Replace the graphics card or CPU?

[Johntv]

Hi, first post ) I'm sure that many gamers find themselves in the position I'm in.

Here's my system (nothing overclocked)

Athlon XP 2000+
768mb RAM (1x512mb PC2700, 2x128mb PC2100 ... all running at PC2100/FSB266)
Epox 8KHA+
ATI Radeon 9500 Pro 128mb

I was actually pretty happy with this system until I tried playing the Joint Operations Typhoon Rising demo, where I had to switch loads of stuff off (or run at 640x480 and STILL turn a couple of things down), to get a smooth framerate. I'm no powergamer, but that's still pretty bad...

Here are my options:

1. Wait until mid/late August, and get a Sempron 3100+ and motherboard..... Maybe £85/$135 for the CPU? And £65/$105 for the motherboard (Abit KV8 K8T800 S754).

2. Get an ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 128 (256 bit) now for £125/$200. (I'd be prepared to overclock this a little bit, perhaps close to XT speeds, since the board that I'd be getting should have the R360 core).

I'm guessing about the Sempron price, but the £prices for the other two items are around the lowest that you can get in the UK....



So I guess my question is, which of those two options would offer the largest performance increase in upcoming games? Also, you're most welcome to suggest other options, albeit within the same budget (£150/$240 or less).

Thanks!

 

[darkswordsman17]

I would say CPU. That is a pretty decent graphics card still.

Oh, and welcome to AT!

 

[scoughlin1]

That cpu is definitely getting up there in age, while the 9500 pro is still a decent card. Personally I think it's a pretty easy choice that you need a new cpu.

 

[Matthias99]

I'm not familiar with that particular MB, but if you can't run a 166FSB with it, I'd definitely say to go with the video card upgrade first, and then look at a whole new MB/CPU/RAM sometimes in the future. An XP2000+ is not *that* slow, and the 9500Pro, while still pretty fast (it's about as fast as a GF4Ti4600), is roughly 50% slower than a 9800Pro. Unless you can run a 166FSB (to run your DDR333 RAM in sync), and intend to get a 3000+ or faster processor, you're not going to get the same sort of benefit out of a CPU upgrade (and even if you can, I think it's unlikely that you'll get a 50% overall performance boost in games).

 

[darkswordsman17]

True, Matthias.

He could get a 9800 Pro for about $200 now, or get an A64 board (Chaintech and Epox both have a nice board for under $100) and a 2800+. This would be about $250-275. Then later upgrade the CPU and the graphics when the new cards have dropped in price.

 

[Brian48]

I would prefer a CPU upgrade, preferably one running at 333mhz like a Barton, along with a new MB that supports it. You'd have to sacrifice the PC2100 if they can't run at 333mhz though.

 

[Alkaline5]

Definitely a new CPU. A 2400+ can be had for under $70 if you want something now w/minimal hassle. (That would also leave room for a 9800Pro right now and still keep everything well below £200.)

 

[PeteRoy]

You will get much better noticeable performance with a CPU upgrade.

I suggest a Pentium 4 Prescott, it has 1MB L2 cache and it's price is reasonable.

 

[Ionizer86]

2000+ is 1667MHz, 2400+ (max practical upgrade for that board) is 2000MHz. The 20% CPU upgrade isn't that much, so I'd upgrade video first, unless you're upgrading the processor and board simultaneously.

BTW, for people who aren't familiar with the board, the 8KHA+ was the most popular and 2nd released Via KT266A board. The KT266A was the chipset that showed off the power of DDR since it was a good amount (15 to 25% faster) than the older DDR chipsets. It supports a max 266 FSB unless you're willing to change PCI/AGP ratios to run higher.

 

[Johntv]

Thanks for the suggestions everyone.

It's a problem, isn't it? I was tending slightly towards the graphics card because (as I understand it) the upcoming games will be limited more by graphics cards than by CPUs - what with all the shader effects. I thought a 9500 Pro would still be able to cope, but then I played Joint Ops... (I know my CPU is also a bottleneck, but I was shocked that I had to drop all the way to 640x480).


And yeah, the 8KHA+ will only really allow an XP 2400+ 266FSB. If I did want to change my CPU, I'd rather go with a whole new mobo and processor. That said, is it true that all the Socket 754 motherboards don't like to take 3 RAM sticks? I vaguely recall something about the RAM being reduced to PC1600 speeds if all three RAM sockets were in use.

If so, I'd have to replace my RAM as well for that CPU/mobo upgrade....