps with that processor, I hate to break it to you—it’s just not going to happen. You'll run straight into a massive bottleneck instead. To actually pull that off, you really ought to be looking at investing somewhere in the $400 to $450 range; you'd want to grab an i5, a solid motherboard, and something along the lines of an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770/780 or maybe an AMD Radeon R9 290.

Battlefield 4
Based on the benchmarks, there is no way you'll see 60 FPS unless you shell out roughly $800 to $900 for a full overhaul...
The CPU scaling with the TITAN GTX is quite interesting.
AMD FX 8350 = 57 fps ($450/$8.00/fps)
AMD FX 6300 = 52 fps ($267/$5.00/fps)
Phenom II X4 955 = 43 fps ($100/$2.25/fps)
Keep in mind these tests were done with AA turned off, so real-world results would likely be even lower. You won't be hitting 60 FPS anytime soon.
With the top-tier CPU, the AMD Radeon HD 7870 pulls about 30 fps. An X4 955 could easily keep pace with a card like that, given that $100 + $433 for the GPU (even allowing for a 25% bottleneck on the card, you'd still be looking at 22.5 fps).
All in all, $533,
Is it possible to get the same performance with any other combination on a budget of $533?

It’s definitely doable, though you might run into some lower frame rates or noticeable stutters depending on how demanding the game is. If you have a friend with a beefier card—maybe something like an AMD Radeon HD 7850, a 6950, or even a 260x—it might be worth running some tests at their place to see how it holds up. That said, I suspect it should run without much trouble. My suggestion would be to go with the AMD Radeon R9 270X; it makes it much easier to upgrade your CPU down the road. You could always pick up a used Phenom 965 for maybe $50 or so later on.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/amd-processor-listing

It really depends on the specific game you're playing; the differences are pretty minor, almost negligible. If you don't have to upgrade your ATX Power Supply, then I'd definitely go with the GTX 770. That said, my first piece of advice would be to try selling your current card first...