A64 to C2D upgrade question

mancunian

Senior member
May 19, 2006
404
0
0
Hello all,


Quick and easy question, would appreciate input. In a few weeks, I will get my yearly bonus from work. And part of that is possibly going to go on a PC upgrade, about 300 UK pounds for components and about another 200 quid for a monitor.


I would be upgrading from:

Asrock Dual Sata 939 board
939 X2 4200+ @ 2.6Ghz c/w Freezer 64 Pro
2GB DDR400 RAM
Radeon 3870
1 x 320GB IDE drive
2 x optical drives
Thermaltake 560W Purepower PSU (22amp 12v rail)

To:

Gigabyte GA-P35-DS3L board
Intel E2180 (hoping to get 2.8-3.2Ghz out of this) + aftermarket cooler + AS5
2-4GB DDR2 800 RAM
Radeon 3870
2 x 750GB SATA drives
2 x optical drives
Corsair PSU VX550W PSU (41 amp 12v rail)


I will also be purchasing a 22" LCD at the same time. I do plan to upgrade the video card later in the year, hence me upgrading the PSU now.


The question is, is this upgrade worth it?


Cheers :D


Manc
 

myocardia

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2003
9,291
30
91
Assuming you're a gamer, it's absolutely worth it. You're not getting anywhere near the performance out of your 3870 now that you should be. Were you aware that your ASSRock motherboard only has 4x bandwidth, on its 16x PCI-E slot?
 

nyker96

Diamond Member
Apr 19, 2005
5,630
2
81
I think you will get a better build by replacing CPU with E7200 (new version than E2180, more cache) and g-card to 8800GT. This may cost slightly more but you gain much more performance for games.

EDIT: sorry saw the 3870 from your old rig. So just keep that. Yes I think going to E7200 will give ya a boost in games esp. if you OC it pass 3.6Ghz.
 

MustangSVT

Lifer
Oct 7, 2000
11,554
12
81
yes DEFINATLY worth it!!!!!!

my upgrade = a64 2.7ghz to c2d e2160 @ 3.2ghz

video card = geforce 6800gt to geforce 8800gs

using a 22" LCD as well .


all my games got a boost but as a designer, boost in illustrator and 3d rendering (i use Rhino) was just too good!
not to mention being much quicker in multitasking. Im even considering quad core because of boost in rendering.

go for it!
 

flexy

Diamond Member
Sep 28, 2001
8,464
155
106
upg from A64@2600 1GB to 6600 Quad@3600, 4GB

its worth it....but Vista takes its toll. Expect system rather sluggish in the first week, but it gets better.
 

mancunian

Senior member
May 19, 2006
404
0
0
Originally posted by: myocardia
Assuming you're a gamer, it's absolutely worth it. You're not getting anywhere near the performance out of your 3870 now that you should be. Were you aware that your ASSRock motherboard only has 4x bandwidth, on its 16x PCI-E slot?

Hey, don't diss the board too much man! It's been solid for me. :D

And the 4x PCI-E is only on the Intel-based variant, the Dual Sata 2 939 board had a full 16x lanes. Just an FYI...;)

But thanks for all responses, they've been most helpful.

:)
 

mancunian

Senior member
May 19, 2006
404
0
0
Originally posted by: nyker96
I think you will get a better build by replacing CPU with E7200 (new version than E2180, more cache) and g-card to 8800GT. This may cost slightly more but you gain much more performance for games.

EDIT: sorry saw the 3870 from your old rig. So just keep that. Yes I think going to E7200 will give ya a boost in games esp. if you OC it pass 3.6Ghz.

Actually, this is a good point. I noticed that the E7200 has become available where I live.

The only thing is I would have to buy that if I wasn't gonna consider dropping a cheap quad in there towards the end of the year. I'm still wondering about that.

But certainly worth thinking about. Cheers Nyker.


:)
 

CTho9305

Elite Member
Jul 26, 2000
9,214
1
81
Are you guys sure it's worth upgrading? As far as I can tell, my X2 4400+ (not-OC'ed) is GPU limited in Crysis by my 2900 XT if I don't play at low resolution.
 

myocardia

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2003
9,291
30
91
Originally posted by: mancunian
And the 4x PCI-E is only on the Intel-based variant, the Dual Sata 2 939 board had a full 16x lanes.

Oh yeah, I had forgotten that the Dual SATA board used a ULi chipset, which has full 16X PCI-E bandwidth. In that case, unless you're planning on playing CPU-bound games like M$'s FSX, or Supreme Commander, or any online game with alot of players, you won't see much of an improvement at all.

If you do decide to build a new system, you should definitely spend a few dollars more, and get an E7200. It has 3x as much L2 cache as the E21x0's, which games love on a system using an FSB, and also starts out at a much higher speed. I'm not sure why I didn't think of that myself, since I just ordered one a few days ago.

Originally posted by: CTho9305
As far as I can tell, my X2 4400+ (not-OC'ed) is GPU limited in Crysis by my 2900 XT if I don't play at low resolution.

