Frankenstein rig

[kitenai]

hey guys, I was wondering how much improvement I would gain updating the CPU/mobo/ram in my rig to something more modern in reference to gaming performance. I have Crysis 3 and I can run it with everything cranked up and FXAA and get 30-60 fps as it is now, but wondering how much better it would be.

AMD Phenom II X4 945 OC to 3.30ghz
Asus M2N-SLI Deluxe
8GB Gskill DDR2-1600
Galaxy GeForce GTX 670
OCZ Vertex 4 128GB SSD
WD 500GB 7200RPM

Thanks

 

[homebrew2ny]

From everything I have seen, upgrading to a top tier cpu would net you significant results, with all else being equal. Crysis, if I recall correctly, is one of those games that thrives on cores/threads.

 

[kitenai]

From everything I have seen, upgrading to a top tier cpu would net you significant results, with all else being equal. Crysis, if I recall correctly, is one of those games that thrives on cores/threads.

cool, I might save up a bit to go intel this go around one thing I did notice, even though I get 30-60fps at 1080p it always seems to take a few seconds for it to get its frame rate together after loading in a stage then the frame rate is consistently smooth after that. was thinking it might be the slow ram?

 

[SithSolo1]

Edit: nvm, I am retarded

 

[KingFatty]

I think it would be best to get new cpu/mobo.

However, does your current motherboard support FX chips, and do you overclock?

I recently spent $119 at microcenter to get an FX-6300. After overclocking, my Starcraft 2 performance went from ~45 frames to ~70 frames in a typical 3v3 huge battle. But without overclocking the FX-6300, it was about tied with a heavily overclocked Phenom II. Anyway, it's an option if you want to spend about $120. Oh forgot that I also got a free motherboard from microcenter in the combo deal, but I'm just going to try to sell it along with the old PHenom II chip.

Anyway like I said it would have been better to get an intel mobo and perhaps a 3570K chip, maybe I'd get like 100 frames in my Starcraft 2 benchmark 3v3 battle replay? But I mean, my issue is I spent around $120 to get my frames from 45 to 70. Did I want to spend $400 to get my frames from 45 to 100 or 120 in starcraft 2 (I don't know what a 3570K would do in my particular replay that I used to benchmark starcraft 2, I really wish there was a built-in benchmark for that game!). I just think that maybe it's a fine compromise to just replace your CPU for very cheap, if it can tide you over for now.

Then do the ultimate upgrade to Haswell. That's my plan, spent $120 to tide me over till Haswell, *then* blow my wad on a new CPU+mobo.

 

[Face2Face]

You would see a nice increase in min framerates. But I would overclock that cpu some more if you can.


Posted from Anandtech.com App for Android

 

[SPBHM]

"DDR2-1600"

I'm pretty sure your MB only supports DDR2 (and no FX chips), and the fastest DDR2 was 1066.

but if you can grab some i5 I think it's a valid upgrade (considering you have the 670)... but maybe you could wait for Haswell...

 

[kitenai]

I think it would be best to get new cpu/mobo.

However, does your current motherboard support FX chips, and do you overclock?

I recently spent $119 at microcenter to get an FX-6300. After overclocking, my Starcraft 2 performance went from ~45 frames to ~70 frames in a typical 3v3 huge battle. But without overclocking the FX-6300, it was about tied with a heavily overclocked Phenom II. Anyway, it's an option if you want to spend about $120. Oh forgot that I also got a free motherboard from microcenter in the combo deal, but I'm just going to try to sell it along with the old PHenom II chip.

Anyway like I said it would have been better to get an intel mobo and perhaps a 3570K chip, maybe I'd get like 100 frames in my Starcraft 2 benchmark 3v3 battle replay? But I mean, my issue is I spent around $120 to get my frames from 45 to 70. Did I want to spend $400 to get my frames from 45 to 100 or 120 in starcraft 2 (I don't know what a 3570K would do in my particular replay that I used to benchmark starcraft 2, I really wish there was a built-in benchmark for that game!). I just think that maybe it's a fine compromise to just replace your CPU for very cheap, if it can tide you over for now.

Then do the ultimate upgrade to Haswell. That's my plan, spent $120 to tide me over till Haswell, *then* blow my wad on a new CPU+mobo.

yeah thats a good point, im trying not to spend too much but at the same time i want something that'll last, may just save for an ivy bridge or something.

 

[kitenai]

You would see a nice increase in min framerates. But I would overclock that cpu some more if you can.


Posted from Anandtech.com App for Android

thats what im hoping, i get really nice high frame rates but when i hit a "spike"(thats what id call it) where for like a half second the frames dip all the way down then shoot back up.

unfortunately my motherboard is topped out pretty much, i hear it now supports the Phenom II X4 965 BE but thats too small a step for me.

 

[kitenai]

"DDR2-1600"

I'm pretty sure your MB only supports DDR2 (and no FX chips), and the fastest DDR2 was 1066.

but if you can grab some i5 I think it's a valid upgrade (considering you have the 670)... but maybe you could wait for Haswell...

lol yeah thats what i meant, i was doing it off the top of my head and got that mixed up.

yeah an i5 would definitely be nice

 

[MeldarthX]

I5 or newest FX will be a nice step for you - just depends on what you want to spend

King brought up a nice thing; if you have a microcenter near you check to see what combos they have......a FX 6300 plus free mb for 120 is damn hard deal to beat

Throw in some ram and you'll have a nice upgraded system for awhile

 

[kitenai]

I5 or newest FX will be a nice step for you - just depends on what you want to spend

King brought up a nice thing; if you have a microcenter near you check to see what combos they have......a FX 6300 plus free mb for 120 is damn hard deal to beat

Throw in some ram and you'll have a nice upgraded system for awhile

I wouldn't mind going AMD again but man so many people say the Intels are so beast

 

[jaqie]

only when you spend enough to go beyond AMD's top of the line cpu... they are good if you have the money, if you don't, amd is the best performance per dollar. In short, check out AMD's top few offerings and if you can't afford more than what a setup with those would cost, you should get them because they perform far better than what intel kit you can get with that much money.

 

[SPBHM]

only when you spend enough to go beyond AMD's top of the line cpu... they are good if you have the money, if you don't, amd is the best performance per dollar. In short, check out AMD's top few offerings and if you can't afford more than what a setup with those would cost, you should get them because they perform far better than what intel kit you can get with that much money.

if we are talking specifically about gaming, I cannot agree, the i5 3470 cost basically the same as the 8350, it uses less power (even half in some cases), and it's overall faster for gaming... also since we are talking about half the power usage, you can probably have a better experience with some ultra cheap motherboards (using it fully stable with some $50 MB, which may not the case with the 125w+ TDP 8350)...

also, even if you go for the 3570k, the $30-40 or whatever have a very small impact on the overall price of the entire PC.

toms hardware recently even choose some Core i5 for their $600 gaming PC
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/pc-gaming-overclock-build-a-pc,3443.html

it's totally possible, and it makes sense, even for a lower cost gaming PCs to consider using an i5.

 

[MeldarthX]

if we are talking specifically about gaming, I cannot agree, the i5 3470 cost basically the same as the 8350, it uses less power (even half in some cases), and it's overall faster for gaming... also since we are talking about half the power usage, you can probably have a better experience with some ultra cheap motherboards (using it fully stable with some $50 MB, which may not the case with the 125w+ TDP 8350)...

also, even if you go for the 3570k, the $30-40 or whatever have a very small impact on the overall price of the entire PC.

toms hardware recently even choose some Core i5 for their $600 gaming PC
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/pc-gaming-overclock-build-a-pc,3443.html

it's totally possible, and it makes sense, even for a lower cost gaming PCs to consider using an i5.

