replacement for ol Radeon HD 4850

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

myocardia

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2003
9,291
30
91
I have no idea why these guys are telling you to buy more ram that you can never reuse and a gpu that's way too fast and expensive for your system.
SHAME!
edit: Just realized you were probably not talking about the RAM that I recommended to him.

I do think that ill be getting a new comp in the next 2 years, but this one should hold out fine by then with the upgrades and OC.

You seriously should be able to have better performance today after upgrading to the R9 290, than you had 5 years ago, with that lowly 4850. The 4850 was never highend, and until 4 or 5 months ago, a 290 was the highest end/fastest card that AMD made, not including the 290X, which is the identical card, but with higher clocks on the GPU and VRAM.
 
Last edited:

roadkill0000

Member
Nov 9, 2015
39
1
71
good points...

I checked on the back of the monitor, it has the digital outputs, (the long white one with the smaller blue next to it, says dvi and vga )

the gtx950 is what I think ill go with, although if i overclock which id like to do , an R290 would be nice. the $70 difference to me isnt a huge deal.

BUT it could be a big deal if these direct x 12 games come out soon. Quick question.. when should I plan on building a new computer for these Direct X 12 games? are we talking months or years?
 

roadkill0000

Member
Nov 9, 2015
39
1
71
ohhh my god.. just saw gameplay of the game ashes of singularity, which is the 1st to use direct x 12...

yea i need that...
 

myocardia

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2003
9,291
30
91
That really all depends on if you're one of those people who pre-order every game that looks like you might like it, or wait until Steam puts it on sale for 50% off, like I do. Listen, here's the scoop. Your processor was 4-5x/400-500% faster than your video card, the day you had your friend build the system. Today, a $220 on sale video card is considerably faster than your CPU, to the point that even overclocked as high as it will go, the CPU will never catch up.

Which types of games are you wanting to play? Include specific examples, if possible. A lot of games don't require much CPU horsepower at all. Others, like GTA V, and nearly all MMOs, require much, much more. Also, nVidia cards do in fact require less CPU horsepower to 'push', than AMD's cards do. Yes, it applies more to DX10 & DX11 games, but that's every single game available for purchase today. All 100,000 or so of them.*

*I don't have the slightest idea how many 3D computer games are available for purchase today, nor do I care. Just making a point.
 

myocardia

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2003
9,291
30
91
ohhh my god.. just saw gameplay of the game ashes of singularity, which is the 1st to use direct x 12...

yea i need that...

That requires a lot of CPU power to play. With the fastest video cards on the planet in SLI or CrossFire, you're still gonna be getting unplayable framerates with your CPU, I'm pretty sure. I'll edit in the link to the CPU thread on it from a week or two ago.

edit: I had forgotten that the AMD CPUs did drastically better when using DX12. Don't forget, though, that the AMD CPU you'd want for DX12 is an 8350, which has twice the cores/threads as your Phenom II 955. Your CPU is only 4 threaded, so it's gonna be even slower than the 4350, if they benchmarked that (because of how much faster the 4350 runs) http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2452985

edit #2: Even a $140 Skylake i3 outperforms the highest threaded AMD CPU in this chart here:

ashes-r9390x.png
 
Last edited:

roadkill0000

Member
Nov 9, 2015
39
1
71
Honestly im just getting back into games, but as of the moment Planetside 2, Mass effect 2 and 3. Company of Heroes, arma 3, MAYBE BF4, although it looks really childish and arcade like compared to what I grew up playing. And whatever else I might find.

Im sure ill be fine with the graphics card mentioned, its just that if DX12 games are just around the corner, ill just be prepared to buy a new computer soon. As for the moment, im happy with what I got.
 

myocardia

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2003
9,291
30
91
BF4 and the newer version BF:Hardline are extremely CPU-bound games...assuming you are playing them online, and are on 64 player maps. On 64 player maps, it takes a very strong CPU to keep framerates up. That said, you'd probably be okay, if you'd spend $20-30 on a cheap but decent tower heatsink, such as the ones I linked below, and run your CPU @3.5Ghz, if not higher. Just remember, the larger the cooler, the better the cooling, and also the quieter it will be, when not running your CPU at 100%.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...$$$$$$$;35-103-099:$$$$$$$;35-103-064:$$$$$$$

And you've talked about so many video cards in this thread, when you say "the card", I have zero idea of which card you mean. If you want to take my advice on video cards, it wouldn't be wise of you to buy any video card for that system, except the AMD 290 or the GTX 960. Yes, the 960. It's 15+% faster than the GTX 950, and only costs ~$20 more. It also does 100% of the cool stuff that the 950 does, like hardware decoding of 4k video, recording games, etc, etc. The 290 is considerably faster than the 960, but you'll never know it, with your current CPU, unless you overclock it as far as it will go. Even overclocked, your CPU will never be fast enough to keep up with a 290.

