I want more RAM. What should I do?

[soccerballtux]

I've got 4x2GB populated in my current rig in sig.
It's an AM2+ mobo and I've got an AM3 CPU. I wouldn't mind keeping the CPU and just upgrading the mobo and RAM to DDR3 if that makes any sense (does it?).

 

[Yuriman]

IMO, not really. That's a pretty expensive RAM upgrade. If you're in need of changing your board, I generally recommend people to go Intel right now. It's possible that the games you play may favor an FX-6300, but generally the i3 is going to be a better chip for most, and if you're bothering to change the board I'd sell the CPU too and move up.

 

[Blain]

Ditch your MB & memory.

Buy an Asrock 970 PRO3 R2.0 and a G.Skill F3-12800CL9Q-16GBSR1 kit.

 

[mfenn]

Ditch your MB & memory.

Buy an Asrock 970 PRO3 R2.0 and a G.Skill F3-12800CL9Q-16GBSR1 kit.

I'd say that a 2x8GB kit would be better. Something like this:

ASRock 970 Pro3 R2.0 $65 - same board
Team DDR3 1600 16GB $129 AP - 2x8GB
Total: $194

That's probably your least expensive path to 16GB if that's the overriding factor. But I'm with Yuriman that upgrading to an i3 or i5 is the best value overall. Best value in the sense that you're not throwing $65 at a board that only exists to get you DDR3.

 

[soccerballtux]

I'd say that a 2x8GB kit would be better. Something like this:

ASRock 970 Pro3 R2.0 $65 - same board
Team DDR3 1600 16GB $129 AP - 2x8GB
Total: $194

That's probably your least expensive path to 16GB if that's the overriding factor. But I'm with Yuriman that upgrading to an i3 or i5 is the best value overall. Best value in the sense that you're not throwing $65 at a board that only exists to get you DDR3.

yeaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh 2x8GBs were what I was hoping to go for!!!!

lot of failed boards it looks like in the reviews there....
and would the 5 phase VRM be ok for my 4ghz overclock?

how about this? BIOSTAR TA970 AM3+
Maybe I should just get a 512GB SSD. There's really no easy solution...

 

[soccerballtux]

IMO, not really. That's a pretty expensive RAM upgrade. If you're in need of changing your board, I generally recommend people to go Intel right now. It's possible that the games you play may favor an FX-6300, but generally the i3 is going to be a better chip for most, and if you're bothering to change the board I'd sell the CPU too and move up.

oh yeah. The main reason to avoid changing to Intel is current CPU cooler would go to waste.
Oh, I guess on an i3 that wouldn't matter.

 

[mfenn]

yeaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh 2x8GBs were what I was hoping to go for!!!!

lot of failed boards it looks like in the reviews there....
and would the 5 phase VRM be ok for my 4ghz overclock?

how about this? BIOSTAR TA970 AM3+
Maybe I should just get a 512GB SSD. There's really no easy solution...

None of the current budget 970 boards are going to overclock as well as what you've got. They might take your CPU to 4.0 GHz, but I wouldn't bet on it. To get a good overclocking board would cost more than the overclock's extra performance is worth.

The Biostar is also a fine alternative (same points apply though) and costs $5 less. I don't really put any stock in Newegg reviews for reliability though, the sample is too biased to make for good statistics.

 

[mfenn]

oh yeah. The main reason to avoid changing to Intel is current CPU cooler would go to waste.
Oh, I guess on an i3 that wouldn't matter.

What cooler?

 

[soccerballtux]

What cooler?

Thermalright Ultra-120

 

[nsafreak]

You could get the VX BTK II Bolt Thru Kit and continue to use your Ultra-120 with a socket 1150 system. That kit works with Socket 1150/1155/1156/1366/2011 & AM2+/AM3+/FM2/FM3.

 

[soccerballtux]

darn, and I thought I had good reason to not upgrade....

which i3 are we talking about? cheapest is $110

I don't see the point in considering the deadness of the platform. It's not like Intel processors ever drop in price.

