Some thoughts on an upgrade path

[DarkRogue]

Hello everyone,

I'd like to see if I can get some input on an upgrade path for my PC.
My current rig is in my sig. I originally designed the rig to handle anything I threw at it well enough (didn't have to be a beast at it) while having the option open to easy, periodic and small upgrades. With that in mind, I am in absolutely no rush to upgrade. I am not yet screaming at my computer for being slow and it's not dying yet. This purely a planning exercise that I'd like some input on.

I'm currently still running XP32 on a WD Raptor 150. I figured the next logical upgrade would be an SSD with Win7x64. With regard to that, I was going to wait for Intel to release their 3rd generation SSDs before jumping in. It should be the easiest way to get a decent boost to performance.

I noticed that I haven't been gaming as much lately and I've been using Adobe Lightroom more. My dual core still works fine and it chugs along at a decent rate but I have been thinking about a CPU upgrade as well. Hexacore Westmere is too expensive for me so unless something new on that front is due out soon, I'm looking at a quadcore. This is where things seem to get sticky.

I'm reluctant to give up the 'easy OC' of my E8400 so a similar CPU would be the Q9650 at $330. On the other hand, the similarly clocked i7-950 is only $295 and should beat out the core2quad at nearly everything. Unfortunately this would require a new mobo and ram, which appear to be about $200 for the mobo and $210 for 12gb of DDR3, bringing the price to nearly $700 to do an i7 upgrade. It's also essentially a new system so my plan for minor upgrades go out the window.

I also wanted to stagger the purchases so it wouldn't feel so painful all at once but I doubt that can happen. Prices continue to fall so I should wait until I'm ready to buy everything at once. I'd also imagine Win7 would complain if I installed the SSD first and then upgraded the mobo/CPU later.

With that in mind, and as a thinking exercise for now (not desperate to buy yet, but maybe within 6-12 months time) what do you guys think and suggest?

Thanks!

Edit:
Woo, 1000th post!

 

[VirtualLarry]

If you don't have a pressing need to upgrade, then don't. You have a pretty goood rig, although it's a dual-core, not a quad-core. If you have a Microcenter nearby, then I would check on the availabiliy of cheap Q9550 chips, I got mine for $180 + tax some months ago. They might have dried up by now though.

Wait for SB.

 

[fffblackmage]

I'm not sure I would bother with upgrading to a Q9550 at this point. I would just wait to upgrade the cpu+mobo+ram together.

 

[mfenn]

I'm not sure I would bother with upgrading to a Q9550 at this point. I would just wait to upgrade the cpu+mobo+ram together.

:thumbsup:

Get and SSD if you really feel the need to upgrade something. 3rd gen is honestly not going to be all that much faster than a nice Sandforce drive today.

 

[DarkRogue]

Yeah, I wasn't considering a Q9550 (although it would be cheaper) but rather a Q9650, because it's clocked the same as my E8400 @ 3.0GHz. I preferred this because of the "easy" OC to 3.6GHz by just bumping the FSB to 400. That said, I have no idea at all how the new i7's work in the OC department. (The E8400 was my first venture into OC'ing anyway.) I was hoping I'd be able to plop in a Q9650, bump it to 400FSB and get away with what is basically dropping in another E8400 into my system.

I'm fairly certain the i7-950 setup would be better than simply dropping a Q9650 into my current system, but I'm not sure if it's worth it. From a price standpoint, I could currently shave off $100 by dropping from 12GB to 6GB of DDR3, though I feel like I should gravitate toward more ram, rather than less.

I suppose the Q9650 is in a similar boat to the Q9550 though at this point, I assume? Would basically be pouring more money into old tech, I guess. It does have the advantage of being cheaper, and only a single component to buy and drop in versus 3 though, and that's where I'm conflicted. Would the difference between dropping in a Q9650 and an i7-950 with 12GB of ram be huge, or only modest?

I know an SSD would make the most immediate and apparent boost, however, so I'm thinking of prioritizing that before the CPU. But won't Windows complain if I install it and then swap CPU's? For that matter, if I swap mobos, it's almost imperative that I do a reinstall of Windows due to different drivers. That kind of makes me want to do it all at once so I only need to install once. Bah, tradeoffs.

In any case, with the SSD, I was waiting for Intel's 3rd gen for a few reasons. One is performance/capacity, which should both go up, but even if it's not spectacular, it should force prices on existing drives down somewhat, I hope. I also believe Sandforce is gearing up for their next round of controllers, aren't they? It just seems like some big SSD explosion is going to happen around the corner of the holidays. More competition can only be good.

As far as waiting for Sandy Bridge, considering how expensive Westmere is at this point, Sandy Bridge can only be even more expensive and out of reach. The only plus I can think of is an SB release should mean Westmere prices go down, lol.

Edit:
When I say Westmere, I mean the hexacore Gulftowns. I'm not sure if it makes sense to get a Westmere quad core or not.
Also, Sand Bridge will come with yet another new socket, won't it?

 

[mfenn]

As far as waiting for Sandy Bridge, considering how expensive Westmere is at this point, Sandy Bridge can only be even more expensive and out of reach. The only plus I can think of is an SB release should mean Westmere prices go down, lol.

Sandy Bridge is actually a midrange part, in the same market segment as the current Lynnfields. It'll be faster and cheaper than Westmere.

 

[DarkRogue]

Really?

I must be really outdated then. I thought SB was to be a new architecture on Intel's tick-tock roadmap, where Westmere was a die-shrunk Nehalem.

I'll need to look up some more information then.

 

[mfenn]

Really?

I must be really outdated then. I thought SB was to be a new architecture on Intel's tick-tock roadmap, where Westmere was a die-shrunk Nehalem.

I'll need to look up some more information then.

You are correct on the ticks and tocks. Intel is just targeting the mid-range first this time.

 

[DarkRogue]

Yeah, I just went ahead and read all the new articles about it. Shows how often I check Anandtech, ha.

In any case, things do seem to be pretty interesting as well. Waiting for something that should be out Q1 of 2011 doesn't sound so bad, since waiting is still an option for me. I suppose if I were thinking of getting an i7-950, I could do just as well to pick up the new i7-2600. Unfortunately, Anand seems to be estimating the 2600's price at over $500, which is too far outside my budget.

Does it make any sense now to even consider the Q9650, even from a pure cost standpoint? Technically, the CPU is more expensive, but it'd also be the only thing I have to buy, versus 3 different items.

In both cases, from the way things look, it seems neither approach is likely to get another upgrade, considering the number of sockets Intel is pushing out. This would likely be the last upgrade for my LGA-775, if any. If I go with a 1156 now, it gets replaced by the 1155 soon. But if I go for the 1366, it also gets replaced a little bit later with 2011. Ugh. And are we ever going to get more than 2 Gulftowns, or are we stuck waiting until the hexacore SB's?

It seems SSD is a no-brainer for a priority upgrade, though I have to wait and see on the new models and how the market looks when they come out.

 

[mfenn]

My philosophy on upgrades is simple: If you need it, buy it. If you don't need it, don't buy it. If you're not happy with your current performance, I'd suggest that you get an i5 760 based system and be happy.

As a side note, this is why I don't get excited for expensive mobos. When you want to upgrade your CPU, you're going to have to buy a new mobo 95% of the time. Thus, get something inexpensive (not cheap!) and functional.