Upgrading CPU/Mobo/Ram

[Sublime89]

I currently have an intel E8400 Core2duo, and and a very basic Mobo that over clocking is not even possible on. It also only accepts DDR2. My ram is Kingston
(833 MHz I think). I have a brand new Gpu I just bought and with this setup I can run Skyrim on high settings with no issues, but on ultra it becomes very laggy. I want to be able to run it on ultra, and also be prepared for new games coming out next year.

I was wondering if anyone had suggestions on ram/CPU/mobo's
I want to spend less than $400 the cheaper the better. Over locking is not something I need to do but would like to have the option.


Any help is appreciated

Edit:my Gpu is a sapphire 6870 1gb.
I don't know much about CPUs / mobo's. Was thinking about the intel I5-2500k. Newegg is having a sale on that one.

 

[lehtv]

Which GPU did you get? Also what's the rest of your setup like (case, PSU etc.; just curious)

i5-2500K $205 after promo (+ CM Hyper 212 Evo $35 for overclocking, buy now or add later)
Asrock Z68 Extreme3 Gen3 $115 after rebate
2x4GB DDR3 1600 $35

= $355

Overclocking is recommended for Skyrim. It's a CPU heavy game that is limited to two threads (Bethesda...). See here.

 

[Sublime89]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16883229055
That's my case in that link.
This is my psu.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16817703015

I would also like to buy a new case but Thats of least importance. Open to suggestions on that. Sorry about low quality of posts Im on my phone at work.

 

[mfenn]

If it works on High but not on Ultra, that means that your GPU is the bottleneck, not your CPU. Not surprising since the 6870 is a lower-midrange card and Skyrim is a very demanding game.

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

If it works on High but not on Ultra, that means that your GPU is the bottleneck, not your CPU.

I was thinking this also, but a new platform would be beneficial with it: not by much though I would think.

I still vote for the 2500K as suggested :thumbsup:

 

[lehtv]

If it works on High but not on Ultra, that means that your GPU is the bottleneck, not your CPU. Not surprising since the 6870 is a lower-midrange card and Skyrim is a very demanding game.

I wouldn't say so... Skyrim is a very CPU dependent game. I would expect a big improvement in Ultra framerates with a 2500K over E8400. As seen in several benchmarks, a 6870 should handle Ultra fine if powered by a decent CPU.

http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/467/bench/Max_02.png
http://www.hardocp.com/images/articles/1321817195hYIBw7jIln_4_3.gif
http://www.hardocp.com/images/articles/1321817195hYIBw7jIln_5_3.gif

 

[janas19]

Which GPU did you get? Also what's the rest of your setup like (case, PSU etc.; just curious)

i5-2500K $205 after promo (+ CM Hyper 212 Evo $35 for overclocking, buy now or add later)
Asrock Z68 Extreme3 Gen3 $115 after rebate
2x4GB DDR3 1600 $35

= $355

Overclocking is recommended for Skyrim. It's a CPU heavy game that is limited to two threads (Bethesda...). See here.

That's a great link, and it just makes me think it shouldn't be that way. When a software company puts out a new game, and you're using a brand-new CPU that costs $100 and all you can get is 30fps, it makes me think something is wrong. If that continued in a linear way you would have to buy a new CPU every two years about! :/

 

[lehtv]

It of course only applies to this particular game. Bethesda for some reason decided to make it very CPU limited. It doesn't take nearly full advantage of a modern quad core CPU. (I believe there are other factors as well than just the limitation to two CPU threads, but idk much about that, I just know what the benches say).

 

[janas19]

It of course only applies to this particular game. Bethesda for some reason decided to make it very CPU limited. It doesn't take nearly full advantage of a modern quad core CPU. (I believe there are other factors as well than just the limitation to two CPU threads, but idk much about that, I just know what the benches say).

Yeah you are right. I guess Bethesda had their reasons but I would complain and wish they had optimized it just a little better for multi-threads...

Sigh.

 

[mfenn]

I wouldn't say so... Skyrim is a very CPU dependent game. I would expect a big improvement in Ultra framerates with a 2500K over E8400. As seen in several benchmarks, a 6870 should handle Ultra fine if powered by a decent CPU.

http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/467/bench/Max_02.png
http://www.hardocp.com/images/articles/1321817195hYIBw7jIln_4_3.gif
http://www.hardocp.com/images/articles/1321817195hYIBw7jIln_5_3.gif

I don't think that going from High to Ultra increases the physics or anything like that, so I'm not seeing how increasing the CPU performance is going to help him in that case.

 

[lehtv]

Then why is the game laggy for the OP on Ultra, while it is playable according to those benchmarks?

 

[mfenn]

Then why is the game laggy for the OP on Ultra, while it is playable according to those benchmarks?

I don't have a really good answer to that, but I'd say it depends on what your definition of "laggy" is any what areas you're in. The minimums are down in the mid-20's, which would definitely be "laggy" IMHO.

 

[lehtv]

I suppose it'd be helpful if the OP told us exactly what sort of framerates he gets on Ultra.

 

[Sublime89]

Thanks for the input. I was under the impression that Skyrim was very intense on the CPU. I do not want to spend $300+ on computer parts for a minimum improvement in performance. What I was expecting was a pretty significant improvement in overall performance on games since my CPU is a dual-core processor that is pretty dated, along with my RAM.

The "lag" I was talking about was less like the lag experienced when playing call of duty online, and more like the game would kind of stop for a couple seconds then resume. I would be fine walking around a small town at night, when not much is going on, then when I got somewhere where a lot was going on (more NPC's, doing actions such as sprinting on the horse by a major town) the screen would start jerking and sometimes stop for a few seconds before I could do anything.