I think it's going to make the most sense to get a solid AM3+ motherboard that I can put my CPU and cooler into, upgrade the ram now, and if want faster CPU down the road I can get a PileDriver FX-6 or 8 for very cheap

 

[mfenn]

darn, and I thought I had good reason to not upgrade....

which i3 are we talking about? cheapest is $110

I don't see the point in considering the deadness of the platform. It's not like Intel processors ever drop in price.

I think it's going to make the most sense to get a solid AM3+ motherboard that I can put my CPU and cooler into, upgrade the ram now, and if want faster CPU down the road I can get a PileDriver FX-6 or 8 for very cheap

If you want to talk about "dead platforms," AM3+ is about as dead as they come. It's ancient and there will likely never be another microarchitecture or chipset for it. Sure you could upgrade to a Piledriver later, but why bother when those chips are already slower than the i3 and i5 (respectively) that you can buy today?

I mean if you really want to stick with AMD, that's your choice, but you've got to realize its basically out of loyalty and charity instead of any performance or value reason.

 

[soccerballtux]

If you want to talk about "dead platforms," AM3+ is about as dead as they come. It's ancient and there will likely never be another microarchitecture or chipset for it. Sure you could upgrade to a Piledriver later, but why bother when those chips are already slower than the i3 and i5 (respectively) that you can buy today?

I mean if you really want to stick with AMD, that's your choice, but you've got to realize its basically out of loyalty and charity instead of any performance or value reason.

I'm saying that "dead platforms" is a moot point IMO. I get more features and performance for $ with AMD than the cheapest i3 solution right now, and Intel never releases new CPUs on anything but the last 2 processor sockets, and never drops CPU prices, so basically what I have an option of buying now is the only thing I'll have an option of buying later, just like the "dead platform" issue with AMD, with the exception of dropping in a quad core processor for $200 down the road vs a $50-75 used FX-8.

power consumption is about the only thing that will sway me I think, I need to work up the TCO on it because AMD is NOT cheap in those regards

the cheapest i3 I can get doesn't even match my current CPU in multithreaded performance so I don't see why I would want to pay $130 for it. Though, the single threaded is great so...

 

[soccerballtux]

I'm saying that "dead platforms" is a moot point IMO. I get more features and performance for $ with AMD than the cheapest i3 solution right now, and Intel never releases new CPUs on anything but the last 2 processor sockets, and never drops CPU prices, so basically what I have an option of buying now is the only thing I'll have an option of buying later, just like the "dead platform" issue with AMD, with the exception of dropping in a quad core processor for $200 down the road vs a $50-75 used FX-8.

power consumption is about the only thing that will sway me I think, I need to work up the TCO on it because AMD is NOT cheap in those regards

the cheapest i3 I can get doesn't even match my current CPU in multithreaded performance so I don't see why I would want to pay $130 for it. Though, the single threaded is great so...

does no one have an answer for this? do people really go around just recommending Intel even when it makes no financial sense?

 

[Ken g6]

Currently, Intel's "cheap enthusiast" solution is the Pentium G3258. It's only a 2-core chip, without hyper-threading, but it's two fast, overclockable cores. Get it with [thread=2389948]a cheap unofficially-overclockable board[/thread], take it to 4+GHz, and enjoy!

AMD's answer to that chip is the Athlon X4 860K, but it's on the FM2+ socket. And it's more expensive and power-hungry.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Currently, Intel's "cheap enthusiast" solution is the Pentium G3258. It's only a 2-core chip, without hyper-threading, but it's two fast, overclockable cores.

If you can accept its limitations, it's a great fun little platform. (Emphasis on "little" - dual-cores are so yesterday. So even just throwing us a bone in the form of an overclockable one, is kinda... I dunno, "weak". I would much prefer an unlocked i3. Then it would be a really worthwhile general platform.)

Not so great for modern gaming, not so great for DC (especially if you use a video card, or worse, two, because usually you have to dedicate a core to the video card to drive it), but decent for just web browsing, with an SSD.

GREAT for "mom-boxes". You can tell Mom that you overclocked her PC!

 

[escrow4]

does no one have an answer for this? do people really go around just recommending Intel even when it makes no financial sense?

An H97 mobo has a pile of features that AM3+ will never have and an i3 4330 will slaughter your current setup whilst sipping power. May as well bump up to an i5 if you want a longer lasting allrounder.

