Upgrade my 939 system to FX60?

[nanaki333]

Ditto, i7 2600 is your best bet. The 2600k only if you want to over clock. That and 8+ gig of RAM should set you for a few years. Also, p67 chipset if you can fit it in the budget. It's the newest chipset from Intel, same one used in the new iMac. Make sure you have USB 3.0 if you want longevity.



Sent from my iPad 2 using Tapatalk

z68 is the newest intel chipset

 

[BTA]

I love my 2500k but really you could easily upgrade your rig without spending that much.

Grab an Athlon II x4, cheap AM3 board, and 4 gigs of memory and you're golden. Will destroy what you are currently running and you'll be right around the $200 you were gonna spend on an FX60.

 

[Tuna-Fish]

I don't get why these people are trying to push you to buy a 2600K -- 2500K is definately the sweet spot right now. It only loses to 2600K in benches that use more than 4 cores, which are not that common yet, and even in those it loses by less than 20% usually. And it's only two thirds of the price.

As for the motherboard, I don't think there is that much reason to buy the 200$ MB's any more. One of the major HW shifts of the past few years is that all the performance-critical components got moved from the board onto the CPU die. There are only two things left in the MB that are of any importance -- the voltage regulation circuitry, and the connectivity. And because, if you go for a quality brand, you can now get a decent enough VRM in a basic board, the only reason to go for the top-of-the-line models is that you need two integrated Ethernet controllers, three PCIe 16x slots, or whatever. Just get a 120$ gigabyte board and be happy.

I dont get how you can go from wanting a minor upgrade (an X2 to a FX-60 is a minor upgrade) to wanting to spend $400 on a total system upgrade. lol. You let these guys sell you overpriced intel garbage.

After we told him that paying 200$ for a FX-60 was blatantly insane, he suggested an almost-as-insane 1100T combo for a total of 500$. After that I told him two good options -- 200$ for a cheap AMD setup, or 500$ for some of the fastest HW out there. How is any of that unreasonable?

I do agree that 2600K is overpriced. But only because it's crippled little brother sells for so much less, while performing just as good in most tasks, and almost as good in everything else. How is ~200$ too much for what is very nearly the very best consumer-class HW out there?

 

[nanaki333]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboB...t=Combo.674695

there you go! a complete quad core system for $235!

 

[JimKiler]

A couple years back I sold the FX60 from my wife's pc on ebay. With the money from the cpu alone I got enough to buy all new cpu/mb/ram to upgrade her rig with, and it was way way faster than that FX60 could ever dream of.

I paid for 90% of my secondary PC upgrade when I eBayed my dual core socket 939 and RAM on eBay in Spring 2009. I see prices are down now but there is still demand. Granted I did not buy the top of the line AM3 parts at the time but more budget conscious AM2 parts and am very happy with it.

 

[darkswordsman17]

I dont get how you can go from wanting a minor upgrade (an X2 to a FX-60 is a minor upgrade) to wanting to spend $400 on a total system upgrade. lol. You let these guys sell you overpriced intel garbage. If all you want is FX-60 level performance then I find it humorous that all these intel fanbois pop out of the woodwork to sell you on a 2600k. An i3 would seem to make more sense. Waiting for BD makes even more sense.

A 2600K is overpriced garbage?

And like Tuna-Fish said, he's the one that made the jump and they were just recommending better options.

 

[Makaveli]

I don't get why these people are trying to push you to buy a 2600K -- 2500K is definately the sweet spot right now. It only loses to 2600K in benches that use more than 4 cores, which are not that common yet, and even in those it loses by less than 20% usually. And it's only two thirds of the price.

As for the motherboard, I don't think there is that much reason to buy the 200$ MB's any more. One of the major HW shifts of the past few years is that all the performance-critical components got moved from the board onto the CPU die. There are only two things left in the MB that are of any importance -- the voltage regulation circuitry, and the connectivity. And because, if you go for a quality brand, you can now get a decent enough VRM in a basic board, the only reason to go for the top-of-the-line models is that you need two integrated Ethernet controllers, three PCIe 16x slots, or whatever. Just get a 120$*gigabyte board and be happy.



After we told him that paying 200$ for a FX-60 was blatantly insane, he suggested an almost-as-insane 1100T combo for a total of 500$. After that I told him two good options -- 200$ for a cheap AMD setup, or 500$ for some of the fastest HW out there. How is any of that unreasonable?

I do agree that 2600K is overpriced. But only because it's crippled little brother sells for so much less, while performing just as good in most tasks, and almost as good in everything else. How is ~200$ too much for what is very nearly the very best consumer-class HW out there?

