PC Upgrade Ideas

Greetings. I am looking for some advice regarding an upgrade to a $500 for this specific rig. The machine is primarily utilized for gaming.

Asrock AM4
Intel Core i3-4130
Crucial DDR3 4GB 1333MHz, JM1333KLH-4G, bulk
NVIDIA GTX 750 Ti with EVGA Power Supply
Corsair CX Series 80+ Bronze, 430 Watt, ATX, EPS12V, PS/2, US Version
US version WD Blue HDD desktop (3.5", 1TB)

I am considering a new processor and a RAM upgrade.

Gary Barrett said:Hey guys, looking to do some upgrades soon. What should I go with? $500 Mostly using this rig for gaming.

Asrock AM4
Intel Core i3-4130.
Crucial DDR3 4GB 1333MHz, JM1333KLH-4G, bulk
NVIDIA GTX 750 Ti with EVGA Power Supply.
Corsair CX Series 430W, 80+ Bronze, ATX, EPS12V, PS/2, US version.
US version WD Blue HDD desktop (3.5", 1TB)

Thinking about a new CPU and a RAM upgrade.

Don't hold your breath trying to find a meaningful CPU upgrade on this platform. Once you start looking at anything actually powerful, the price jump makes it a total waste of money compared to what you're running now.
What's up? $500 Needs a new platform, something like this:

One Gigabyte 970, AM4 socket, AMD 970 chipset, supports 4 slots of Crucial DDR3 up to 2000 (O.C.)/1866.
One Intel Core i5-3570, 3.5GHz, 14MB, 95W, AM4.
One Spire Kepler Rev.2 cooler. Fits 1156/775/AM4 sockets. Dimensions are 96.5×51×125 mm with a 92mm fan.
$521

Intel Core i7-3770

Intel Core i7 with ASUS Motherboard

Total comes to about $165.79

If that doesn't feel like too much for you $50... I guess your next upgrade should be adding another 4GB of RAM.

Gary Barrett said:Hey everyone, I'm looking for some upgrade ideas to get this rig up to a decent $500 level. I mostly use this PC for gaming.

Asrock AM4
Intel Core i3-4130
Crucial DDR3 4GB 1333MHz, JM1333KLH-4G, bulk
NVIDIA GTX 750 Ti with EVGA Power Supply
Corsair CX Series 80+ Bronze, 430 Watt, ATX, EPS12V, PS/2, US version WD Blue HDD desktop
US version WD Blue HDD desktop (3.5", 1TB)

I'm thinking about getting a new CPU and upgrading the RAM.

Hmm, tricky spot. That's the classic issue with this specific platform. You can't really slap a beefier graphics card in there because the processor will just bottleneck it, and if you try to upgrade the CPU, you're basically forced to swap out the motherboard too since upgrading within this current setup doesn't make much sense. Even if you did switch platforms and processors, you wouldn't see a huge jump in gaming performance anyway, because what you have right now is already maxing out that GPU and is plenty good enough for decent gaming. 😬

4GB RAM + 250GB SSD

If you aren't already running an SSD, I’d say you should definitely grab one. It’s going to feel like a massive upgrade compared to what you have now, I guess.

Sure, but here’s the real issue: a build labeled as "good enough for decent gaming" just doesn't cut it anymore when you're trying to run modern titles. I can't tell if the bottleneck is that 4GB of RAM or the processor 😠

Prioritize RAM for certain games, then move on to the CPU, and finally tackle the GPU. Right now, your graphics card is your biggest bottleneck. You could follow crimsonstag84's advice, or just save up some cash and grab a new GPU down the road when you're ready.

Adam Moore3 said:Hmm, you're in a bit of a bind. This is the classic issue with the FM2 platform. You can't drop in a beefier graphics card because the processor holds you back, but if you want to upgrade the CPU, you're forced to swap out the motherboard too—since upgrading within this existing platform doesn't really get you anywhere. And even if you jump to a whole new platform and processor, you won't see a massive boost in gaming performance anyway, because your current CPU is already maxing out that GPU and doing a decent job for solid gaming.😬

Honestly, switching motherboards isn't as bad as it sounds once you run the numbers. For instance, motherboards are pretty affordable right now; you can find an A68 chipset board for around $50—which isn't even entry-level since it includes USB 3.0 and SATA 3 as standard features—and that comes with a 3-year warrantyfor example. An Athlon 840 goes for about $167, and when you look at the overall cost of the $267 platform, nobody is spending a fortune on the processor alone. The only real headache is the hassle of selling your old gear, but since new boards aren't expensive, you won't take a huge hit financially. When you look at it that way, it's actually a pretty cost-effective platform. Just push it as far as it can go, then sell it off.