3470?? Really isn't a match for 8350 specially when overclocking goes into account.

games and programs are moving from single core to mutlicore more that do that; more you see 8350 shine along with the 6300 etc.

As I said; find a deal that matches 6300 + free motherboard for 120; 6300 overclocked is a very nice cpu for gaming and normal computer use.

If he's got 400-600 to spend then yes it does make more sense to go Intel.....but we're watching dual cores being brought to their knees in the newer games. Its time to start moving on.....

I have 8150 that's sitting at 4ghz.....I do a lot of gaming; transcoding etc; not once has it ever not been able to do anything I want fast. I will be moving to either 8350 or there revisions when they are release

I also have Intel server box - I will say I dislike Intel's business practices *seen them first hand* I can't knock their engineering...

 

[Tweak155]

3470?? Really isn't a match for 8350 specially when overclocking goes into account.

games and programs are moving from single core to mutlicore more that do that; more you see 8350 shine along with the 6300 etc.

As I said; find a deal that matches 6300 + free motherboard for 120; 6300 overclocked is a very nice cpu for gaming and normal computer use.

If he's got 400-600 to spend then yes it does make more sense to go Intel.....but we're watching dual cores being brought to their knees in the newer games. Its time to start moving on.....

I have 8150 that's sitting at 4ghz.....I do a lot of gaming; transcoding etc; not once has it ever not been able to do anything I want fast. I will be moving to either 8350 or there revisions when they are release

I also have Intel server box - I will say I dislike Intel's business practices *seen them first hand* I can't knock their engineering...

I bought my I5 3570k and mobo for $230 after tax...

 

[MeldarthX]

Tweak that still more than 120.....again

 

[vampirr]

Its common sense that everyone is recommend Intel over AMD since Intel is prevalent and use Apple styled commercials and promotions and brainwashing customers that never do any research and believe that an i3 beats FX 8350 while any guy with college or has at least some basic knowledge of CPU/processors know that this is against mere logic or rational thinking...

Today dual core with or without HyperThreading are struggling to run Crysis 3 and have a bottleneck even on 7850 while on multiplayer side they are literally crawling and will become useless in Q3-Q4 of 2013.

We see a trend of departure from single threaded programs and conversion to multithreaded that FX series really shine, as Intel fanboyware is trying to bash AMD's CPU's they don't see that Bulldozer/Piledriver shine more and more as games and programs are multithreaded... Singlethreaded is just way outdated and it hit its limits...

Bulldozer was a catastrophe since most programs were not still multithreaded and the arhitecture was lets say lightly, a bit radical change to previous AMD's CPU's... Piledriver fixed the problems that Bulldozer had and was an overall great improvement in performance per watt, in 2014 SteamRoller will be out and it will bring great improvements to single-threaded programs/games/apps and it will really compete with Intel.

If you got the money and want to spend it, get i5 3570k or i7 3770k even thought FX 8350 even beats in couple of things the i7 3770k that costs 100-130$ more...

If you want more future proof build, FX 8350 is great. Gaming wise, almost perfect and if you play do to video editing and even streaming while playing it will be a perfect machine. Streaming+Gaming FX 8350 > i5 3570k/i7 3770k Streaming+Gaming

Just pointing out things, since most responses in this thread/post say Intel... So I decided to go "launch" couple of countermeasures since there are biased people here.

 

[SlowSpyder]

*edit - Your motherboard is AM2, not AM2+... nevermind, I don't think an x6 would work in there.

 

[Tweak155]

Tweak that still more than 120.....again

So? Doesn't save your statement from being way off...

 

[Muyoso]

If you got the money and want to spend it, get i5 3570k or i7 3770k even thought FX 8350 even beats in couple of things the i7 3770k that costs 100-130$ more...

The 3770k is 60 dollars more expensive if you are near a Microcenter, and the 3570k is only 20 dollars more expensive than the FX 8350 at Microcenter. With regards to gaming and any single threaded task, the 3570k and the 3770k are far faster than the FX 8350. Its not about "if you have the money". Its about are you SERIOUSLY going to sacrifice a ridiculous amount of performance in games for $20???

http://anandtech.com/bench/Product/701?vs=697

Look at the games at the bottom. 15-35 fps difference between the 3570k and the FX8350.