 

[Ketchup]

Thermalright Ultra-120

You are getting plenty of good advice on the CPU front, so I will just jump on this one. That cooler is ready to retire. I had one, and while good, it was bettered in every way by a $30 cooler from Cooler Master - easy of assembly, weight, noise, cooling ability, and price.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16835103099

 

[mfenn]

does no one have an answer for this? do people really go around just recommending Intel even when it makes no financial sense?

That post didn't have a question to answer. If you take off your "I want to be offended!1one!!" hat for a bit, you'll notice that everyone pretty much agreed that your cheapest way to get to 16GB would be to replace the motherboard and RAM, keeping your current CPU.

But we then said that updating the motherboard and RAM to keep processor compatibility and then turning around and very shortly thereafter buying a new (or used) AMD processor didn't make a lot of sense. You'd be finding a couple of local value maxima, but would miss a higher value maximum that you could reach if you were to consider the CPU, motherboard, and RAM as a single purchase.

 

[soccerballtux]

An H97 mobo has a pile of features that AM3+ will never have

hm, so integrated video that I won't use, and SATA6. Well not SATA6 AMD has that too-- what features am I missing?

and an i3 4330 will slaughter your current setup whilst sipping power.

definitely not going to slaughter, check your favorite bench website or the Cinebenth 11.5 thread

yes on the power sipping bit though. I don't know how much more $ it would save but it would help

May as well bump up to an i5 if you want a longer lasting allrounder.

this is the only way that changing to Intel makes sense to me

still, if all I need right now is 16GB RAM, it's at least $50 cheaper to do that with simply a new AMD mobo

hm maybe I'll try using firefox instead of chrome or something else better on memory footprint.

 

[soccerballtux]

You are getting plenty of good advice on the CPU front, so I will just jump on this one. That cooler is ready to retire. I had one, and while good, it was bettered in every way by a $30 cooler from Cooler Master - easy of assembly, weight, noise, cooling ability, and price.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16835103099

yeah I kept eyeing that but my current one has been fine. Would probably make sense to get that if moved to Intel since I'd have to get the mounting bracket

 

[Yuriman]

I never bothered to ask - what is your primary use of this PC? Judging by your parts it's likely a casual gaming and web browsing PC, but I shouldn't make assumptions.

Regarding multithreaded performance, an i3 would not slaughter your current chip. Rather, it would probably lose, though not by much, but you knew that. My experience has been that two fast cores with HT make for a better system for those purposes, hence my recommendation. Having used both (I have multiple AMD and Intel systems in the house) I'd take an i3 over any FX for casual gaming and web browsing.

It's definitely a factor that you already have a cooler that would allow for a decent overclock, and probably a power supply to support it too. These are items that add cost to a from-scratch AM3 build and help to level the playing field, but having a cooler doesn't necessarily mean it needs to be used. I have boxes of old parts unused and I don't feel compelled to stick them in my current computers. An overclocked FX-6300 would slaughter your current system in multithreaded performance, but unless you're shooting for 4.5+, would probably be a regression in single-threaded performance, and thus you'd (marginally) lose FPS in some games.

Perhaps the deciding factor would be this - would you rather have a Phenom quad chip at 6Ghz, or one clocked slightly lower than your current one but with more cores? Which would benefit you more?

 

[corkyg]

BTW - what OS? It is not in your sig.

 

[daveybrat]

I'd go with this board for the money:

GIGABYTE GA-970A-UD3P AM3+ AMD 970 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX AMD Motherboard

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813128651

It's only $59.99 after $15 mail in rebate.

It'll support your cpu and give you the ability to upgrade to a faster FX AM3+ cpu.

Also it uses the following:

8+2 phase CPU VRM power design for AMD high-TDP CPU support

Add a 16GB kit of ram and you are good to go by getting faster/more memory support, Sata 3 ports, and future cpu upgradability.

 

[escrow4]

An i3 would actually come very close in a multithreaded scenario:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/362?vs=1192

The x4 is only a tiny 1000 points higher. Plus H97 has ALC 1150, M.2 slots, and PCI-E 3.0, plus native USB 3.