Recommended upgrade?

[algae]

Hi all,
I've got the upgrade bug but not enough to build an entirely new system. Based on my current specs below, what do you recommend for an upgrade that will noticeably increase my performance? This box gets a pretty good workout: Gaming...RTCW, MOHAA. Video: Making/converting VCDs, Photoshop, Mp3, Internet,etc...
Current specs:
MSI K7T266 Pro2 Motherboard
512 Crucial DDR RAM
MSI Geforce 2 Ti 64 Mb DDR video
Soundblaster Live 5.1 Sound card
80 G. WD HD with 8mb buffer; 60 G Maxtor HD
Monsoon MH-502 Speakers

Obviously I'm thinking of a new video card, but based on some research I'm not that convinced it will be worth it.

Any suggestions would be appreciated.

Gary

 

[dullard]

You are missing one piece of information - or maybe I'm blind - what is the processor?

 

[Markfw]

What CPu ? How much money do you want to spend ? What do you want to do better ? What do you use the computer for ? Without answers to these questions, any response is worthless.

 

[DimZiE]

if u want an increase of performance in general the obvious choice is to upgrade the processor and add some more memory....

if u want faster gaming performance then i'll suggest u upgrade your VGA card as well GF2 Ti wouldn't be able to run newer games at a decent resolution and FPS

 

[algae]

Sorry forgot to mention:
Athlon XP 1600+ CPU.
Gary

 

[dullard]

In that case, I bet you will get the most noticible difference with a new video card. You have enough memory (unless you are doing massive photoshop work), your drives are plenty good, your processor is good enough for now. Then when the Barton prices are low, get one of those (which may or may not need a new motherboard - I don't spend the time to keep up to date with those).

 

[bsr]

if you are a gammer then: atleast amd 2Ghz (p4 2.6), radeon 9500 or 9700, 1gb ram ... This is also the upgrade im going to make.

 

[DX2Player]

Definatly get new graphics card, but if you can manage to hold out a bit longer I would see how this whole FX vs R350 things turns out, even if not interested in the top dog they should push down prices faily quickly of other very good cards. Could possible get a ATI 9700 non pro for about $200.

 

[Ilmater]

Originally posted by: bsr
if you are a gammer then: atleast amd 2Ghz (p4 2.6), radeon 9500 or 9700, 1gb ram ... This is also the upgrade im going to make.

AH HAH! I knew some maniac was going around somewhere and suggesting people buy 1GB of RAM! bsr, buddy, what are you trying to do to people? All these people coming in here ask if they need 1GB of RAM or say they're going to build computers with 1GB of RAM, and I constantly have to tell them to stop wasting money. Have you ever actually seen a benchmark that shows an application going faster with 1GB of RAM than it did when it had 512MB of RAM? No? That's because most people don't benchmark programs like Photoshop and AutoCAD - the only programs that would benefit from more RAM. In fact, I did see a comparison of 128MB, 256MB, 512,MB 768MB, and 1GB of RAM, and there were increases in performance until you got to 512MB of RAM. At 768MB, benches were basically flat (no more than 1% or 2% difference in any benchmark), and at 1GB some benches actually went down. I don't know why, I just know what I saw. Please stop telling people to get 1GB of RAM until you can prove that getting it will bring even the slightest increase in performance.

My question is, where did this rumor start? Why do people suddenly think that getting more RAM than 512MB will magically make your computer faster? I assume it's just a natural progression: people figure that 512MB has been the de facto standard for so long that they just decided it was time to move up.

Anyway, I'd recommend an upgrade in your video card. A GF4 Ti4200 is the best price/performance gaming card out right now IMO. Unless, of course, you want to modify things a little. There's some way to change a Radeon 9500 into a 9700, and that would be a little better than buying a GF4 Ti4200.

RAM's fine, CPU's fine, HDD's fine, and motherboard's fine. The only other thing to consider would be getting a new sound card. Maybe an Audigy 2 card. I used to steer people away from them, but then I bought one (irresistable price) and am very satisfied.

BTW, bsr, don't you waste your money either; stick with 512MB of RAM unless you do serious graphic work/video editing/CAD work.

Edit:

Originally posted by: DimZiE
if u want an increase of performance in general the obvious choice is to upgrade the processor and add some more memory....

if u want faster gaming performance then i'll suggest u upgrade your VGA card as well GF2 Ti wouldn't be able to run newer games at a decent resolution and FPS

How did I miss this?! Everything I said to bsr above applies to you too. Knock it off!

 

[dmhinz]

Ilmater is correct, 1GB of RAM is a waste of $ for what you describe. I have 1GB of memory because I do a lot of video editing and even under that stress, I have yet to run out of memory!

I would upgrade either the video or the cpu if I were you. AMD prices are pretty cheap so a faster cpu won't bite into your wallet too deeply. A new video card w/ good AA filtering would certainly improve your gaming experience. I personally have an ATI Radeon 9700 Pro and am very happy w/ it - it was however nearly $400 so I expected no less.

-D

 

[DX2Player]

Actually if you had to get something right now I would get the 9500 Pro over the Ti4200. Some sites do not show the comparison in terms of AA/AF which would only show minimal increase over the Ti4200 in terms of frames but onces the goodies are turned up and the res is pumped up the 9500 pro can even beat out the ti4600. This indicates it is more capable of dealing with the future not to mention that its Direct9x capable instead of 8.1. This is of course asuming your desire of making it last, if your going to upgrade your graphics card again in another 6-8 months than it doesnt really matter. For now the best price/performance card out there is the 9500 Pro.

