Best upgrade path?

[Pacfanweb]

Built this rig in late 2007. Still works fine, but I've noticed that for most new games, I'm well below the "recommended" specs, to the point that I just don't buy games anymore.
My view has always been, if I have to turn all the eye candy off just to make it playable, why bother?
Plus, I just don't game that much anymore, but when I do, I like it to look good and run smooth.

So, here's what I have, and I'd like to know where I can go from here without building a new PC:
EVGA 680 SLI mobo 2gigs RAM
Q6600 Kentsfield @ 3.15ghz

BFG 8800GT OC 512
Windows XP

So what can I do to up my video HP? It is worth it to find another 8800 GT and go SLI?
Or should I just get a more powerful card?

Do I have anywhere to go with my CPU? Did a quick bit of research, and I don't think I do, but I haven't stayed current on the hardware, so that's why I'm asking.
Is there any hope of getting this rig respectable in comparison with today's rigs?

edit: Maybe this should be in PC Gaming? I AM looking to upgrade graphics horsepower, but if it is better off in PC Gaming, move it

 

[AoS810]

I'd look out for some "hot deals" on a GTX 460 or 6850, but actually what I should ask first is what resolution are you playing at?

Also I'd try to find another matching set of 2x1GB memory sticks *I'm assuming that's what you have as opposed to a 1x2GB* to bump your total up ot 4GB. Are you using a 64-bit version of XP? Even if you're not the extra memory will help in the long run when you do decide to change your OS.

*EDIT* do you have more headroom on OC'ing your cpu? I'm not very familiar with how far you can push it with that mobo setup.. but you could always try squeezing some more life out of your chip, but I wouldn't sacrifice longevity via excessive voltage just for higher clocks.

 

[hawtdawg]

Your CPU is fine for current games. Just grab a 6850 and OC it and maybe grab a better cooler for your CPU and see what you can get out of it

 

[taltamir]

grab 2 more gigs of ram and swap your GPU to a GTX 460 or 6850. With your OC your CPU is well in excess of what most games require.
The extra RAM is important so don't neglect it.

Also, consider ditching XP for win7 x64

 

[Pacfanweb]

To answer the questions:

I have XP 32 bit.

Might be a bit more left in the CPU. It barely runs over normal temp, and as I recall, I hit the number I was looking for, and quit. People here were telling me it would do 3.3, 3.4, but I never tried. It's been solid at this speed for about 3.5 years now.

Resolution is 1680x1050

Bought my son Medal of Honor Airborne off the el cheapo rack. Thought it was just a continuation of the MOH series, which is build on the Quake 3 engine and my computer wouldn't even notice it at the highest res. Well, it's pretty demanding, and the graphics are good.....and it makes the computer chug a bit. Doesn't bother him at all ,but it makes me sick if I play more than ten minutes or so.
That's what brought this upgrade question on. I figured if I had trouble running this, it had no chance with something like Black Ops.


edit: So is the GTX 460 or 6850 recommended because it's the best bang for the buck, or because that's as high as I can go before my cpu will be the bottleneck and there's no point in getting a card that's any faster?

 

[taltamir]

edit: So is the GTX 460 or 6850 recommended because it's the best bang for the buck, or because that's as high as I can go before my cpu will be the bottleneck and there's no point in getting a card that's any faster?

its because it is relatively inexpensive while still being a lot faster then your current card and generally considered "sufficient" for most gamers today.
If you want you can go higher end with your current CPU, this will cost a lot more but let you enjoy greater resolutions, 3D, and AA. A lot of modern games would be maxed out on the above mentioned cards in your resolution.

 

[hawtdawg]

edit: So is the GTX 460 or 6850 recommended because it's the best bang for the buck, or because that's as high as I can go before my cpu will be the bottleneck and there's no point in getting a card that's any faster?

Those 2 are good bang for the buck, but If you want something a little more than that, I would recommend a 560 ti, or a 6950. You can always benefit from more GPU power, especially down the road. Though a 460 or 6850 should keep you plenty happy at that resolution for the time being.

 

[Vicaar]

You don't mention your power supply. I just jumped on the Sapphire 6850 deal from newegg ($150 after 10% instant promo code, +$15 mail-in rebate, +$10 newegg gift card, free shipping). I would normally have gone for the GTX460 (simply because I've always had nVidia cards in the past...), but the 6850 uses only 1 6pin and does quite a bit better under load which better matched my PSU. It is also a "5-tier" upgrade from my current 9600gt per Tom's Hardware hierarchy list which should be more than enough for 1680x1050 with quite a bit of eyecandy turned on.

If your PSU isn't a worry, you are probably safe going with whatever you find the best deal on.

 

[Pacfanweb]

^I actually don't remember what power supply I have, to be honest. I know I bought more than I needed at the time, so I assume it's good to go.

I was just over at Tom's, browsing the VGA charts.

