What would you upgrade next?

deadken

Diamond Member
Aug 8, 2004
3,199
6
81
I am married with two teenagers and my wife doesn't work. I have some money to spend, but not a ton. You will realize that I replace things as needed and don't usually buy 'bleeding edge' components.

After a recent power surge I lost my PSU and a Hard Drive. I bought a 700 OCZ PSU (now I know I should have read up first), and a WD 640GB Caviar Black HD. About a month later, I bought a PhenomII 555 BE, Asus M4A79XTD EVO, 2x2GB OCZ ram to replace my S754 parts (s754 3400+, 2x2gb OCZ, ePox mobo). I was able to unlock to a Quad core and I have it O/C'd to 3.5Ghz. Since I had spent a good deal of money (for my budget) in such a short period of time, I kept my BFG 640mb 8800GTS, Audigy X-Fi, Win XP Pro sp3, and my Samsung 20" TN 204b (4:3) monitor.

Ok, so now I have a few more bucks I am willing to part with for my PC. I usually read some forums (Auto + PC), play some FPS (BFBC2), and rarely watch a movie on my PC. While I still love my monitor, it is over 4 years old and 4:3. I've never used a Non-TN LCD, so I don't miss 'better colors'. I love Win XP Pro, but it is DX9 and since I skipped Vista, it might be time to see what Win7 offers. The 8800GTS still cranks out frames per second in BFBC2 (the most demanding game I play). At 1600x1200 with Fraps running, I sometimes get as low as 50+ fps while gaming, but usually it is 60-70fps (most setting at max). I'm sure I'd get lower fps if I was able to turn AA above 1x, but I can't because XP (DX9).

I figure that I should get a new 16:10 monitor that is at least 24" first, then get a new Operating System, and finally get a new Video Card. While my friend rants that I should get a new VC first, then Monitor, then OS. I don't see that a VC will make any difference if my fps are fine now. Perhaps having %20 more pixels will cause some drain on my card and I will need / want the get the Video Card before I get the O/S, but I am guessing that when I start running DX10 and AA above 1x, I will need the new Video card (by then maybe the Southern Island cards will be launched and a prices will be a bit cheaper for the older cards).

Here is what I am looking to get, please tell me what you think:

Asus VW266H (25.5" TN 2ms LCD)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824236047

Win 7 64-bit
I have NO IDEA which one to get. I doubt that I need to the the best version, but is the cheapest version fine? How about upgrade versions? Can I get a break if I want to go from XP to Win7? I heard that upgrade versions come with full install CD's anyway (no files would be left over from XP).

EVGA GTX 460 1GB EE (overclocked + lifetime warranty version)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-568-_-Product

I wouldn't mind getting a better color LCD (IPS?), but I wouldn't want to suffer while gaming from to slow of a response time.

I wouldn't mind getting the cheapest version of Win7 that will do what I need. I don't think that I needed the 'extra features' of XP Pro (over XP Home), but I don't know. For a few bucks, I'm a sport. For twice the price, I'd hope that there is something that I "NEED" to have.

I am not an Nvidia fanboy. I'd get an ATI card if it was as good / as cheap / as power efficient, as long as it had a VERY GOOD warranty (I hold onto my parts for a long time, remember?).

-I'm sorry for writing such a long post, but I wanted to be thorough, Ken
 

evolucion8

Platinum Member
Jun 17, 2005
2,867
3
81
There's IPS monitors that are fast enough for gaming, but if you want a faster monitor, get a P-MVA, it has many of the IPS attributes like great color reproduction and excellent angles, but faster response than IPS. (Mine's 6ms)
 

bryanW1995

Lifer
May 22, 2007
11,144
32
91
first of all, stay on xp as long as you can. I have vista x64 at work on a q9450 @3.0 and 2gb ram. it runs like a dog. I have xp pro on an x3350 (same cpu only xeon) @ 3.4 and 2gb ram. the x3350 is far and away the "quickest" computer I have. It makes my i7 @3.8 on win 7 home premium x64 feel like a dog even. I sometimes go up to my guest room to game on that computer in fact, it's a dream.

re the monitor, you can get an hp e-ips monitor for ~ $250 these days. it's only 23" instead of 24, but is a LOT better monitor than even a decent tn. however, the 25.5 " you're looking at is quite a bit bigger, so you'll need to pick your poison there.


btw, setting aa to 1x has nothing to do with dx9, dx 10, etc. you can manually force aa even if the game won't allow you to set it.
 

evolucion8

Platinum Member
Jun 17, 2005
2,867
3
81
That's odd, my old PC which had a Pentium 4 3.40Ghz, 2GB of RAM and an HD 2600PRO felt smoother with Windows 7 than Windows XP, the latter has problems with memory cache management with large amounts of memory aka cache trashing. My current PC used to have Windows Vista x64 and ran faster than the 32-Bit version, when I moved to Windows 7 64-Bits, didn't feel a difference in performance, but memory management and usage is far more better. Windows XP is light on resources but its old as potatoes and can't take advantage of newer hardware technologies.
 

happy medium

Lifer
Jun 8, 2003
14,387
480
126
Get windows 7 pro 64 bit.
gtx 460 1gb is the best buy out there.
Keep your crt and save for a good 3d lcd monitor later.
Don't spend hundreds on a monitor thats going to be old tech in a year. :)
 

cusideabelincoln

Diamond Member
Aug 3, 2008
3,275
46
91
Since you are satisfied with performance get a new monitor first. No sense in upgrading for performance if you don't need it.
 

bryanW1995

Lifer
May 22, 2007
11,144
32
91
sorry, unless some of you guys are using xp, vista and 7 at the same time I think that your memory might be faulty.