I've been building computers for well over 15 years now.

If he actually cares about overclocking a POS budget board will not do.

Not saying you can't overclock on them but they never last as long and never allow you to push the chip as the more expensive boards. One of the reasons you pay more money is they tend to be much better built, use higher quality components etc.

I have a friend that is a cheap son of a and always buys budget crap and then always has issues which I refuse to help with cause I can't stand cheap people lol.

A new build is in order for sure I just moved my Opteron 170 into my HTPC and it works great in that build with a 4890 you can still play some games but for the money you can build a much faster machine now without breaking the bank.

And since you are someone that seems to keep your system for a long period of time I would only look at SB wouldn't bother with anything Phenom II.

 

[shady28]

I don't get why these people are trying to push you to buy a 2600K -- 2500K is definately the sweet spot right now. It only loses to 2600K in benches that use more than 4 cores, which are not that common yet, and even in those it loses by less than 20% usually. And it's only two thirds of the price.

I rec'd the 2600 mostly because of his stated budget (400-500) and the fact that the i7 is significantly faster in about 1/3 of the benches.

Ie, from Anands review

WinRar 3.8 compression: 59.6s vs 70.5s
Z-7 Zip 19744 MIPS vs 14440 MIPS
Visual studio compile. 18.6 Minutes vs 27.1 Minutes
Excel Monte Carlo. 11.1s. Vs. 15.4s

Only in gaming is there really parity, and as games make use of more threads that will Change, especially with a 5 year time horizon like the OP has.

 

[FAUguy]

I've been building computers for well over 15 years now.

If he actually cares about overclocking a POS budget board will not do.

Not saying you can't overclock on them but they never last as long and never allow you to push the chip as the more expensive boards. One of the reasons you pay more money is they tend to be much better built, use higher quality components etc.

I have a friend that is a cheap son of a and always buys budget crap and then always has issues which I refuse to help with cause I can't stand cheap people lol.

A new build is in order for sure I just moved my Opteron 170 into my HTPC and it works great in that build with a 4890 you can still play some games but for the money you can build a much faster machine now without breaking the bank.

And since you are someone that seems to keep your system for a long period of time I would only look at SB wouldn't bother with anything Phenom II.

You understand my thinking pretty well.
The first PC that I built myself was back in 1996, which lasted several years with some internal updates to the CPU, more RAM, and video card. When it got to the point where the software required more, I built a new system. The PC I'm using now is the 3rd one that I have built for myself, but have built about 10 over the years for friends....but none in the past 2 years. So that is why I'm trying to catchup on the new PC tech.

I like to have a system that can be overclocked (on air) and where I can get about 6-7 years or so on the motherboard, and maybe update the CPU and/or RAM after 3 years if it needs it. This is why I like to have a quality product, and don't mind paying somewhat more for it, as long as it's not extremely overpriced (like those $350 boards at $1000 CPUs). As I stated earlier, my current Athlon X2 64 processor is overclocked from 2200Mhz to 2400Mhz and the RAM is at 240Mhz (480MHz DDR).

So if I'm going to spend $500 or so on a new CPU/MB/RAM, I'd like it to be overclockable and last for years, not to crap out on me in a few months....as I've seen this happen to people I know that go with the $50 board and $25 RAM and try to push it.

With that being said, I'm not in a major hurry to buy something now, since my current system in OK, but I would like to upgrade in the next couple months. So if there's something better night around the corner, I can wait.

But If I did have to choose from what's on the market right now....what would you guys say is quality and overclockable that should last? The 2500K and ASRock Fatal1ty Professional might make a good O.C. combo?

 

[videoclone]

That 2500K and ASRock Fatal1ty combo looks fine FAUguy

FYI: Z68 Chipset its the same as the P67 Chipset but with an extra feature for SSD cashing. not worth the price if you ask me P67 is fine

I would think about waiting an extra month for Bulldozer to come out its soooo close now it would be a shame not to wait...

If you cant wait, just go the $200 AMD upgrade option of Cheapest AMD CPU, 990X chipset board ( something like this http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=3894#ov )
with 4GB DDR3... This lets you slot in an AMD Bulldozer cpu in a months time when they come out and will be a very nice upgrade.

AMD + bulldozer or Intel i5 2500k Either one would be a great upgrade.

 

[betasub]

Z68 Chipset its the same as the P67 Chipset but with an extra feature for SSD cashing. not worth the price if you ask me P67 is fine

There are more differences: AnandTech main site has a good article on the Z68 chipset features. Like enabling on-chip Intel HD graphics (same as H61/H67) and QuickSync.

 

[Red Dawn]

A 2600K is overpriced garbage?