Timothy Kim60 said:RAM only matters for certain games, then it's the CPU, then finally the GPU. Your graphics card is still your strongest link. You can go with what crimsonstag84 suggested, and then one sunny day just grab a better GPU when you've saved up enough cash.

Actually, upgrading isn't even that bad once you look at the numbers. Right now, motherboards are cheap; you can find an A68 chipset for $40—and it's not even bottom-of-the-barrel, it has USB 3 and SATA 3 as standard features—plus it comes with a 3-year warranty for example. An Athlon-X4-860K goes for about $167, and when you consider the whole platform $267, nobody is paying nearly that much just for a processor. The only real hassle is having to sell your old motherboard, but they aren't expensive even when brand new, so you won't take a massive hit. It’s a worthwhile platform if you look at it that way. You push it as far as it goes, then sell it.

Look, if someone wants more power for gaming—and let's be honest, they usually do—what are their options? They have to move to AM3+ because they won't be able to pair a decent GPU with that processor otherwise. So, we're talking a Gigabyte 970 plus at least an Intel Core i5-3570, which isn't even a great value compared to an Intel Core i7-3770 right now. Basically, like crimsonstag84 mentioned, it'll be around $550. And that's just for the CPU and motherboard. Once they upgrade that, they still won't see any actual improvement in games without also investing in a GPU. That means another minimum of $567 for something like an R9 280/380 or a GTX 960, because anything less than that is practically a waste of money. At that point, we've already blown past $1000.

Now, the AM4 platform is honestly great for the average gamer who doesn't plan on major upgrades or expecting high-end settings. The problem pops up when someone actually wants that extra performance (and let's be real, any semi-serious gamer will eventually want that 😬), but lacks the funds. If they want to upgrade, they basically have to replace the core components of the build. That's why I always push for AM3+ from the start, even if it means settling for a slightly weaker graphics card for now. Because if a guy drops $533 on an Intel Core i7-3770, he won't see any real gains in gaming and will end up wondering why the hell he wasted all that money! But realistically, there isn't much smarter way to spend that cash anyway 🙂

It’s definitely a process; you’re essentially looking at swapping out almost the entire PC in two distinct stages. Honestly, it’s much easier on the wallet than trying to drop a massive lump sum all at once when you're starting from scratch.

Gary Barrett

Could you specify which games you're looking to play? Are you running into actual performance issues where things won't launch, or are you just chasing better graphics and higher FPS?

Based on the system requirements, that CPU should handle most titles—assuming we're talking about an Intel Core i3-2100, which usually sits right at the minimum requirement for the heavy hitters. The GPU should hold up too. However, if you want smooth gameplay (not necessarily maxed settings or insane frame rates), that 4GB of RAM is going to be your bottleneck in several titles—specifically Dying Light, Watch Dogs, Grand Theft Auto V, the last couple of Call of Duty entries, and maybe a few others.

To whole Dying Light situation is just unplayable. Even Grand Theft Auto V is acting up in weird ways; some days I jump in and everything runs fine, but other times it’s impossible to even move without the frame rate tanking down to 5 or 10 FPS. I can only manage Far Cry 4 on low settings if I want anything resembling a decent frame rate, and Watch Dogs is the exact same story. I wasn't entirely certain if the bottleneck was the RAM or the processor. Regardless, I'm picking up a 4GB stick of Crucial DDR3 4 to see if that fixes things.

Yeah, adding that extra 4 GB of RAM will definitely give you a boost with those games. Honestly, you can't really go wrong here—it's not like you're breaking the bank, it'll help your current setup, and you can always reuse the RAM in your next build 🙂

Gary Barrett said:It’s exactly what I thought—you just can't play Dying Light. Even Grand Theft Auto V acts up; one day everything runs smoothly, and the next, it’s impossible to even move without stuttering or seeing the FPS tank down to 5 or 10. As for Far Cry 4, I can only manage to run it on low settings if I want decent frame rates, and Watch Dogs is the same story. I wasn't sure if the bottleneck was the RAM or the processor, but I'm going to pick up a 4GB stick of RAM and see how things shake out.

