About time I upgrade?

[pood]

I'm currently on a Q9450, nforce 780i, 4gigs ram, and ati 4850. couple raptors and an intel 320 ssd.

Time to upgrade? Will I get a big boost in speed? I do play games and I'd like to play everything in max.

I'm thinking of selling all my raptors and maybe getting 1 or 2 more intel 320s. Worth the money? Hate how loud the raptors are because I'm on a silent system.

Are there new product lines coming out in the next couple month that I should for wait or is this as good time as any to upgrade?

 

[Ken g6]

Will I get a big boost in speed?

Depends on your budget. And [thread=80121]some other questions[/thread] too.

Again depending on your budget, the AMD 7800 GPUs might be out soon, and you might want one. And then there's Kepler - who knows when it will be out?

 

[pood]

I'm not a huge fan of AMDs so I'd like to stick to Intel.

budge is probably going to be about $750 for the mobo, cpu, and 8gb ram.

another $300 for the GPU, but I'd be willing to wait on that.

 

[Blain]

wait

 

[T_Yamamoto]

you have fairly new tech still

wait for ivy bridge and keplar

 

[pood]

I could wait till April.

 

[T_Yamamoto]

okay, good

 

[OlafSicky]

Wait your system is good

 

[mfenn]

$750 for a mobo, CPU, and RAM is about $300 too much. It's a little silly to split things up that way anyway. Let's look at it like you have $1050 total to spend. You can indeed get a VERY significant upgrade for that amount:

i5 2500K $230
ASRock Z68 Extreme3 $122
Patriot DDR3 1600 8GB $42
7950 $490
Crucial M4 128GB $177
Total: $1061

 

[Topweasel]

I'm not a huge fan of AMDs so I'd like to stick to Intel.

The Mentioning of AMD was in regards to AMD video cards. Trust me you don't want an Intel video card.

Just in case you have been out of the loop, ATI is just refered to as AMD right now. In terms of performance, support, capability, AMD graphics a much more comparable to Nvidia graphics then AMD CPU's are to Intel's.

In that end I wouldn't recommend turning away from either AMD or Nvidia.

 

[Johnny Doe]

OC the CPU as much as you can, those chips are still capable.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/charts/index.php?pid=62,76&tid=3

Then shoot for a 560 Ti 448 or a 6950.

 

[T_Yamamoto]

and a 560ti 448=a failed 570

 

[Johnny Doe]

and a 560ti 448=a failed 570

The 560 Ti 448 is an excellent card. It OC's very well and is built on a solid PCB's. Look at the 560 Ti 448 Classy, it's built on a 580 PCB, and can OC like a 580 to 900 Mhz. It can get faster than a 570. It's no BS card.

 

[mfenn]

The 560 Ti 448 is an excellent card. It OC's very well and is built on a solid PCB's. Look at the 560 Ti 448 Classy, it's built on a 580 PCB, and can OC like a 580 to 900 Mhz. It can get faster than a 570. It's no BS card.

Excellent in the sense that it trades blows with a 6950 2GB yet costs as much as a GTX 570, sure.

 

[Johnny Doe]

Excellent in the sense that it trades blows with a 6950 2GB yet costs as much as a GTX 570, sure.

It's faster than a 6950 at stock and costs significantly lower than a reference 570, which is plagued with shit VRM.

 

[mfenn]

It's faster than a 6950 at stock and costs significantly lower than a reference 570, which is plagued with shit VRM.

You do realize that averaging performance across games is is completely invalid, right? Especially when you don't even list the games used. Here is a real comparison.

 

[Johnny Doe]

You do realize that averaging performance across games is is completely invalid, right? Especially when you don't even list the games used. Here is a real comparison.

What are you talking about? Do you even have an idea what you're on about? Average FPS is valid, and that IS a real comparison. That chart was pulled from W1zzard's TPU review, which is argueably the best review out there. Go look up on the bench results on the games (one by one) yourself, he uses at least 15-20 proper games.

 

[ctrlaltduhlete]

my current setup is almost exactly the same except i have a core2 6850
new intel ssd plus nforce driver headaches made me want to update
im tryin to spend 1/3 of your mb/ram/cpu budget and it still seems worth it
i'd say do it
what resolution is your monitor?

 

[mfenn]

What are you talking about? Do you even have an idea what you're on about? Average FPS is valid, and that IS a real comparison. That chart was pulled from W1zzard's TPU review, which is argueably the best review out there. Go look up on the bench results on the games (one by one) yourself, he uses at least 15-20 proper games.

Average FPS within a particular game is of course valid. Averaging FPS scores across games is not.

Here's an example:

Game A Card A: 30 FPS
Game A Card B: 50 FPS
Game B Card A: 100 FPS
Came B Card B: 60 FPS

Card A average performance: 65 FPS
Card B average performance: 55 FPS

So, if you looked at the average, you would say that card A is faster. However, Card B delivers a playable experience in both games whereas Card A does not.

Averaging FPSs across all resolutions is even worse because it biases the comparison towards the lower resolutions, which are not challenging in the first place.

In short: Learn some statistics and and stop blindly accepting summary conclusions.

 

[Johnny Doe]

Average FPS within a particular game is of course valid. Averaging FPS scores across games is not.

Yes, it is.

Here's an example:

Game A Card A: 30 FPS
Game A Card B: 50 FPS
Game B Card A: 100 FPS
Came B Card B: 60 FPS

Card A average performance: 65 FPS
Card B average performance: 55 FPS

So, if you looked at the average, you would say that card A is faster. However, Card B delivers a playable experience in both games whereas Card A does not.

Both the 6950 and the 560 Ti 448 are capable of delivering playable experience in the majority of the games at decent settings.

Averaging FPSs across all resolutions is even worse because it biases the comparison towards the lower resolutions, which are not challenging in the first place.

No, it doesn't. His results go from 1280x1024 to 2560x1600, so it loads up the cards equally on both high res and low res. And these are single GPU setups, not multiple so no multi-GPU scaling to keep in mind (at low res).

In short: Learn some statistics and and stop blindly accepting summary conclusions.

In short, educate yourself before claming that the 6950 is better than the 560 Ti 448. All things considered, the 6950 is head to head with a 560 Ti 448.

 

[T_Yamamoto]

But a 560 ti448 IS a failed 570 and costs almost as much as a 570 and you can't just say one is bad. It all depends on purpose and resolution. -___-

Stop being a fanboy

 

[mfenn]

In short, educate yourself before claming that the 6950 is better than the 560 Ti 448. All things considered, the 6950 is head to head with a 560 Ti 448.

So we are in agreement then? For reference, here is my first response to you:

Excellent in the sense that it trades blows with a 6950 2GB yet costs as much as a GTX 570, sure.