If he had mentioned Crysis, we would have told him that he needed either Tri-SLI'd 8800 Ultra's, or a pair of 3870X2's.;)
 

Alienwho

Diamond Member
Apr 22, 2001
6,766
0
76
Thread hijack time. I'm currently running an AMD Venice 3200+, Geforce 7900GT, 2Gig ram.

The upgrade itch has hit me, and i'm thinking of splurging on a C2D E8400 and Geforce 9600 + Ram + Mobo, I priced it out about a month ago and it came to about $500. Is that worth it? I'm willing to wait a few months if there is something good coming out around the corner, but if we're not going to see an increase for 18 months i'd rather just buy now.

<edit>

Now that I think about it, cheaper would be better, and all this E21xx talk i'm seeing is starting to win me over. Would it be decent to buy one of those and save $150? How fast would i be able to OC it compared to an E8400?
 

Tweakin

Platinum Member
Feb 7, 2000
2,532
0
71
I would probably lean towards a e7200 right now...$135 from the egg and these things are crazy OC'ers. It seems that 3.6~4.0 is nothing for these chips. They are 45nm but only come with 3MB cache.

This would also mean that they run cool as the cache puts out lots of heat.
 

jporter

Junior Member
May 5, 2008
6
0
0
Absolutely go for it, it's a world of difference. I don't know if the DS3 L is such a good clocker as the DS3R.

And go for the E2200 if you wanna have a more easy overclock (higher multiplier). Its not said that a E2200 WILL overclock better then a E2180 but I'd go for the E2200 as it has a higher multi.
 

nerp

Diamond Member
Dec 31, 2005
9,866
105
106
My E2180 @ 3.2ghz literally blows away my Opty 180 @2.7. I was expecting a slight bump but it far exceeded my expectations.
 

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
If you are keeping the 3870 I doubt it's worth a system overhaul for a gaming machine (assuming all you care about is gaming performance).
 

mancunian

Senior member
May 19, 2006
404
0
0
Again, thanks for all your replies.

So if I have this right, an E2180 at 3Ghz isn't that much better than a 939 X2 at 2.6Ghz, right?

Considering the E7200 now, thinking that the upgrade won't be worth it unless I get one of those....
 

myocardia

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2003
9,291
30
91
Originally posted by: mancunian
So if I have this right, an E2180 at 3Ghz isn't that much better than a 939 X2 at 2.6Ghz, right?

No, an E2180 @ 3.0 Ghz would compare to a 3.2 Ghz X2, so it would be some improvement, just nowhere near an E7200 @ 3.0-3.5 Ghz.

 

mancunian

Senior member
May 19, 2006
404
0
0
Originally posted by: myocardia
Originally posted by: mancunian
So if I have this right, an E2180 at 3Ghz isn't that much better than a 939 X2 at 2.6Ghz, right?

No, an E2180 @ 3.0 Ghz would compare to a 3.2 Ghz X2, so it would be some improvement, just nowhere near an E7200 @ 3.0-3.5 Ghz.

Right. Cheers for the clarification. :)

Looks like I hafta throw in an E7200 then. I don't think that'll be a problem, they are available.

So the extra cache really does help?


Edit: Just reading up on the E7200, and I've made my decision. I will be upgrading to this chip, it cannot be beaten for the price. Here in the UK, which is much worse than the US for prices, the E7200 costs 84 pounds, whereas the E2180 costs 44 pounds. For just an extra 40 quid, I'm going to have to go for this one. 84 quid for such a good processor is just too good to pass up. Thanks to all who helped me decide in this thread.

:)


Manc
 

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
Originally posted by: myocardia
Originally posted by: mancunian
So the extra cache really does help?

For gaming, it definitely matters.

Ok, help me out here. I often see people suggest CPU upgrades for systems that use 3870/8800GT class video cards, and in this case the OP will be gaming on a 22" monitor. According to Toms chart the E2160 running at only 1.8GHz, in the slowest benchmark shown (COD... which looks to be GPU limited even at low res) will push that game at 83 frames per second. His A64 dual core at 2.6GHz should be at least as fast as the E2160 at 1.8GHz, right? So what is the tangible gain from going with a faster processor for a gaming machine? I'm not saying there isn't one, but I just haven't seen any benchmarks that show that you need more CPU power then a current middle of the road CPU to game, especially when you play at 1680x1050 or higher. Maybe this should be it's own topic. I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm really trying to seek clarification on this.

If you look at Prey and Quake 4 you can see gains going from a low end processor to a higher end processor, but even the lowend doesn't get close to less then 60 frames per second... not to mention once you are playing at a higher resolution I doubt very much that your CPU that can push Prey at 89FPS at 1280x1024 will be your bottle neck at 1680x1050.

