If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
New mobo & CPU or new Videocard ... decisions descisions ;o)
Hello all
Probably an oft asked question but ... My current core system:- Gigabyte GA-7N400 Pro (Using on-board audio & NIC) AMD 2800+ (2.08 GHz) Barton core Sapphire 9700 128 MB (non-pro) video 1 GB PC3200 RAM (2 x 512 Dimms OCZ & Kingston HyperX mix) Antec 430 Watt PSU I'm quite into games and have annoying slow downs in some games (Far Cry, Ground Control II, Dawn of War) although generally when there is a lot of action on screen. I play most games at 1024 x 768 with no AA & 2xAF. I have two broad choices. I can by an ATI X800 (or nvidia equivalent) or I can replace the mobo and CPU (I've decided I'd go down the Socket 939 route with one of the lower clocked 90nm 64 chips). I can't afford to replace the videocard, CPU & mobo at the same time (though I've not yet looked into selling any old components). Would the videocard upgrade be the *best* way to go performance wise (CPU limited with the 2800+?) or should I be thinking of future upgrades as Socket A is on its way out (well within a year)? Alternatively should I just sit tight? TIA BillL |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"BillL" wrote in message k... Hello all Probably an oft asked question but ... My current core system:- Gigabyte GA-7N400 Pro (Using on-board audio & NIC) AMD 2800+ (2.08 GHz) Barton core Sapphire 9700 128 MB (non-pro) video 1 GB PC3200 RAM (2 x 512 Dimms OCZ & Kingston HyperX mix) Antec 430 Watt PSU I'm quite into games and have annoying slow downs in some games (Far Cry, Ground Control II, Dawn of War) although generally when there is a lot of action on screen. I play most games at 1024 x 768 with no AA & 2xAF. Well, you are at an awkward time for upgrading. If you think of the systems as 1, 2 and 3, with "1" being your current setup, you can't really build "2" without replacing CPU, Mainboard and Video card, or you will be starting over from zero when you get to "3". To get significant performance upgrade from your current setup, you'd have to buy some pretty high-end components. But if you go (mainboard and CPU) or (video card only), then you are locked into AGP video. So that's a lot of money to throw at a system that will be completely replaced within a couple of years, at most. If you save a little bit of money and do Mainboard, CPU and Video card all at once . . . and go PCI Express for video . . . then system "2" might just survive one upgrade in the process of building system "3". -Dave |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
BillL wrote:
My cdilemmaore system:- Gigabyte GA-7N400 Pro (Using on-board audio & NIC) AMD 2800+ (2.08 GHz) Barton core Sapphire 9700 128 MB (non-pro) video 1 GB PC3200 RAM (2 x 512 Dimms OCZ & Kingston HyperX mix) Antec 430 Watt PSU I'm quite into games and have annoying slow downs in some games (Far Cry, Ground Control II, Dawn of War) although generally when there is a lot of action on screen. I play most games at 1024 x 768 with no AA & 2xAF. I have two broad choices. I can by an ATI X800 (or nvidia equivalent) or I can replace the mobo and CPU (I've decided I'd go down the Socket 939 route with one of the lower clocked 90nm 64 chips). I can't afford to replace the videocard, CPU & mobo at the same time (though I've not yet looked into selling any old components). Would the videocard upgrade be the *best* way to go performance wise (CPU limited with the 2800+?) or should I be thinking of future upgrades as Socket A is on its way out (well within a year)? Alternatively should I just sit tight? I'll give you my take, and you decide for yourself. First off, to generically answer your question, a video card upgrade will do the most for you in game performance. Your CPU is plenty fast, and you have lots of memory. I'd advocate avoiding the high-end stuff, and get an nVidia GeForce 6600GT board, when AGP models hit the shelves. Now, here's the big dilemma, and I'm in this very same dilemma with my system. All boards, both AMD and Intel based, are going to PCI-X based graphics. The AMD boards are just hitting the shelves. Your board is plenty fast for now, and a video card upgrade will do wonders, but that's $200 spent on a graphics card you won't be taking with you on your next mobo & CPU upgrade. The Athlon XP is just about at the end of it's life, and the Semperons have less performance, so there isn't much you can do about upgrading the CPU alone in the near future, which would prolong getting a new system. Undoubtedly, within the next year or so, you'll be wanting to upgrade to an Athlon 64/FX machine and chances are, it'll be a PCI-X model, since surely you won't want to build a machine that's already old technology. If you game, you need to stay more on the bleeding edge of hardware, since newer games slow systems down and that's a trend that'll go on forever. Every new major release has more and more polygons to render and they obsolete hardware fast. My 2.6 GHz P4 machine (OC'd to 3.0) has a GeForce Ti4600 card that cost me plenty when it was new. It's really showing its age in just over 2 years. The graphics card is the culprit, but I'm weary of upgrading because next year I'll probably build an Athlon 64 machine to replace it. So, armed with that knowledge, decide for yourself... |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"Ruel Smith" wrote in message ... BillL wrote: My cdilemmaore system:- Gigabyte GA-7N400 Pro (Using on-board audio & NIC) AMD 2800+ (2.08 GHz) Barton core Sapphire 9700 128 MB (non-pro) video 1 GB PC3200 RAM (2 x 512 Dimms OCZ & Kingston HyperX mix) Antec 430 Watt PSU I'm quite into games and have annoying slow downs in some games (Far Cry, Ground Control II, Dawn of War) although generally when there is a lot of action on screen. I play most games at 1024 x 768 with no AA & 2xAF. I have