It's like you picked a lineup of the absolute worst offenders in that regard. Just as I suspected.
Dying Light used to have some serious issues with memory leaks and CPU usage, though apparently, patches have significantly cut down the RAM consumption. Far Cry 4 supposedly got fixed via patches too—there was this weird bug where loading would hang on a single core unless you alt-tabbed to kick it into gear. Same goes for Watch Dogs, and those cracked versions of Grand Theft Auto V had their own set of headaches... On top of all that, these games are incredibly demanding. You can't afford to be picky about settings; you really need to hunt down some tweak guides and stuff like that.
Bottom line: you'll need to patch your games and definitely add another 4GB of RAM. Everything you mentioned was basically a half-baked product when it first launched. All that's missing from this list of disasters is AC: Unity, which was arguably the worst of them all, or how they actually pulled the latest Batman game from shelves because it was so unfinished.

Maybe try defragging your drive too. It won't be a miracle fix, but I guess it might help a little—it could stop the system from hunting around for textures for five seconds every time it needs to load something.

I think jumping up to the Athlon-X4-860K would be the right move here, especially if you pick up another 4GB of RAM. The 860K isn't that pricey, it's a bit stronger, and you can overclock it too...

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/AMD-Athlon-X...-Athlon-X4-740

Of course, only if your motherboard supports it.

http://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/FM2A75M-HD+/?cat=CPU

So we're looking at about $267, which ends up being a little more once you add the RAM.

Moving to an Intel Core i5-3570 instead of the 860K doesn't feel like a temporary fix. Long term, it keeps the door open for those Intel Core i7-3770 chips.

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/AMD-FX-6300-...Athlon-X4-860K

This setup is actually really solid. crimsonstag84 put this together, but you’ll need to grab an extra 4GB of RAM as well.

"Intel Core i7 with ASUS Motherboard
GIGABYTE Main Board Desktop AMD 970A (970A-DS3P)
LC Power CPU Cooler LC-CC-95 - 90mm

Total: $1,657.87

If that's not too much for you$50... then your next upgrade is just adding another 4GB of RAM."

The Athlon-X4-860K uses an AM4 socket, and even if he manages to get it running on his motherboard, it wouldn't really be worth the investment. Honestly, that boost just isn't worth the hassle.

Timothy Kim60 said:The 860K uses the FM2+ socket. Even if it fits on the motherboard, it wouldn't be worth it... the boost just isn't there.

Fair enough. I somehow had it stuck in my head that the 860K could only handle something like an A9 280 and that was basically its limit...

If they just grab another 4GB of RAM, they might actually see some improvement. It should help... having dual channel running helps when games are hungry for memory...

Beyond that, it's the Intel Core i7-3770 and everything else that goes with it.

Bryan Taylor6 said:fair enough, I think I just had it stuck in my head that the 860K could only really handle an A9 280 and that was basically its limit...

There isn't much of a gap between those two CPUs. If we were talking about an APU, maybe the integrated graphics would make a difference, but raw processing power is pretty much the same.

Like I said before—just grab another 4GB of RAM and you'll be fine for a while, then eventually move up to an i5 or an fx8***. I built a similar rig for my neighbor a few years back (Intel Core i3-4130, NVIDIA GTX 750 Ti with EVGA Power Supply) but gave him 8GB of RAM, and he still hasn't complained about anything lagging or failing to run on high settings.

This might sound like a pretty mindless question, but does anything actually matter when you're buying RAM besides the frequency and the DDR rating?

Gary Barrett said:One incredibly stupid question: does anything actually matter besides frequency and DDR when you're buying RAM?

Yeah, price 😛 Frequency doesn't even matter in your case, just grab whatever is cheapest. 🙂

I have this

I used to play these games constantly when I was a kid, but I haven't touched anything since Need for Speed Underground because I just didn't have the time. Now that I'm feeling the itch again, my rig is pretty ancient, so I doubt much will run...

Would adding an SSD and some extra RAM save me here, or am I looking at a total system overhaul?

Any recommendations from the group would be appreciated.

Thanks