So I guess I just am trying to understand the mindset, because everyone is pushing a new CPU. The OP is keeping his 3870, and will be gaming at 1680x1050, what is the advantage for a gaming system in upgrading his CPU power? The only possible advantage I can see is 'future proofing' but even then I bet money spent on a next gen graphics card will give much bigger gains then upgrading the CPU. Anyway, just my $.02
 

ShawnD1

Lifer
May 24, 2003
15,987
2
81
There's no doubt that a faster processor will get faster frame rates, IF your video card is also extremely fast (8800GT, Radeon 3870, etc). The question is about money.

How much does it actually cost to upgrade?
$220 for a C2Q6600
then you need a new motherboard...
$85 for an Asus (I like Asus)
Your ram might be too slow for overclocking, so you'll need that too
$115 for 4gb ram

Total: $420 for a faster CPU. Not worth it. It's also not worth upgrading to the bottom end of the core 2 line. That's a very small upgrade, at best, and it still runs in the $400 range because of the motherboard and ram (I'm not sure you would need new ram).
 

myocardia

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2003
9,291
30
91
Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
Ok, help me out here. I often see people suggest CPU upgrades for systems that use 3870/8800GT class video cards, and in this case the OP will be gaming on a 22" monitor. According to Toms chart the E2160 running at only 1.8GHz, in the slowest benchmark shown (COD... which looks to be GPU limited even at low res) will push that game at 83 frames per second. His A64 dual core at 2.6GHz should be at least as fast as the E2160 at 1.8GHz, right? So what is the tangible gain from going with a faster processor for a gaming machine? I'm not saying there isn't one, but I just haven't seen any benchmarks that show that you need more CPU power then a current middle of the road CPU to game, especially when you play at 1680x1050 or higher. Maybe this should be it's own topic. I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm really trying to seek clarification on this.

If you look at Prey and Quake 4 you can see gains going from a low end processor to a higher end processor, but even the lowend doesn't get close to less then 60 frames per second... not to mention once you are playing at a higher resolution I doubt very much that your CPU that can push Prey at 89FPS at 1280x1024 will be your bottle neck at 1680x1050.

So I guess I just am trying to understand the mindset, because everyone is pushing a new CPU. The OP is keeping his 3870, and will be gaming at 1680x1050, what is the advantage for a gaming system in upgrading his CPU power? The only possible advantage I can see is 'future proofing' but even then I bet money spent on a next gen graphics card will give much bigger gains then upgrading the CPU. Anyway, just my $.02

For the games in that link, you're correct. But have you ever seen the benchmarks on some of these somewhat newer games, like Supreme Commander, World In Conflict, Call of Juarez, etc? Not all games are created equal, IOW, and some definitely benefit from faster CPU's (though obviously not all). Plus, when the framerate starts getting low, a faster processor helps keep the minimum framerates considerably higher, and that isn't reflected in the average FPS that these benchmarking sites like to publish.

Besides, look a few posts up, where I said that I didn't think it would be worth the expense, since he already had a pretty decent processor.
 

mancunian

Senior member
May 19, 2006
404
0
0
This is all good stuff, I appreciate all comments.

Nothing is set in stone, I haven't got anything yet. The concensus seems to be that an E2180 clocked up to 3Ghz or so wouldn't be worth it over what I now have, but that an E7200 Wolfdale clocked up to about 3.5Ghz might well be.

Waiting to see how the Radeon 4870 turns out might also be worth it. That 939 X2 @ 2.6Ghz I have might well have a bit of life left in it yet. And a graphics card upgrade would be more beneficial in gaming.

I suppose the idea of the E2180 wasn't to drastically improve upon what I now have, but more to have the option of dropping in a cheap quad towards the end of the year.

But this thread has given me a lot of food for thought, for which I am grateful to you all.

:)
 

rbk123

Senior member
Aug 22, 2006
743
345
136
For gaming, your CPU is plenty fast; you'll get much more value by getting a different video card. If your doing other CPU intensive work, then a CPU upgrade should be considered.
If you want to do it just for fun, that's a whole different story.
 

bryanW1995

Lifer
May 22, 2007
11,144
32
91
Originally posted by: mancunian
This is all good stuff, I appreciate all comments.

Nothing is set in stone, I haven't got anything yet. The concensus seems to be that an E2180 clocked up to 3Ghz or so wouldn't be worth it over what I now have, but that an E7200 Wolfdale clocked up to about 3.5Ghz might well be.

Waiting to see how the Radeon 4870 turns out might also be worth it. That 939 X2 @ 2.6Ghz I have might well have a bit of life left in it yet. And a graphics card upgrade would be more beneficial in gaming.

I suppose the idea of the E2180 wasn't to drastically improve upon what I now have, but more to have the option of dropping in a cheap quad towards the end of the year.

But this thread has given me a lot of food for thought, for which I am grateful to you all.

:)

ds3L is $90 at newegg.
E7200 is $139
2x1gb ddr2 800 4-4-4-12 name brand is ~$30AR

that also gives you plenty of room for oc'ing both the e7200 and, later, a potential 45nm quad upgrade.