two broad choices. I can by an ATI X800 (or nvidia equivalent) or I can replace the mobo and CPU (I've decided I'd go down the Socket 939 route with one of the lower clocked 90nm 64 chips). I can't afford to replace the videocard, CPU & mobo at the same time (though I've not yet looked into selling any old components). Would the videocard upgrade be the *best* way to go performance wise (CPU limited with the 2800+?) or should I be thinking of future upgrades as Socket A is on its way out (well within a year)? Alternatively should I just sit tight? I'll give you my take, and you decide for yourself. First off, to generically answer your question, a video card upgrade will do the most for you in game performance. Your CPU is plenty fast, and you have lots of memory. I'd advocate avoiding the high-end stuff, and get an nVidia GeForce 6600GT board, when AGP models hit the shelves. Now, here's the big dilemma, and I'm in this very same dilemma with my system. All boards, both AMD and Intel based, are going to PCI-X based graphics. The AMD boards are just hitting the shelves. Your board is plenty fast for now, and a video card upgrade will do wonders, but that's $200 spent on a graphics card you won't be taking with you on your next mobo & CPU upgrade. The Athlon XP is just about at the end of it's life, and the Semperons have less performance, so there isn't much you can do about upgrading the CPU alone in the near future, which would prolong getting a new system. Undoubtedly, within the next year or so, you'll be wanting to upgrade to an Athlon 64/FX machine and chances are, it'll be a PCI-X model, since surely you won't want to build a machine that's already old technology. If you game, you need to stay more on the bleeding edge of hardware, since newer games slow systems down and that's a trend that'll go on forever. Every new major release has more and more polygons to render and they obsolete hardware fast. My 2.6 GHz P4 machine (OC'd to 3.0) has a GeForce Ti4600 card that cost me plenty when it was new. It's really showing its age in just over 2 years. The graphics card is the culprit, but I'm weary of upgrading because next year I'll probably build an Athlon 64 machine to replace it. So, armed with that knowledge, decide for yourself... Thanks for the feedback. I'm not sure that PCI-X is the way to go just yet - doesn't supply a significantly higher performance than AGP? However, to add to my confusion (if I go with PCI-X) I've noticed that the Nforce4 (I've had some bad experiences with VIA chipsets!) chipset does not come with PCI-X but with PCI Express?? Anyhoo thanks for both replies to my question so far. BillL |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks for the feedback. I'm not sure that PCI-X is the way to go just
yet - doesn't supply a significantly higher performance than AGP? However, to add to my confusion (if I go with PCI-X) I've noticed that the Nforce4 (I've had some bad experiences with VIA chipsets!) chipset does not come with PCI-X but with PCI Express?? Anyhoo thanks for both replies to my question so far. BillL PCI-X never was the way to go. Someone abbreviated PCI-Express as PCI-X, not realizing that there WAS a PCI-X, and it has nothing to do with PCI-Express. PCI-Express is the future of video cards, and all other expansion cards. -Dave |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
BillL wrote:
Thanks for the feedback. I'm not sure that PCI-X is the way to go just yet - doesn't supply a significantly higher performance than AGP? Not yet, but in future GPU's, it probably will. The big deal is the replacement of the PCI bus itself, since just about everything, whether onboard or through a PCI slot runs through the PCI bus, and it's reaching its maximum bandwith and becoming a bottleneck. The PCI-X 16 slot for the graphics card will just ensure future upgradeability because both ATi and nVidia have announced there will not be any new graphics cards released after the current core generation for the AGP slot. That means, next year or the year after, when they release new cards, they will all be for the PCI-X 16 slot. That's the big deal. Otherwise, currently, PCI-X 16 cards are no faster than AGP 8X cards. However, to add to my confusion (if I go with PCI-X) I've noticed that the Nforce4 (I've had some bad experiences with VIA chipsets!) chipset does not come with PCI-X but with PCI Express?? PCI-X and PCI Express are one in the same. I've had a bad experience with my first and only Via chipset using Linux. However, using it in a Windows setting could yield much better results, so I'm not holding it against it just yet. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Dave C. wrote:
PCI-X never was the way to go. Someone abbreviated PCI-Express as PCI-X, not realizing that there WAS a PCI-X, and it has nothing to do with PCI-Express. PCI-Express is the future of video cards, and all other expansion cards. -Dave You're right. I used it as an abbreviation for PCI Express. I don't like typing the whole damn name for it. My apologies. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Ruel Smith wrote:
... I've had a bad experience with my first and only Via chipset using Linux. However, using it in a Windows setting could yield much better results, so I'm not holding it against it just yet. Try Fedora Core 1. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Opinions on budget mobo | Mike B | Overclocking AMD Processors | 5 | December 16th 04 03:43 AM |
is this a cpu or mobo problem? | jon | Homebuilt PC's | 2 | August 24th 04 08:55 PM |
Help with overclocking Duron on gigabyte mobo! | matiii | Overclocking AMD Processors | 9 | June 8th 04 11:06 AM |
What can I do about my dead mobo? | Zenobia | General | 3 | January 5th 04 09:30 PM |
How to connect front audio ports to mobo | *Vanguard* | General | 5 | December 17th 03 09:35 PM |