However, if/when you decide to build yourself a new computer, the 290 I linked earlier will give you considerably better framerates than the 960...with a CPU that's twice as fast as the one you have now. I only mention that because it's nice to be able to transfer old parts to new computers, and not feel like you're holding the new computer back a ton, the way you would be with a slower card. That would allow you to be able to let your wallet recover for a month or two (or six), before buying a newer, cheaper, yet still faster newer generation video card.

My last bit of advice for you, if you are wanting to build yourself a new computer/have one built for you, this is a very excellent time to do so. The Skylake architecture is as impressive as Haswell was over Ivy Bridge. It overclocks well, the chipset you want to buy with an unlocked Skylake is extremely nice, and has no major flaws, which Intel happens to be known for having in their first generation chipsets. What we always say around here is "the proper time to upgrade is when your equipment needs upgrading."

Just remember this, though: for the last 3-4 years, your problem has been your slow video card, not your slow CPU. Video cards, and that goes double or triple for cheaper ones, should be replaced often. For the past ~5 years, there hasn't been a whole lot of advances in CPUs, so not much of a reason to upgrade them. A gaming machine needs its video card replaced much, much more often, to keep it current and to be able to play the newest games. Good luck.

edit: One last thing. If you think you'll probably not replace that computer in the next 12 months or so, you'd be better off with the GTX 960. It is a much better match for your slower CPU, especially since AMD cards require more CPU horsepower to push them, and although it's only ~2/3 as fast as a 290, it's still 500-600% faster than your current card.
 
Last edited:

MrTeal

Diamond Member
Dec 7, 2003
3,918
2,708
136
Given your system, and your intention to replace it in a couple years, I would give serious consideration to just buying a used GPU for $100, something along the line of a 7950/7970. Take the money you save and buy that extra 4GB ram (assuming you're using a 64-bit copy of Win7) and an SSD to put your operating system on. You can probably get the whole package for $200, and it will be worlds better in both gaming and everyday use than how it is now.

$75 with promo code - 250GB Samsung 850 Evo
$28 - Another 4GB of your existing RAM
$100 - Some random guy selling a 7950*

A 7950 will be faster than a 950 (especially overclocked), and general usage will be much improved with the SSD and extra ram, especially if you're a tab whore in Chrome.

*Not endorsing this guy, btw. It was just the first FS 7950 listed here. If you're patient you can probably grab a 7970 for $100 shipped.
 

roadkill0000

Member
Nov 9, 2015
39
1
71
gtx 960 it is. alot of other options out there, but this is practical and i dont have to mess wih ebay. ill get an extra stick of ram,

as far as overclocking and the heatsinks.. which of those heatsinks should i get and will work wih my comp?

also, i should probobly head over to he overclocking forum section, but is there an easy way i can go by this myself? i should just post something there..
 

myocardia

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2003
9,291
30
91
Well, as usual with sales, the RAM you should buy is no longer on sale. You will still be far better off with it, than to waste $28 buying two identical sticks of the slow RAM your buddy sold you. Having two sticks of RAM is preferable 100% of the time to 4 sticks, unless you own one of the chipsets that can run 4 channels in quad-channel, instead of the two channels that yours and my chipsets/motherboards/CPUs run. You'd also still have the 4GB of slower, higher latency RAM, in case games ever start to need more than 8GB. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...tm_medium=affiliates&utm_source=afc-Skimlinks

All of the heatsinks I linked will fit your motherboard and CPU. The biggest, most expensive one, which is ridiculously cheap for a heatsink that will allow you to have decent temps after overclocking, is by far the best one. And yeah, you will in fact need to start or read some threads about how to overclock that Phenom II. Good luck.

edit: I'd just read the first 10 or 15 pages of this Phenom II overclocking guide, if I were you: http://www.overclock.net/t/525113/phenom-ii-overclocking-guide
 
Last edited:

roadkill0000

Member
Nov 9, 2015
39
1
71
Im looking for a gtx 960, but there are alot of choices, do you think you could post the link? I have no idea which one.

thanks again. Im gonna try overclock possibly, and the heatsink.

this should be all I need for some time. Thank you for all of the help.
 