 

[MeldarthX]

So? Doesn't save your statement from being way off...

FFS Tweak again read what I said; if you can find 6300 plus a new MB for 120; that's a hell of a deal.......

Better than your deal because you're paying double the price for about 15% more performance in benchmarks but not in RL.....

If he doesn't have Microcenter near him; best is price out what is in his price range; whether its AMD or Intel; if he wants AMD there is nothing wrong with that......

Seriously misinformation needs to stop....

 

[frozentundra123456]

3470?? Really isn't a match for 8350 specially when overclocking goes into account.

games and programs are moving from single core to mutlicore more that do that; more you see 8350 shine along with the 6300 etc.

As I said; find a deal that matches 6300 + free motherboard for 120; 6300 overclocked is a very nice cpu for gaming and normal computer use.

If he's got 400-600 to spend then yes it does make more sense to go Intel.....but we're watching dual cores being brought to their knees in the newer games. Its time to start moving on.....

I have 8150 that's sitting at 4ghz.....I do a lot of gaming; transcoding etc; not once has it ever not been able to do anything I want fast. I will be moving to either 8350 or there revisions when they are release

I also have Intel server box - I will say I dislike Intel's business practices *seen them first hand* I can't knock their engineering...

According to anands bench, the i5 3470 beats the FX8350 in every game tested. In newer games like Crysis 3 it is even very close. Toms Hardware recently tested an 8350 vs i5 3550 in crysis 3, and the ave FPS was a tie, with the i5 having a better minimum frame rate.

So overall, including a wide spectrum of games and not just the recent few in which the 8350 is more competitive, at stock, I think the even a low end i5 is more balanced for gaming and will use less power.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Its common sense that everyone is recommend Intel over AMD since Intel is prevalent and use Apple styled commercials and promotions and brainwashing customers that never do any research and believe that an i3 beats FX 8350 while any guy with college or has at least some basic knowledge of CPU/processors know that this is against mere logic or rational thinking...

Today dual core with or without HyperThreading are struggling to run Crysis 3 and have a bottleneck even on 7850 while on multiplayer side they are literally crawling and will become useless in Q3-Q4 of 2013.

We see a trend of departure from single threaded programs and conversion to multithreaded that FX series really shine, as Intel fanboyware is trying to bash AMD's CPU's they don't see that Bulldozer/Piledriver shine more and more as games and programs are multithreaded... Singlethreaded is just way outdated and it hit its limits...

Bulldozer was a catastrophe since most programs were not still multithreaded and the arhitecture was lets say lightly, a bit radical change to previous AMD's CPU's... Piledriver fixed the problems that Bulldozer had and was an overall great improvement in performance per watt, in 2014 SteamRoller will be out and it will bring great improvements to single-threaded programs/games/apps and it will really compete with Intel.

If you got the money and want to spend it, get i5 3570k or i7 3770k even thought FX 8350 even beats in couple of things the i7 3770k that costs 100-130$ more...

If you want more future proof build, FX 8350 is great. Gaming wise, almost perfect and if you play do to video editing and even streaming while playing it will be a perfect machine. Streaming+Gaming FX 8350 > i5 3570k/i7 3770k Streaming+Gaming

Just pointing out things, since most responses in this thread/post say Intel... So I decided to go "launch" couple of countermeasures since there are biased people here.

I definitely agree with your last sentence!! I would disagree with you about who they are however.

 

[Imouto]

http://anandtech.com/bench/Product/701?vs=697

Look at the games at the bottom. 15-35 fps difference between the 3570k and the FX8350.

Here we go again. 100+ fps or superlow res benches.

I'd buy a 3570k, an ASRock Pro4 and 8 GB of cheap 1600 RAM.