Damn! That 460 absolutely rapes my 8800GT. And in SLI, it's not too far off the top cards on the charts (which were Radeons in Crossfire), and ONE of those cards costs more than two 460's. Don't know how much another 8800GT in SLI might help, but they don't seem to be much less than a new 460, and I doubt 2 8800's would even equal one 460.

The 460 in SLI did have a pretty significant improvement over just one 460 at my resolution, but I'm sure their rig had a better CPU than mine, so don't know how that'd translate in my particular case, and with Windows XP.

Also did some checking on my motherboard and what processors it supports. Looks like I'm pretty much at the end of the line there. I *could* go up to the highest Quad CPU in the Kentsfield line, but I'm already clocked faster than one of those, anyway, and it doesn't support the Yorkfields.

So looks like pretty much all I can do with this setup is more memory, and better graphics card. Maybe clocking the processor a bit, but not sure that'd really be worth it....it's so solid as it is, I hate to mess with it much.

 

[Denithor]

Your CPU is still perfectly adequate for today's games. No worries there at all.

As mentioned above, pick up another 2GB of RAM. When gaming it's pretty easy to exceed 2GB and your system will definitely start to chug when this happens.

Yeah, it's not even funny how much GPUs have advanced in the last couple of years since your 8800GT came out. At your resolution a GTX 460 768MB would even be fine since you won't have to worry about frame buffer issues. Those can be had for around $100 after rebates pretty easily. Otherwise the Radeon 6850/6950 or a GTX 560 Ti would be excellent choices.

 

[Pacfanweb]

I also wonder about the value of upgrading to Window 7.

I love XP. And my son still plays a lot of older games, like Serious Sam and Unreal Tournament 99, etc. (so do I, when I play)

I just wonder if I'd have any problems getting them to run on the newer version of Windows. I've always said I'm not giving up XP until I absolutely have to, but maybe it's time?

 

[Arkadrel]

Pacfanweb

Sounds like mostly you just need another 2gb of ram, and a 6850 or so.

WinXP is a great operating system, I had a friend with a vista machine when it was out and new... yeah that made me go "Im so staying with XP". Win7 is worth the opgrade though.

Vista was just a Oopsie from MS, same with Windows ME.
(both of those where the versions you could skip)

 

[betasub]

^^ Vista and 7 both include compatibility mode for those old .exe files that won't run properly in the native shell. Yes, there are still a few rare things that won't play nice, but there are options to work round like dual booting, virtualising etc.

 

[flexcore]

You've gotten some good advice here. Couple of questions first.
What power supply? This is important.Are you using stock cooling, or...?
My suggestions:
Make sure of PSU first.
4GB RAM
Aftermarket CPU HSF. CM Hyper 212+ is really good on price/performance. Clock that baby!
AMD HD 6850.
Windows 7 64.
Enjoy!!!!

 

[taltamir]

WinXP is a great operating system, I had a friend with a vista machine when it was out and new... yeah that made me go "Im so staying with XP". Win7 is worth the opgrade though.

Vista was just a Oopsie from MS, same with Windows ME.
(both of those where the versions you could skip)

This is not true.
Windows 98 was unusable until SE (second edition)
Win 2k was worse then 98 until about SP4.
Win XP was worse than 2k until SP2.
Win Vista was worse than xp until SP1. A very slightly altered version of SP1 was released under the name win7 because of all the bad press for win7.
Win 7 was good from day 1.

The thing is, people have this delusion that XP is somehow special, XP RTM was a piece of turd. Eventually it got good and people moved to it. Vista had many advantages but like any MS OS it was mostly hindered by being released far too early, that and MS didn't really take enough heed of people's complaints.

If given the choice between latest vista and latest XP then you should go with vista. While XP SP2 Was better then vista RTM times have changed and things moved on.

Honestly, if you don't want vista or win7 (or don't have the money to) you might as well just go with ubuntu... its free and at least its not a decade old OS. XP still has use in dual booting for playing those specific very old games that don't work with Win7, thats about it.

 

[Pacfanweb]

You've gotten some good advice here. Couple of questions first.
What power supply? This is important.Are you using stock cooling, or...?
My suggestions:
Make sure of PSU first.
4GB RAM
Aftermarket CPU HSF. CM Hyper 212+ is really good on price/performance. Clock that baby!
AMD HD 6850.
Windows 7 64.
Enjoy!!!!

Mentioned before, don't know the exact power supply. Been too long, but I don't think it's a problem.

Got a huge cooler on it. That's not a problem, either. I think I'm kind of at the point of diminishing returns on clocking it higher at this point, though. Already at 3.15ghz. Would 3.2 or 3.3 really help that much?


Agree on the RAM.
HD 6850? Seems the 460 performs slightly better at a slightly lower cost. Not that much difference, though.

I'll consider the Windows 7. Seems like the newer graphics card is going to get me the biggest increase, though.