MrTeal

Diamond Member
Dec 7, 2003
3,918
2,708
136
Well, as usual with sales, the RAM you should buy is no longer on sale. You will still be far better off with it, than to waste $28 buying two identical sticks of the slow RAM your buddy sold you. Having two sticks of RAM is preferable 100% of the time to 4 sticks, unless you own one of the chipsets that can run 4 channels in quad-channel, instead of the two channels that yours and my chipsets/motherboards/CPUs run. You'd also still have the 4GB of slower, higher latency RAM, in case games ever start to need more than 8GB. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...tm_medium=affiliates&utm_source=afc-Skimlinks

All of the heatsinks I linked will fit your motherboard and CPU. The biggest, most expensive one, which is ridiculously cheap for a heatsink that will allow you to have decent temps after overclocking, is by far the best one. And yeah, you will in fact need to start or read some threads about how to overclock that Phenom II. Good luck.

edit: I'd just read the first 10 or 15 pages of this Phenom II overclocking guide, if I were you: http://www.overclock.net/t/525113/phenom-ii-overclocking-guide

I wouldn't absolutely disagree with you, though there's not going to be any real difference between 1333 CL8 and 1600 CL9 in gaming or much other than Sandra memory tests. Going 4GBx2 is definitely the better choice if you're willing to invest the time in setting the existing kit on Craiglist for $20 though. Without selling the existing RAM, it's questionable whether the spending 60% more to get two sticks of 1600CL9 vs four sticks of 1333CL8 especially if you're not overclocking the memory. Probably better to spend the $16 on something else, like the stupidly cheap $75 250GB 850 Evo.

Edit: Ref: AT memory testing
 
Last edited:

myocardia

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2003
9,291
30
91
I wouldn't absolutely disagree with you, though there's not going to be any real difference between 1333 CL8 and 1600 CL9 in gaming or much other than Sandra memory tests
Are you going to buy him some 1,333 CL8? Because what he has now is 1,333 CL10. So, the better RAM is not only higher speed, it's got tighter timings as well, making everything else you typed moot. Now, have a link showing someone testing slower, higher latency RAM, against faster, lower latency RAM?

edit:
like the stupidly cheap $75 250GB 850 Evo.

Whoa, that is an awesome deal. Thanks for mentioning it. roadkill, if you don't own an SSD yet, that is the one to buy, at that price. You would still have spent less money total on the GTX 960, the two 4GB sticks of RAM, and the SSD, than you would have for just an R9 390, which you wouldn't be able to use to anywhere near it's full potential, anyway.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...72&cm_re=850_evo_250gb-_-20-147-372-_-Product
 
Last edited:

Headfoot

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2008
4,444
641
126
You have 2 options:
1) get a weaker video card that is aligned with the max performance of your current CPU and replace everything (videocard included) when you can.
2) get a faster video card and carry it over to the new build.

1 will be cheaper in the short term, 2 will be cheaper in the long term. 1 would also be better if you plan on keeping the old machine as a guest PC or something along those lines when you do a new build.
 

MrTeal

Diamond Member
Dec 7, 2003
3,918
2,708
136
Are you going to buy him some 1,333 CL8? Because what he has now is 1,333 CL10. So, the better RAM is not only higher speed, it's got tighter timings as well, making everything else you typed moot. Now, have a link showing someone testing slower, higher latency RAM, against faster, lower latency RAM?
Are you sure? What's linked in his first post is 1333 CL8.

DDR3 1333 (PC3 10600)
Timing 8-8-8-21
Cas Latency 8
Voltage 1.5V

Whoa, that is an awesome deal. Thanks for mentioning it. roadkill, if you don't own an SSD yet, that is the one to buy, at that price. You would still have spent less money total on the GTX 960, the two 4GB sticks of RAM, and the SSD, than you would have for just an R9 390, which you wouldn't be able to use to anywhere near it's full potential, anyway.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...72&cm_re=850_evo_250gb-_-20-147-372-_-Product
It's almost a no brainer for anyone without an SSD at that price. 240GB+ is a great number for most people since it removes some of the discipline you need with the 120GB class drives.
 

myocardia

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2003
9,291
30
91
Are you sure? What's linked in his first post is 1333 CL8.

DDR3 1333 (PC3 10600)
Timing 8-8-8-21
Cas Latency 8
Voltage 1.5V

Wow, I have no idea how I became convinced that he had linked CL10 RAM, but you are correct. I wonder if maybe he accidentally linked the wrong RAM first? Either way, I apologize. Yes, it would be a waste of money to buy any other RAM. The difference between CL8 @ 1,333 and CL9 @ 1,600 is less than negligible; they are more or less identical in both bandwidth and overall latency. He only needs to buy another set of the RAM that he has now.

edit: You'll notice in my first post in this thread, I mentioned the RAM I suggested had not only more speed, but also tighter timings (in the edit).
 
Last edited:

roadkill0000

Member
Nov 9, 2015
39
1
71
thanks for he clarification. yes im going to go wih option one. im planning on keeping this comp longer then 12 months. the gtx960 linked above will do. maybe an extra stick of old ram. the heatsink will help, my comp has trouble with the heat, it gets hot in my apartment. if i OC it wont be by much.

with these upgrades i should be doing better. then ill wait it out a little until it really becomes necessary to upgrade. which i dont see happening yet.

thanks for all of the assistance.