I hadn't really used my xp rig in 6 mos until a couple weeks ago. My memories of it were decidedly mixed, but now that I'm literally using all 3 rigs every day I would definitely rank xp pro ahead of 7 x64 ahead of vista x64. I don't have any ultra modern games on the xp rig admittedly, but anything that doesn't require 2gb + to play will perform better on xp. plus it doesn't have as much bloat as even 7 has, and don't get me started on vista.
 

deadken

Diamond Member
Aug 8, 2004
3,199
6
81
There's IPS monitors that are fast enough for gaming, but if you want a faster monitor, get a P-MVA, it has many of the IPS attributes like great color reproduction and excellent angles, but faster response than IPS. (Mine's 6ms)
Perhaps you can make a few specific suggestions? I looked at Newegg to see if I could 'sort' the LCD results by screen type (TN, IPS, etc...), but there is no way to do that. Please remember that I am looking for 1920 x 1200 resolution. Just so I know, what it the slowest response rate I should look for in a gaming monitor (GTG or otherwise)?

first of all, stay on xp as long as you can. ...

re the monitor, you can get an hp e-ips monitor for ~ $250 these days. it's only 23" instead of 24, but is a LOT better monitor than even a decent tn. ...

btw, setting aa to 1x has nothing to do with dx9, dx 10, etc. you can manually force aa even if the game won't allow you to set it.
I don't mind XP, it still works fine for my use. But, since the new games are out that do not let you run AA with DX9, it has started limiting what I do. Perhaps it isn't a big deal, but still it seems like a start to a long slippery slope.

Perhaps you could give a specifics as to which monitor you are suggesting? Google didn't return any valid responses when I looked for a HP e-ips. Just a model number would go a long way. Please keep in mind, unless someone can suggest why I shouldn't get one, I'd still like a 1920 x 1200 monitor.

I'm sorry to say that I think you are wrong in your statement that I can force AA. I'm open to hear otherwise, but everything that I have read tells me I need DX10 or better for AA in BFBC2. Take a look here for what I am talking about:
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?p=1035633060

happy medium, what will the new monitors have? Is it better colors, response times, 120Hz, pricing? What should I look for to signal that it is the time to buy?

cusideabelincoln, so you're saying that I am on the right track? Get the monitor now and see a difference. Then get O/S and Video Card when they are needed. Basically, keep doing what I am doing and keep the philosophy that if it works, keep using it?

RussianSensation, I totally agree that a GTX470@ $270 is a good price. But, when I take into consideration that the GTX460 1GB EE that I linked to should perform pretty similarly with the factory overclock figured in (according to GPUReview.com) and have a lifetime warranty (worth a lot in my book) as well as uses 65 less watts (according to GPUReview.com) things start to even out a bit.
Ok, now I see that the EVGA version has the lifetime warranty and is only $10 more (then the $270 you quoted). Well, who knows what will happen with Video Card prices in a few months (presuming that you agree that I should get the monitor and OS first). BTW: The link for the 460 you gave doesn't work.

-Thanks, Ken

BTW: Thanks for all of the replies. I don't want to come off as argumentative after asking opinions. But, I would like to get you guys to back up your comments and be specific when possible.
 
Last edited:

cusideabelincoln

Diamond Member
Aug 3, 2008
3,275
46
91
I think you're on the right track. Although you can get the video card or OS second; you'll just have to re-evaluate the situation after getting a new monitor.
 

Dark Shroud

Golden Member
Mar 26, 2010
1,576
1
0
There is no problems using a CRT monitor for gaming. In fact the CRT will outperform most lower end LCD monitors.

If you don't have Vista or Win7 then it's not really worth it to buy a DX 11 video card.

Intel will be releasing Sandy Bridge in the next few months as well as ATI is releasing their new 6000 series (Southern Islands) roughly in November.

So it might be worth it to wait another 2 months or so & save up a little more money.
 

toyota

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
12,957
1
0
"there’s another important benefit of using a faster refresh rate - everything looks smoother, and you can now drive up to 120 FPS without tearing".

I hate when people, especially tech sites, make ridiculous comments like that. you can have tearing no matter what the refresh rate or the framerate is and it really comes down to the individual game. yes there should be less overall tearing but it will still occur.
 

bunnyfubbles

Lifer
Sep 3, 2001
12,248
3
0
sorry, unless some of you guys are using xp, vista and 7 at the same time I think that your memory might be faulty.

