PC Upgrade Ideas

Hey, I've got about $400-$500 burning a hole in my pocket—what should I swap out first?
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650
Mobo: 790gx Pro
CPU: AMD Phenom II X4 955, 3.20 GHz
4 GB RAM

So, what's the move here? Just upgraded the hard drive and monitor recently, so those are off the table. The GPU is definitely struggling at this point, so that’s probably priority number one.
I'm thinking about adding another 4 GB of RAM too, and maybe a new PSU if mine's trash...😉
Mostly gonna be using this rig for gaming...

What kind of power supply are you running? Honestly, I'd say you should just sell off the CPU, motherboard, and GPU, then toss that cash back into your budget to pick up some much more powerful components. You just need to check which PSU you have first.

1 x Intel Core i5-4460 Soc 1150
1 x Gigabyte GA-B85M-DS3H,1150,iB85,D3,S3,U3,DVI,mA
1 x MSI Radeon R7 265 GDDR5 2GB/256bit
1 x Intel SSD 520 Series (120GB, 2.5in SATA 6Gb/s, 25nm, MLC) 9.5mm, OEM pack 3432,30

$1144
futura-it

http://www.newegg.com/p/product_info.php?products_id=14056
GPU and power supply

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/catalog/sst-st50f-es/

Just put the rest in your savings account; transfers go through pretty quickly. This should run you about $567.

Ryan Hayes82 said:What kind of power supply are you running? Honestly, just sell the CPU, motherboard, and GPU, toss that cash back into your budget, and grab some much stronger components. Just make sure you check what power supply you have first.

1 x Intel Core i5-4460 Soc 1150
1 x Gigabyte GA-B85M-DS3H,1150,iB85,D3,S3,U3,DVI,mA
1 x MSI Radeon R7 265 GDDR5 2GB/256bit
1 x Intel SSD 520 Series (120GB, 2.5in SATA 6Gb/s, 25nm, MLC) 9.5mm, OEM pack 3432,30

$1144
futura-it

His processor is about 15-20 percent weaker in games than your i5, so making the switch is definitely 🙂

Don't be ridiculous. An i5 will outperform a Phenom in basically any category you look at.

It’s honestly not worth upgrading the entire rig just for an AMD Radeon R7 265; his current AMD Phenom can still handle the heavy lifting if he needs to.

So, we're looking at an AMD Radeon R7 265 / R9 270, maybe a new power supply if the current one is struggling, a CPU cooler if he doesn't have one, and perhaps adding another 4GB of RAM.

It might handle some lighter stuff, but it’s going to struggle with certain titles. Specifically, anything more recent—titles like Watch Dogs, Crysis 3, or Battlefield 4 are prime examples where the AMD Phenom just isn't going to cut it.

http://gamegpu.ru/images/remote/http...bf4_proz_2.jpg
http://gamegpu.ru/images/stories/Tes...203%20proz.png

But was that actually tested using high-end cards? That second link uses an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 while running Crysis 3 Multiplayer, which is easily one of the most CPU-intensive scenarios out there. With an AMD Radeon R7 265, he wouldn't notice any real difference—maybe a tiny variance in multiplayer performance between Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Crysis 3, or Watch Dogs, since that's where the AMD Phenom II 955/965 starts to struggle alongside an HD7850 or HD7870. For 99% of all other games, it would be absolutely identical.

In certain titles, it honestly won't matter if he's running that Phenom or an Intel Core i7, even with a high-end GPU.
http://www.techspot.com/review/537-m...nce/page7.html

It really just boils down to what kind of games he plays and how well they are optimized.

If you ask me, it's better to just pull the trigger on this upgrade now. He'll get some solid mileage out of this combo for a while, and once it finally hits its limit, he can just swap everything out for something significantly more powerful later on.

I gotta swap out the PSU too since I just realized it’s total garbage. Suggestions are fine and all, but now I’m stuck deciding whether to just do a quick upgrade or just rip everything out and start over...

I’d probably lean toward Amy Vaughn12's suggestion—but honestly, I’d skip the graphics card entirely. You could just grab everything except the AMD Radeon R7 265, and then once you’ve saved up enough cash, you can just pick up something much more powerful.

Larry Ortiz5 said:...but without a graphics card, meaning you buy everything except the AMD Radeon R7 265, and once you've saved up enough love, you just buy a much stronger GPU instead.

That approach makes zero sense if the goal is actually gaming—specifically, if he wants better performance than what he has right now.

If he were to change just one thing, he'd be much better off even if he "overkilled" the GPU—say, by grabbing a 280X or an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770. Even with a bottleneck (which varies depending on the game), compared to his current setup, in something like Max Payne 3, there wouldn't be any noticeable BN; he’d see a massive jump in performance because the CPU will give him everything it's got... and then he can upgrade the CPU later. That would be going "balls out." As it stands, if he grabs the Intel Core i5 and sticks with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650, his gaming performance won't move the needle at all. He wouldn't gain anything; at least this way, he'd actually be helping himself.