 

[bsr]

[/quote]AH HAH! I knew some maniac was going around somewhere and suggesting people buy 1GB of RAM! bsr, buddy, what are you trying to do to people? All these people coming in here ask if they need 1GB of RAM or say they're going to build computers with 1GB of RAM, and I constantly have to tell them to stop wasting money. Have you ever actually seen a benchmark that shows an application going faster with 1GB of RAM than it did when it had 512MB of RAM? No? That's because most people don't benchmark programs like Photoshop and AutoCAD - the only programs that would benefit from more RAM. In fact, I did see a comparison of 128MB, 256MB, 512,MB 768MB, and 1GB of RAM, and there were increases in performance until you got to 512MB of RAM. At 768MB, benches were basically flat (no more than 1% or 2% difference in any benchmark), and at 1GB some benches actually went down. I don't know why, I just know what I saw. Please stop telling people to get 1GB of RAM until you can prove that getting it will bring even the slightest increase in performance.
[/quote]

Well bf1942 will suck up 512mb of ram very fast (in about 15 mins of play),, and start paging to hd. After about 1 hour of play you will find about 500mb paged ti hd and no available ram.... So why not have 1gb to avoid paging/swapping ??

 

[Ilmater]

Originally posted by: bsr

AH HAH! I knew some maniac was going around somewhere and suggesting people buy 1GB of RAM! bsr, buddy, what are you trying to do to people? All these people coming in here ask if they need 1GB of RAM or say they're going to build computers with 1GB of RAM, and I constantly have to tell them to stop wasting money. Have you ever actually seen a benchmark that shows an application going faster with 1GB of RAM than it did when it had 512MB of RAM? No? That's because most people don't benchmark programs like Photoshop and AutoCAD - the only programs that would benefit from more RAM. In fact, I did see a comparison of 128MB, 256MB, 512,MB 768MB, and 1GB of RAM, and there were increases in performance until you got to 512MB of RAM. At 768MB, benches were basically flat (no more than 1% or 2% difference in any benchmark), and at 1GB some benches actually went down. I don't know why, I just know what I saw. Please stop telling people to get 1GB of RAM until you can prove that getting it will bring even the slightest increase in performance.
[/quote]

Well bf1942 will suck up 512mb of ram very fast (in about 15 mins of play),, and start paging to hd. After about 1 hour of play you will find about 500mb paged ti hd and no available ram.... So why not have 1gb to avoid paging/swapping ??[/quote]
Why not? Because that one game is the only one that does that, and it still doesn't hardly affect performance. Who cares if your page file gets big?!

 

[Ilmater]

Originally posted by: DX2Player
Actually if you had to get something right now I would get the 9500 Pro over the Ti4200. Some sites do not show the comparison in terms of AA/AF which would only show minimal increase over the Ti4200 in terms of frames but onces the goodies are turned up and the res is pumped up the 9500 pro can even beat out the ti4600. This indicates it is more capable of dealing with the future not to mention that its Direct9x capable instead of 8.1. This is of course asuming your desire of making it last, if your going to upgrade your graphics card again in another 6-8 months than it doesnt really matter. For now the best price/performance card out there is the 9500 Pro.

The thing I don't understand is, what does it matter if the 9500 Pro beats the Ti4200 with AA and AF turned all the way up if they're both getting frame rates in the 20s?! At any playable resolution/quality setting in any new game (NOT Q3), the 4200 is reasonably close to the 9500 Pro. The cheapest 9500 Pro I could find was $180. The cheapest 4200 I could find was $117. algae, you can pick for yourself.

 

[DX2Player]

Originally posted by: Ilmater

Originally posted by: DX2Player
Actually if you had to get something right now I would get the 9500 Pro over the Ti4200. Some sites do not show the comparison in terms of AA/AF which would only show minimal increase over the Ti4200 in terms of frames but onces the goodies are turned up and the res is pumped up the 9500 pro can even beat out the ti4600. This indicates it is more capable of dealing with the future not to mention that its Direct9x capable instead of 8.1. This is of course asuming your desire of making it last, if your going to upgrade your graphics card again in another 6-8 months than it doesnt really matter. For now the best price/performance card out there is the 9500 Pro.

The thing I don't understand is, what does it matter if the 9500 Pro beats the Ti4200 with AA and AF turned all the way up if they're both getting frame rates in the 20s?! At any playable resolution/quality setting in any new game (NOT Q3), the 4200 is reasonably close to the 9500 Pro. The cheapest 9500 Pro I could find was $180. The cheapest 4200 I could find was $117. algae, you can pick for yourself.

Dude dont know what your talkin about

Anandtech <-look at final version it totally owns

Hothardware

HardOPC

Various current games included

Could find a bunch more but I think you get the point, algae I hope you do decide for yourself but only after being properly informed

Hope this helps

 

[DX2Player]

What you can do is upgrade vid card, that upgrade should hold you for a while, than if later you find you want to upgrade again than get new CPU and mobo and keep the graphics card till again you feel you need to upgrade. Back and forth so wont hurt the wallet all at one time.