Seeing as the new top of the line BD is going to be priced higher with probably less performance I wonder if he'd call that garbage. I some how doubt it.

 

[FAUguy]

That 2500K and ASRock Fatal1ty combo looks fine FAUguy

FYI: Z68 Chipset its the same as the P67 Chipset but with an extra feature for SSD cashing. not worth the price if you ask me P67 is fine

I would think about waiting an extra month for Bulldozer to come out its soooo close now it would be a shame not to wait...

If you cant wait, just go the $200 AMD upgrade option of Cheapest AMD CPU, 990X chipset board ( something like this http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=3894#ov )
with 4GB DDR3... This lets you slot in an AMD Bulldozer cpu in a months time when they come out and will be a very nice upgrade.

AMD + bulldozer or Intel i5 2500k Either one would be a great upgrade.

I don't mind waiting a little bit for the AMD Bulldozer to see how those stack-up.
I haven't compared the differences between the Z68 and P67 chipsets, but did see that most all of the Z68 boards have integrated graphics with the DVI port built in, which I don't need since I have a video card.

 

[Bill Brasky]

I didn't realize an FX-60 sold for so much on ebay. I have an FX-60 and 2 GB's of corsair DDR sitting in a box somewhere.

 

[sm625]

A 2600K is overpriced garbage?

Considering its pretty much the same as a 2500k, yet costs 50% more, yes that makes it overpriced. Since it has a gpu on it that no one will actually use, that makes it garbage. You may be a fan of the kind of tactics intel is using when they decide to shove a crappy gpu down enthusiasts throats, but I am not.

 

[Bill Brasky]

Considering its pretty much the same as a 2500k, yet costs 50% more, yes that makes it overpriced. Since it has a gpu on it that no one will actually use, that makes it garbage. You may be a fan of the kind of tactics intel is using when they decide to shove a crappy gpu down enthusiasts throats, but I am not.

Except for hyperthreading, the extra cache and speed bump, right?

 

[Red Dawn]

Considering its pretty much the same as a 2500k, yet costs 50% more, yes that makes it overpriced. Since it has a gpu on it that no one will actually use, that makes it garbage. You may be a fan of the kind of tactics intel is using when they decide to shove a crappy gpu down enthusiasts throats, but I am not.

The GPU is just an option, one that enthusiasts more than likely wouldn't use even if it was better. Those who aren't enthusiasts, like those who need it for the horse power, the extra cache and the hyperthreading it's a pretty good deal for under 3 bones at MC. Add an enthusuasts Video Card and you have a kick ass system


Hopefully BD won't be a dud and can compete with both the 2500K and 2600K and we get some kind of price war going on, it'd be a win win for the customers.

 

[bryanW1995]

When I purchased the ABIT AN8 Fatal1ty board, it was the top of the line that wasn't SLI (which I don't need). So if I were to ever replace the board with an AM3/AM3+, I would want it to be mid-to-high end since ABIT went bust a few years back.

So a quick NewEgg check...
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T $199 (or wait for the new AM3+ FX CPUs)
Motherboard $140-$200 (depending on features)
4GB 2000-2133 (for overclocking room) $100
My current heatsink may not fit, so that's about $50

So I'd be about $500-600 depending. Maybe I'm overkilling it some, but I like it to last for years before needing to upgrade. I'm not one who is buying the newest hardware every few months when it comes out.

Please do not buy an fx 60 for $200. It's actually worth next to nothing when you compare it with any current cpu offering from AMD or Intel. Factoring in the hassle factor of replacing ram/etc I guess you could spend $30-$40 and have it not be a complete waste.

Don't look at it like you have to always buy high end. In fact, you should almost never do that. Buy decent equipment that is easily/cheaply upgradeable, otherwise you'll be in the same boat in a few years. Grab 4gb of cheap ddr3, an inexpensive intel/amd cpu, and a reasonably-priced mobo. Sell your current rig for whatever you can get ($50 or so doesn't seem unreasonable, maybe a bit more), then spend $250 or so extra on the upgrades I mentioned and you'll have a HUGE upgrade.

 

[darkswordsman17]

Considering its pretty much the same as a 2500k, yet costs 50% more, yes that makes it overpriced. Since it has a gpu on it that no one will actually use, that makes it garbage. You may be a fan of the kind of tactics intel is using when they decide to shove a crappy gpu down enthusiasts throats, but I am not.

Don't agree about the GPU, in fact, I'd say that just adds value, as getting 2600K level of CPU performance at its price point alone is actually very good. Yeah, I think the 2500K is better value, but the 2600K is hardly garbage. Nor are they shoving it down your throat (in fact, them offering a CPU that offers most of the performance for significantly less is kinda the exact opposite).