Following a standard plan—just grab the AMD Radeon R7 265 and change nothing else—is the way to go. It isn't worth changing the whole platform just for that. At the very least, that card is twice as powerful as his current one, making it a relevant upgrade regardless.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1127?vs=1125

I hear what everyone is saying, but I’m sticking to my guns on this one. Honestly, isn't it just way easier down the road to swap out a single graphics card rather than having to overhaul your entire platform—you know, dealing with a full Windows reinstall and all that headache? With this setup, you can just pull the old card out, slide a new one in, and call it a day. Or, if they feel like saving up a bit more cash, they could always just grab an entirely new rig and be done with it. 🤷

If I’m trying to push a GTX 660 with a Q6600, that fan is going to be working much harder than just "decent." Honestly, looking at the options from Kimberly Gomez34 or Alexander Moore67, their setup actually seems like the smarter move here.

Timothy Kim60 said:It doesn't make any sense if he actually wants to play, or rather, if he wants better gaming performance than what he has now.

If he changed just one thing, he'd be much better off even if he completely overkilled the GPU—like grabbing a 280X or an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770—despite the bottleneck (whatever that looks like depending on the game). Compared to his current card, in something like Max Payne 3, there wouldn't be any bottleneck at all, and he'd see a massive jump in performance... the CPU will just give everything it can. Then he can upgrade the CPU later. That’s if he goes full "balls out" mode. If he just grabs an Intel Core i5 and sticks with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650, his gaming performance stays exactly the same; he won't have achieved anything. At least this way he'd actually help himself.

Going the normal route—he should just grab an AMD Radeon R7 265 and change nothing else. It's not worth swapping the whole platform just for that. At least that card is twice as powerful as his current one, making it a relevant upgrade regardless.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1127?vs=1125

I agree. I also just read THIS little thing that might soon change how everyone agrees on builds here 😬

Exactly. The whole goal is to offload more work from the CPU through APIs like Mantle or DirectX 12. We’re still in the early stages of this evolution, so things will definitely improve, even if games themselves continue to demand more processing power over time. 😬

At the end of the day, we really need to see how this plays out in actual gameplay scenarios...

By the way, here is another massive hit that doesn't absolutely murder your CPU scaling.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...rk,3195-6.html
http://www.techspot.com/review/532-d...nce/page5.html

Obviously, it isn't a heavy-hitter, so it won't serve as a definitive benchmark. However, I'd argue that titles like Max Payne 3 and Diablo 3 are much higher quality than Crysis 3 and far more relevant since they actually have a massive player base.

Crysis 3 suffers from some pretty massive FPS fluctuations. I’m definitely not the only one who noticed this during the "Welcome to the Jungle" mission, where performance basically drops by half
if you're working with a weaker CPU.

1 x Zalman CNPS10X OPTIMA CPU cooler with a 120mm fan spinning at 1000rpm
1 x 4GB DDR3 Kingston module, 1600MHz, CL11, Value series
1 x XFX TS Series 550W Power Supply (P1550S-XXB9)
1 x Sapphire R9 280 3GB OC Dual-X, featuring 3GB GDDR5 and a 384bit bus, 28nm architecture

$884 AMD

Overclocking this to about 3.7-3.8GHz, maybe. I'll probably just jump to a completely new platform next year.

David Sanders4 said:Crysis 3 suffers from massive FPS fluctuations. I'm definitely not the only one who noticed during the "Welcome to the Jungle" mission where performance literally gets cut in half... especially when you're dealing with a weaker CPU.

Crysis 3 is the definition of a multicore-heavy game; it's incredibly CPU-hungry even in single-player, almost like a tech demo. It's the kind of scenario where a quad-core FM2 Athlon might actually "beat" an i3—even though the i3 is generally better for gaming overall.click(An AMD Phenom II at 3.7 GHz still holds its own reasonably well)

Speaking of which, check out this gameplay video at the end: 😬 click

Just look at this guy and how surprised he is. 😬

Games like this are still the exception. Most standard titles, like Thief or Splinter Cell, can be easily handled by a basic i3; they aren't significantly worse off compared to running an i5 or i7 paired with a high-end GPU.

Timothy Kim60 said:Crysis 3 is a true multicore title; it’s incredibly CPU-hungry even in single-player mode. It feels more like a tech demo at times... In this case, a quad-core FM2 Athlon actually gets "outperformed" by an i3 (which is generally better for gaming anyway) click (though a Phenom II at 3.7 GHz still holds its own enough)

Speaking of which, check out the gameplay video at the end here 😬 click

Just look at this guy and how surprised he is 😬

Games like this are still the exception. Most titles follow a standard pattern—think Thief, Splinter Cell, or similar games—where an i3 won't break a sweat. You aren't seeing much of a difference compared to running an i5 or i7 paired with a high-end GPU.

I don't really see why this person with an HD 7770 and a Pentium is so baffled. That card alone is far too weak for Crysis 3... On the other hand, a Phenom 965, or perhaps a slightly stronger or weaker variant, is actually a fantastic used buy if you can find one for $100. Or even an Intel Core i7 920 (I see them listed online for about $50, and that CPU still handles modern series quite well... it's honestly excellent).
But then again, it raises the question: if you aren't playing these specific types of games, do you actually need a powerhouse? Since Crysis 3 launched over two and a half years ago, we haven't seen many games that demand that level of heavy investment, aside from certain multiplayer titles that are almost all CPU-intensive.

David Sanders4 said:I don't see why anyone is acting surprised by this guy's setup with an HD7770 and a Pentium. That card is far too weak to handle Crysis3 on its own...

He’s just confused because his frame rates aren't matching the benchmarks or reviews from other people using an HD7770 in this game. The issue is the CPU; having only two cores in a title like this creates a massive bottleneck. However, for 99% of other games out there, that combination works perfectly fine.