I will play again on high and ultra tonight and report the FPS findings. I am download FRAPS, so if anyone knows a better FPS tracking software let me know.

Thanks again for the help guys.

 

[Sublime89]

I have been using Fraps for about 45 mins of play.

What I noticed on ultra was that in areas that are small like the inside of buildings I get constant 60FPS. Once I step outside into the open world, it drops to about 45, and when I run it start dropping to 30-45. Sprinting on a horse in open world will drop it to numbers like 0-15-25-30, causing the game to freeze for second then slowly jump back up in fps. Gets pretty laggy when sprinting on a horse or sprinting on foot though high traffic areas. When fighting NPC's it will drop to 25-30 or so.

On High I never drop below 45 FPS, even sprinting on a horse. Although I do notice some slight stutters when sprinting on a horse in open world/busy area's.

 

[lehtv]

What kind of hard drive do you have?

 

[Sublime89]

250gb sata ii 7200rpm

 

[monkeydelmagico]

Thanks for the input. I was under the impression that Skyrim was very intense on the CPU. I do not want to spend $300+ on computer parts for a minimum improvement in performance. What I was expecting was a pretty significant improvement in overall performance on games since my CPU is a dual-core processor that is pretty dated, along with my RAM.

The "lag" I was talking about was less like the lag experienced when playing call of duty online, and more like the game would kind of stop for a couple seconds then resume. I would be fine walking around a small town at night, when not much is going on, then when I got somewhere where a lot was going on (more NPC's, doing actions such as sprinting on the horse by a major town) the screen would start jerking and sometimes stop for a few seconds before I could do anything.

I will play again on high and ultra tonight and report the FPS findings. I am download FRAPS, so if anyone knows a better FPS tracking software let me know.

Thanks again for the help guys.

Couple things. I upgraded because of skyrim from a 3 core athlon running at 3.3Ghz to the 4 core in my sig and gained about 10fps average in skyrim. I don't care what other people say, when I look at CPU utilization it is across all my cores.

I still don't do ultra settings. I'm thinking my 5770 is the limiting factor now. BUT I do have a 5870 on it's way to me as I type. I'm on a quest to get the best visuals in skyrim for the least amount of $$$. I'll re-test and follow up with impressions, they may help you make a decision. FWIW, I'm betting you are CPU bound with your E8400.

 

[mfenn]

I have been using Fraps for about 45 mins of play.

What I noticed on ultra was that in areas that are small like the inside of buildings I get constant 60FPS. Once I step outside into the open world, it drops to about 45, and when I run it start dropping to 30-45. Sprinting on a horse in open world will drop it to numbers like 0-15-25-30, causing the game to freeze for second then slowly jump back up in fps. Gets pretty laggy when sprinting on a horse or sprinting on foot though high traffic areas. When fighting NPC's it will drop to 25-30 or so.

On High I never drop below 45 FPS, even sprinting on a horse. Although I do notice some slight stutters when sprinting on a horse in open world/busy area's.

How much RAM do you have? What you're describing sounds like the system is pausing when it has to load up new textures and whatnot. Moving quickly exacerbates this problem because it has to load more faster. Ultra textures bigger than high textures and the draw distance is longer, so it makes sense that it would be the cause problems.

 

[lehtv]

^ Skyrim is limited to 2GB of system ram use. However bethesda is coming up with a patch to make it large address aware i.e 4GB.

I don't think your HDD is the problem either. Whatever problems arising from it should most likely appear on high settings just as on ultra...

I can't recommend anything else than upgrading to 2500K. You will for sure increase your framerate and hopefully it will also rid you of the lag problems. You have the money to spend on it and it will definitely set you up for new games for a long time. It's just a purchase that you won't regret so I can't see why not even if it's not 100% the cause of your lag problems (even though I think it's likely)

 

[Sublime89]

Thanks for the replies. I think I have decided on my final parts but would like some reassuring advice.


New mobo : Asrock pro3 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813157230

New CPU
I5-2500k

RAM
4gb G-skill 1600. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231313
I don't think I will need more than 4Gb for gaming.

 

[lehtv]

Hmm.. I'd rather get this motherboard for $85 after rebate and promo (+1 year warranty +Crossfire +internal USB3.0), and use the difference towards 8GB of RAM. The issue I have with 4GB is that it's worse $/GB than 2x4GB, and with 8GB you're basically future proofed for your RAM needs. 4GB makes sense only for budget systems in my opinion...

 

[Sublime89]

My only problem with that is that I've had been browsing the forums on motherboard brands and have read quite a few bad things about MSI boards. Makes me worried to purchase MSI.

 

[lehtv]

I've been here for quite a while and haven't seen any actual reports of MSI boards failing or being unreliable. Only opinions, and on the few occasions I've asked exactly what was wrong with the board I didn't get an answer.

However, you can see some MSI boards on newegg with worse user ratings than similar boards from other brands. Newegg reviews aren't a big deal though, people who get bad units are much more inclined to post a review about it than people whose board works as intended. So even if a particular MSI model was more often faulty, the vast majority of users would be enjoying perfectly functioning boards.

The board linked has better features for $15 less, and with really nothing more than opinion to support the idea that MSI is somehow inferior, I wouldn't hesitate to buy it myself

 

[janas19]

My only problem with that is that I've had been browsing the forums on motherboard brands and have read quite a few bad things about MSI boards. Makes me worried to purchase MSI.

MSI makes great netbooks. I have a Wind U100 and for what it does and the price I've been extremely satisfied. So based on that I'd be quite willing to recommend MSI.