Plus its not like AMD doesn't do the same thing. Look at the X6, you pay ~75-100% more for 2 extra cores that never make up the price difference.

 

[FAUguy]

Ok, so at this point it looks like the 2500K/2600K is the way to go, or wait for the AMD Bulldozer. My question is if I went the Intel i5-2500K or i7-2600K, and since those use the 1155 pins, will there still be newer CPUs made to use the 1155 down the road, or is this near the end-of-life?

 

[pantsaregood]

1155 is likely going to be the mainstream socket throughout the life of the SB architecture, which means Ivy Bridge will also use the socket.

Seeing an architecture that lives through multiple architectures like 775 did probably won't happen again. LGA 1155 is pretty much tied to DDR3 RAM since the memory controllers are on the CPU. Haswell will probably support a new memory standard, so it won't be compatible with 1155.

 

[4ghz]

It doesn't really matter what combo you buy just as long as you don't pay $200 for an old slow power sucking used cpu. Heck I just bought a used gigabyte p55m-ud4 off ebay for $52 shipped(was a $140 board when new a year and a half ago), an i3 540 off the forms for $65 shipped and popped in some cheap 4gb ddr3 ($30) I got off mwave. Total cost of $147 and about twice as fast as the cpu you were thinking of buying while using a lot less juice.

 

[shady28]

Ok, so at this point it looks like the 2500K/2600K is the way to go, or wait for the AMD Bulldozer. My question is if I went the Intel i5-2500K or i7-2600K, and since those use the 1155 pins, will there still be newer CPUs made to use the 1155 down the road, or is this near the end-of-life?

Excellent question. Bottom line is that the current sandy bridge chips are the low end ones.

First, a summary of what's available now.

1156 and 1366 sockets are for the first generation core I series. 1366 was that generations performance socket, 1156 the low end socket. 1156 supports 4 cores and dual channel ddr3; 1366 supports 8 cores and triple channel ddr3 ( a max 6 core chip is available; can't get 8 cores even though it's supported).

1155 is the only current sandy bridge chip socket and is the replacement for 1156; it is the low end socket for sandy bridge. It is limited to 4 Cores and supports dual channel RAM.

It's worth noting that the fastest intel chip you can get right now is a 1366 part, the 980x, with 6 cores - it's a previous gen chip.

LGA 1356 is the performance socket, it is not yet released. It replaces 1366, and supports triple channel DDR3, 8 cores, and more QPI connects. Processors that fit this are likely to handily beat any current sandy bridge chips.

LGA 2011 is the high end, maybe server, not much is known about it right now. It supports quad channel DDR3.

1356 should come out this year; socket 2011 next year.

Watch for the new Mac Pros, they supposedly will be the first with the new higher end sandy bridge chips / sockets.


More info here:

http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/video/pcw/docs/360/112/6.pdf

 

[pantsaregood]

Excellent question. Bottom line is that the current sandy bridge chips are the low end ones.

The Core i7-2600K is the bottom of the line "premium performance" chip from Intel. It is not a low-end CPU.

1155 is the only current sandy bridge chip socket and is the replacement for 1156; it is the low end socket for sandy bridge. It is limited to 4 Cores and supports dual channel RAM.

There has been no information that I'm aware of that indicates that LGA 1155 can't support more than four cores.

It's worth noting that the fastest intel chip you can get right now is a 1366 part, the 980x, with 6 cores - it's a previous gen chip.

The i7-980X is EOL and will be replaced by the i7-980 soon. The i7-990X is Intel's current flagship, and is to be replaced by the i7-995X. These CPUs generally benchmark lower than the i5-2500 and i7-2600 because programs fail to make use of their excessive threads. In very few senses are they the "fastest" at the moment.

LGA 1356 is the performance socket, it is not yet released. It replaces 1366, and supports triple channel DDR3, 8 cores, and more QPI connects. Processors that fit this are likely to handily beat any current sandy bridge chips.

LGA 2011 is the high end, maybe server, not much is known about it right now. It supports quad channel DDR3.

1356 should come out this year; socket 2011 next year.

Watch for the new Mac Pros, they supposedly will be the first with the new higher end sandy bridge chips / sockets.

It is pretty clear that LGA 2011 will be the "high end" socket at this point. Pictures of consumer-oriented LGA 2011 boards have been released. I have no idea what LGA 1356's purpose is, but it isn't intended to replace 1366.

 

[Blue Shift]

Whatever you do, make sure that your new motherboard has IDE ports. Even if you get a new HDD, you'll still need/want to move data from the old one.