I hadn't really used my xp rig in 6 mos until a couple weeks ago. My memories of it were decidedly mixed, but now that I'm literally using all 3 rigs every day I would definitely rank xp pro ahead of 7 x64 ahead of vista x64. I don't have any ultra modern games on the xp rig admittedly, but anything that doesn't require 2gb + to play will perform better on xp. plus it doesn't have as much bloat as even 7 has, and don't get me started on vista.

I'm not sorry I don't believe you and think you just have something(s) fucked up somewhere with your setups/installs.

I'd much rather have Win 7 x64 or even Vista x64 over XP. Granted, my x64 rigs have no less than 8GB of ram...but that's the point of why XP sucks for today's computing.
 

3DVagabond

Lifer
Aug 10, 2009
11,951
204
106
Whatever you buy first should be the item that will last the longest. For instance, a monitor would be a good choice. Monitors tend to last a long while. Video cards, not so long before they are superseded by something new and improved.

Hopefully, whatever you purchase will still be satisfactory after you've bought the last piece for your new build.
 

nOOky

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2004
3,233
2,290
136
Me, I'd buy a decent monitor. Right now 120hz and 3d monitors are still out of reach and at unreasonable prices though. I would maybe buy a Dell 24" 1080P or similar. You'll find it a huge upgrade, and what part of your computer do you stare at and interact the most with? Yep, your monitor.
After that if your video card won't cut it, you'll have good reason to save up for a better video card etc.
 

happy medium

Lifer
Jun 8, 2003
14,387
480
126
go for the GTX 460 first, then OS then monitor =)

+1

He has a monitor that does 1600x1200. Thats why I said wait to get something 120hz and 3d.
A gtx 460 will be fine for a 1600x1200 screen. It's really not much less then a 1900 x1080 monitor pixal wise.
 

cusideabelincoln

Diamond Member
Aug 3, 2008
3,275
46
91
+1

He has a monitor that does 1600x1200. Thats why I said wait to get something 120hz and 3d.
A gtx 460 will be fine for a 1600x1200 screen. It's really not much less then a 1900 x1080 monitor pixal wise.


Uh, DUH! Of course the 460 would be fine for 16x12 because the OP already said...

I don't see that a VC will make any difference if my fps are fine now.
 

happy medium

Lifer
Jun 8, 2003
14,387
480
126
Uh, DUH! Of course the 460 would be fine for 16x12 because the OP already said...

The title of the thread is , what to upgrade next.

So you would upgrade his monitor first to a 1900x1080 monitor with a 8800gts?
He would see much better gains with a gtx 460 upgrade, next a windows 7 upgrade (for direct x 11 with his gtx 460), and a good 3d monitor next year.
 

Madcatatlas

Golden Member
Feb 22, 2010
1,155
0
0
Id wait a few months if i was the OP, im in the same situation. currently this laptop is working out ok with 8600gt and core2duo 2ghz. coupled with no news of Mechwarrior 5, im playing the waiting game..


But the 460 is a really good deal if you can get a factory overclocked one for 230 or less.
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
SSD for boot/a couple games should be on your list. Amazing upgrade for the general feel of the computer.
 

Golgatha

Lifer
Jul 18, 2003
12,396
1,068
126
That's a pretty decent sized monitor. I vote for video card, Win7 64bit, and a new monitor in that order.
 

deadken

Diamond Member
Aug 8, 2004
3,199
6
81
Thanks again for all of the replies so far. I read them and keep re-reading them and it's funny how I can identify with them.

Sometimes, I feel like getting the Monitor first and enjoying it without any other changes. I'd hope that my kill / death ratio would improve as I'd have a 'bigger view' onto the battlefield (bfbc2). Sure it'd be old technology, but at $260 for 25.5", who'd care?!? (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824236047)

Other times I just want a new Video Card. Hell, there isn't much of a better feeling of getting a new video card. I don't think I'd see much difference in my gaming, but man the bragging rights of a new video card puts you on top with your geek friends for a while! BTW: I know that the fps would increase with a new card, but if they never get to unplayable rates now, would I even notice?

Other times I think about what 3DVagabond said:
'Whatever you buy first should be the item that will last the longest. ... Hopefully, whatever you purchase will still be satisfactory after you've bought the last piece for your new build.'

That really struck a chord. Monitors and Graphic Cards will continue to get better and cheaper. But, M$ won't lower it's price for Win7 anytime soon (let's face it, you can still find Win98 being sold for well over $100 online). I expect that Win7 will not be replaced for at least 2 years. So, the O/S is the only thing I can expect to not get better or cheaper anytime soon.

Finally it struck me. I really should try borrowing my sons 23" Asus LCD for a night or two (I doubt he will give it up for much longer then that). That would let me 'see' if a widescreen LCD would help me gaming or not. It'd also let me see if I could stand only having 1080 vertical resolution. Then I will know if I still need to consider not having 1920 x 1200 is a dealbreaker on the monitor.

Perhaps now would be a good time to ask: if I buy Win7, should I get another 2x2GB of ram? I know that I don't need it for the minimum specs. Will I be unhappy with 'only' having 4GB? I do want to take it into consideration if I will need to shell out another $100 - $130 for memory at the same time I buy the O/S.

-Ken