GPU/CPU Dilemma for new PC

[spyblog]

1. What YOUR PC will be used for. That means what types of tasks you'll be performing.

Gaming is the only place I care about performance. Want it to run games as well as possible and be good for the future.


4. IF YOU have a brand preference. That means, are you an Intel-Fanboy, AMD-Fanboy, ATI-Fanboy, nVidia-Fanboy, Seagate-Fanboy, WD-Fanboy, etc, etc, etc, you get the picture.

Looking to stay with Intel/Nvidia for CPU/GPU.

5. If YOU intend on using any of YOUR current parts, and if so, what those parts are.

No

6. IF YOU have searched and/or read similar threads.

A little bit

7. IF YOU plan on overclocking or run the system at default speeds.

Not sure yet, I think I'd like the option to OC if I want to

8. WHEN do you plan to build it?

Soon



I'm basically have debates over the CPU and GPU, maybe someone can help me out. My original idea:

Q8200 CPU
EVGA 750I Mobo
Kingston HyperX 4G PC8500
EVGA 9800 GTX+ SC

So here's my dilemma. I was originally building it like this so it would be pretty solid now, but so that I could also do SLI with another 9800 GTX sometime down the road. However, I've been reading about all the problems with SLI boards and with certain games making SLI unplayable. Would it be wiser to go something like:

Q8200 CPU
Good Non-SLI Mobo
Same RAM
XFX GTX 280 (or even GTX 260)

The money I'd save on the mobo would almost pay the difference in the video card I think, so I'm just not sure which route to go. The other potential option is the GTX 260 with a slightly better processor (9400 maybe).

Anyway, if anyone has any advice I'd appreciate it. I'd like to be future proof, but I keep hearing bad things about SLI so I'm just not sure it's worth it right now and I believe a GTX 280 runs about the same speeds as 9800 GTX in SLI.

Thanks

 

[DaveSimmons]

In my opinion building for SLI only makes sense if you are going to buy two high-end cards right now or buy the second card in a month or two.

If you're thinking "I'll buy the second card in a year or two" it's a waste of money, especially if you do it instead of spending money on a better single card now.

 

[spyblog]

Well I usually keep my PCs for about 2 years, so I figured adding a second card in about a year would be a good way to extend the life/performance of the rig. Would it just be better to do the single card, non-SLI in terms of long-term efficiency / life-span as well?

 

[DaveSimmons]

SLI motherboard + 9800GTX+ now, second 9800GTX+ in a year (might have to find it used) -- this also requires a more expensive PSU now or later vs. a PSU for 1 card

-or-

non-SLI + GTX280 now, sell GTX and buy a GTX 3xx in 1.x years

Which gives you better gaming performance over the next year?

If you can't afford SLI now, why give up gaming performance over the next year+ in the hope than a SLI upgrade still makes sense in a year when newer cards are out?

Also, for the next 2 years and at stock speed an E8500 3.16 GHz dual-core will probably keep offering better performance than a 2.33 GHz quad-core.

 

[spyblog]

I was thinking about that as well (E8500). I can get a good deal on it right now actually, but I wasn't sure about how useful Quad was right now. I know very few games take advantage of the extra cores, so do you think a ~2 year investment would make sense with the E8500? As in, do you think Quads will still be underused during that time?

So you're thinking an E8500 + GFX 260 or 280 (depends on my budget) would be the best bet for what I'm trying to do?

Edit: It's actually the E8400 I can get a good deal on. It would be about the same price ($25 cheaper) than the Q8200. What do you think? If you think the E8400 would be the better deal, can you recommend a solid mobo for it? (under $185 USD)

 

[krnmastersgt]

Quad optimized engines are becoming more and more popular, if you're heavy into rts/fps then you should be looking at quads since the transition is slow but surely coming. Though if you do go with a quad for gaming, I'm not all that sure a Q8xxx is the way to go due to its lower cache, not sure on how big a performance hit it'll cause though. But for games as of now/1 year from now a dual core should suffice for the vast majority of games.

What resolution do you play at?

 

[spyblog]

Will be upgrading to a 22", so probably 16xx (forget the dimensions).

I live in Canada and the store I'm looking at (good sales and shipping deals) has the Q6600 priced badly compared to the Q8200 and E8400. From what I've read, the Q8200 and Q6600 at stock perform pretty much the same with a very very slight advantage to the Q6600. Only downside is 6600 OC's better.

So I'm really not sure.

 

[spyblog]

Looking at prices, I think GTX 260 might work better for me than GTX 280.

Q9400 & 9800 GTX+ SC is a possible option along with Q8200 or E8400 & GTX 260 SSC.

 

[DaveSimmons]

I've had Gigabyte's P43 chipset motherboard (under $100 in the US) since July and it has worked flawlessly with my E8400 and ATI 4870. The cheapest Asus and Gigabyte P45 boards are also popular.

Quad optimized engines are becoming more and more popular, if you're heavy into rts/fps then you should be looking at quads since the transition is slow but surely coming.

True, but it's kind of like SLI with two $75 video cards, since the quad cores are running so much slower than an E8400 or E8500 (600+ MHz slower). A game has to make very good use of the extra cores just to catch up to the faster dual-core.

 

[spyblog]

Interesting. I'm about to check out the mobo you listed, do you have any advice on my last post (those 2 options)

 

[DaveSimmons]

What are the prices you can get? I'd probably get an E8400 and GTX 260 in the US.

 

[krnmastersgt]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
True, but it's kind of like SLI with two $75 video cards, since the quad cores are running so much slower than an E8400 or E8500 (600+ MHz slower). A game has to make very good use of the extra cores just to catch up to the faster dual-core.

That depends on the quad chosen and whether or not the chips are overclocked imo. A Q8300 and an E8400 perform quite close to each other at stock clocks (cache not being an issue), now if we're talking overclocked speeds then maybe, but it's not as drastic as running 2 last-generation middle-performance cards in SLI. And no dual is really suited for massive rts games with all the ai that goes into them.

 

[spyblog]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
What are the prices you can get? I'd probably get an E8400 and GTX 260 in the US.

With the current sales, the two combos work out to being the same price. So it'd be whichever would give better performance (Q9400 & 9800 GTX+ or E8400 & GTX 260). If I can manage extra money for GTX 280, I think the choice becomes more clear.

 

[spyblog]

bump

Rechecked the deals, realized Q9400 + GTX 280 might be possible. In a debate between Q9400 v E8400, opinions?

 

[bamacre]

Q9400

Games are just now beginning to be multi-threaded, and that trend will continue.

 

[Denithor]

Well, my take is this: if you seriously don't plan to upgrade your CPU for the next 2 years, get a quad. Because more & more games are being released that at least gain some benefit from them.

Here's what I would suggest.

PhII 940 + Asus M3N72-D (750a SLI) combo $377
G.Skill 2x2GB DDR2-1066 $59

That's $436CAN which might just leave you enough room in your budget for that GTX 260.

:thumbsup: