• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Cpu Upgrade question...

S

slick2010

Member
would it be worth while to replace an E8500 dual core with a Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650 3.0GHz? Im running 4 bg's of ram with a 260gtx.

For Battlefield Bad company 2


Moved from PC Gaming

Anandtech PC Gaming Moderator
KeithTalent
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd run with what you have until you can afford a Core i5/i7 - an E8500 is no slouch, and for what you'll pay for a Q9650 you could get an i5 750, motherboard, and be 50 bucks shy from 4Gb DDR3.
 
Battlefield Bad Company requires a quad? That doesn't sound right since it's probably just a console port. Those things don't really tax a system.

The E8500 is still a vary fast processor. Vary few games support true quad core and tend to benefit more from high clock speeds. Your system should have absolutely no problems with any game you throw at it. There's no need to upgrade.
 
Bad Company 2 requires at least a dual, not a quad, but it recommends the quad.

I don't have exactly the OP's rig, but I was wondering this myself. I have an E4300 @ 2.0GHz, 2 GB of RAM, and an ATI 4870. I have a Gigabyte GA-965P-S3 mobo which I believe can do quad core, so I'm thinkin of perhaps getting one along with another 2 GB of RAM. Do you guys think that would be a decent upgrade from what I currently have?

EDIT: Looks like the mobo only supports up to 1066 MHz FSB so I think I'm kinda shot in the ass as far as a good Core 2 Quad in this system. Bah.
 
Last edited:
Can't beat drop in upgrades IMO. Q9650 is fast by today's standards still, but that's as far as you'll be able to go. You'll need to do a complete new system for your next CPU upgrade.
 
slick2010 said:
its just that if a drop in a quad, i dont have to do a full rebuild, the game requires a quad apparently,
Click to expand...

It requires a dual and recommends a quad.

A full rebuild isn't that big of a deal - you're probably going to pull the board to replace the processor/HSF anyway. $329.99 at Newegg for a 9650, or $179.99 at eWiz for an i5 750 (coupon code CUPID40 for $15 off), $104.99 at Newegg for a GIGABYTE GA-P55M-UD2 (review), and $84.99 for 4Gb DDR3 (review).

Net difference of $39.98 for a modern quad core with DDR3. That leaves you with a perfectly capable dual core combo that you could either sell off or use to build another system.
 
A couple points I want to make:

1. Upgrading from an E8500 to a Q9650 would not require an OS reformat. It's a simple drop in upgrade and then you're done.
2. DDR2 is cheaper than DDR3 still and there are no performance benefits to DDR3 at this time. He could use his existing 4GB of ram or he could upgrade to 8GB of DDR2 and be set for a very long time. A Q9650 with 8GB of ram will last longer than an i5 with 4GB of ram in terms of running increasingly complex software.
3. The Q9650 is still high end and competes very well with the Core i5 and i7. It is a bit slower than them, but it's still very fast(and very overclockable) by any standard despite the platform age.
 
slick2010 said:
Im running 4gb's of OCZ DDR2 ram @1066, would that bottleneck the cpu?
Click to expand...

It wouldn't bottleneck it at all. DDR2 667 is all you would need to run 1:1 synced FSB and RAM if you were keeping it at stock clocks. DDR2 800 is good for up to 3.6Ghz on the Q9650. DDR2 1066 is good up to 4.8Ghz to give you an idea of how much headroom your RAM gives you.

For future reference, this is how it works: If your CPU has an FSB of 1333Mhz, then all you need is 667Mhz memory in dual channel to fully feed that bus.(667x2 ~ 1333) If you have a 1600Mhz FSB, then you need 800Mhz memory in dual channel to feed it. With 1066Mhz memory in a dual channel configuration, you could in theory fully feed a processor that had an FSB of 2133Mhz, but those don't exist and you probably won't find a motherboard that could handle a bus speed that high.
 
Last edited:
wait for benchmarks to see how big the difference is between quad and dual and OC the E8500 if you haven't and assuming you're not using stock HSF
 
Last edited:
No not a big enough jump. That processor is already fast. Just overclock it. I went from an E6300 @ 2.9GHz to a Q9550 @ 3.4 and it wasn't a huge jump but it was the old dual cores that used tons of power and had a tiny amount of cache. You have the newer dual cores so just overclock it.
 
I don't understand whats with these high CPU requirements for Bad Company 2. Its a console game after all, designed to run on 5 year-old hardware. Sure, maybe the PC version supports better visuals which would require more videocard power, but CPU?
 
Wait for benchmarks when the actual game comes out.

Better yet, play the damn game yourself and then determine if performance sucks instead of blindly following what they're telling you.
 
PieIsAwesome said:
I don't understand whats with these high CPU requirements for Bad Company 2. Its a console game after all, designed to run on 5 year-old hardware. Sure, maybe the PC version supports better visuals which would require more videocard power, but CPU?
Click to expand...
"Designed to run on 5 year-old hardware"

wat
 
PieIsAwesome said:
I don't understand whats with these high CPU requirements for Bad Company 2. Its a console game after all, designed to run on 5 year-old hardware. Sure, maybe the PC version supports better visuals which would require more videocard power, but CPU?
Click to expand...

Have you ever played a PC in your life?
 
clamum said:
"Designed to run on 5 year-old hardware"

wat
Click to expand...

The Xbox 360 launched November 2005. The game was designed to run on the Xbox 360 along with the other platforms. If the Xbox 360's crappy CPU can run the game fine why can't any modern decent PC CPU?
 
PieIsAwesome said:
The Xbox 360 launched November 2005. The game was designed to run on the Xbox 360 along with the other platforms. If the Xbox 360's crappy CPU can run the game fine why can't any modern decent PC CPU?
Click to expand...

Of course his system can run it but it won't run on all high settings. PC gamers expect to be able to turn up all the eye candy in games. We run at much higher rez than most of those games do as well. There's hardly any true 1080p console games.
 
zerocool84 said:
Of course his system can run it but it won't run on all high settings. PC gamers expect to be able to turn up all the eye candy in games. We run at much higher rez than most of those games do as well. There's hardly any true 1080p console games.
Click to expand...

But increasing resolution, adding AA, AF taxes the videocard.
 
slick2010 said:
Bad company 2 is recommending quad core so ill probably go for it
Click to expand...

I sold my e8400 for 100$ and bought a q9550 used for 150$.

You might not get the deal I got ,but you should get 120$ for your e8500.
I would have paid 190$ for my q9550. 90$ is worth the extra year or 2 I should get out of it.

I say you should sell the e8500 while it's still worth something ,and buy a used q9xxx cpu.

Easy drop in upgrade for about 100$ that should last you more then a year.
A overclocked q9xxx is not much slower then a i5 750 with games.

My next upgrade will be a 32nm intel,I'm skipping the i5/i7 45nm line.
 
clamum said:
Bad Company 2 requires at least a dual, not a quad, but it recommends the quad.

I don't have exactly the OP's rig, but I was wondering this myself. I have an E4300 @ 2.0GHz, 2 GB of RAM, and an ATI 4870. I have a Gigabyte GA-965P-S3 mobo which I believe can do quad core, so I'm thinkin of perhaps getting one along with another 2 GB of RAM. Do you guys think that would be a decent upgrade from what I currently have?

EDIT: Looks like the mobo only supports up to 1066 MHz FSB so I think I'm kinda shot in the ass as far as a good Core 2 Quad in this system. Bah.
Click to expand...
I would certainly try and oc that cpu a bit. really at 1680 you could have just bought a 4850 and gotten the same performance in almost every game with that cpu. you are probably throwing at least 25-35% of what that 4870 can do at 1680 right down the drain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top