"Upgrading" current build to a more viable gaming build

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
S

SithLordDahlia

Reputable
Dec 26, 2014
36
0
4,530
Okay, so here are my specs:

Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
CPU: 2 Xeon X5355 2.66ghz
GPU: Nvidia GTX 660ti
Mobo: dell 0MY171 (I think built into case)
Ram: 50 Gb DDR2
PSU: 1000W built in to Case
Case: Dell Precision 690
HDD: 4 ATA drives that add up to 1.2Tb

Now, this build is as best as it is going to get unless I upgrade the GPU. So, I've taken into the account of changing out the Case, PSU, CPU, and MOBO for $200 (will go as high as $300). I'm thinking of reusing as many of the DDR2 Ram that I have (at least 8 4gb sticks), possibly reusing the at least 2 of the 4 fans, the GPU, and possibly reusing all of the HDDs

This is the change-out I had in mind:

Windows 7 64-bit Pro
MOBO: Asus M5A78L-M/USB3 Micro ATX AM3+ Motherboard
CPU: AMD FX-6300 3.5GHz 6-Core Processor
Case: Cooler Master TC102 ATX Mid Tower Case w/500W Power Supply

Would this be a viable build to play a good number of games at a good, constant framerate? Should I change-out the DDR2 for DDR3? The games I'd like to play are like Skyrim, Bioshock, Mass Effect, The Old Republic, and Sins of a Solar Empire. Any help/suggestions would be greatly appreciated. I'm new to all of this.
 
Solution
Rogue Leader
Sort by date Sort by votes
Eximo

Eximo

Titan
Ambassador
May 27, 2010
25,827
4,169
139,340
You can't actually use DDR2 in that motherboard.

Also more or less a downgrade in CPU performance. You have the equivalent of two Q2Q 6700 which can still run a gaming machine quite well today.

For your budget I would say toss in something like a GTX960 and that would be it until you can save up about 300-400 for a new CPU, motherboard, and memory. (More like $500, since you would also need a new case and powersupply)

 
Upvote 1 Downvote
Rogue Leader

Rogue Leader

It's a trap!
Moderator
Dec 22, 2014
32,727
2,807
113,640
Few issues, firstly that DDR2 ram is likely not going to work on your new motherboard. Secondly that GPU is fairly outdated, You don't need to buy a high dollar one, but something for around $200ish should fit the bill like an R9 280 or 285.

I think you may be going at this all wrong, for example I'd consider keeping that case and 1000w PSU, depending on if you can confirm its a good one. Also the regarding the PSU that comes with a $38 case is likely a piece of junk, so to upgrade your GPU right there you'll probably want to consider a different one as well.

I'd suggest some stuff but $300 is not going to get you where you want to be. Something like this (just an example) is really where you need to be:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.2248434

Some things can be cut and you can re-use if you want (like your hard drives) but most of what you have may not do the deed.

Now after all that, as long as the board you have is PCIe 2.0 you can likely just replace the GPU at $200-$300 depending how crazy you want to get and get a decent framerate out of most of those games. The processors you have are pretty beastly, and you have a LOT of ram. It won't be perfect but it will do the job, and get you going till you can save up to upgrade the rest of it (higher than you suggested even) around the GPU you bought.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

SithLordDahlia

Reputable
Dec 26, 2014
36
0
4,530


Would getting a 960 actually help? I've always thought that these two server processors bottleneck my entire performance to where no GPU upgrade would even make a difference.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Eximo

Eximo

Titan
Ambassador
May 27, 2010
25,827
4,169
139,340
Dell workstation supplies are quite good. Though sometimes proprietary to their motherboards.

FX 6300 is only two 'tiers' higher in performance then a Q6700, however, this board has two Xeon class Core 2 Quads at the same frequency. Games that can take advantage of the extra threads (all 8 of them) will run quite well.

Replacing that amount of memory would be quite expensive. Most consumer class boards don't even support more then 32GB right now. Some will do 4x16GB though.

A replacement uni-processor workstation class build with DDR4 would be over $1000 just to get the basic parts.

Very powerful computer for its day, and it is still relevant.

I know people that still game with C2Q 6600 running stock frequencies 2.4Ghz. Just need a decent GPU to match and they can still get decent frame rates in all modern titles.

Skyrim is your worst title there when it comes to CPU usage. (Though Sins can get pretty rough during heavy fleet actions)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

SithLordDahlia

Reputable
Dec 26, 2014
36
0
4,530


I see. So, as of now, my best bet would be to upgrade the GPU to where I want, then replace everything else later on? I thought this card was decent, but lately it hasn't been giving me the performance I'd like on games that it can run. At least I've been told it can run (Star Was The Old Republic and Star Wars Forces of Corruption run pretty poorly with this card). I figured my number one priority would be to get rid of these server processors. 660ti isn't up to snuff?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Eximo

Eximo

Titan
Ambassador
May 27, 2010
25,827
4,169
139,340


The only potential bottleneck is between the CPU and the GPU via the PCI-Express bus. Essentially only a single CPU's worth of lanes can be brought out when using a single GPU. But all 16 lanes, even at PCIe 1 is plenty of bandwidth for nearly any GPU. There will be a slight bottleneck yes, but you will still gain the performance that the GPU has.

You can see this chart where they ran fast GPUs at lower PCIe speeds. A significant, but not huge impact on performance.

Besides, you can carry that GPU to your next build, so no sense in not getting it if you want more performance.

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/358350-33-express-card-pcie-slot-compatible-performance
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Rogue Leader

Rogue Leader

It's a trap!
Moderator
Dec 22, 2014
32,727
2,807
113,640


If you're not getting the game performance you want the GPU is one of the biggest deciders of that. I swapped my AMD Radeon HD 5670 for my R9 280 and gained 5000 points in 3D Mark Firestrike test (went from 931 to 6000, and a top level PC is about 9100), changing nothing else. It went from a complete slideshow, to playable. The 660 is better than what I had, but those server processors aren't as weak as you think, and you're running 2, they were beasts for their day and still hold up. If you have $300 to spend buy a $300 GPU and enjoy it for a few years, then build yourself something new in a few years.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
S

SithLordDahlia

Reputable
Dec 26, 2014
36
0
4,530


Thank you all for the helpful information! Will upgrade to a r9 280, just trying to make sure that I can run it.

What are all the specifications for that card? PCIe 2.0 you said? How can I check if it is compatible with my mobo? Cpu-z just says PCI-Express Max. Supported x16
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Rogue Leader

Rogue Leader

It's a trap!
Moderator
Dec 22, 2014
32,727
2,807
113,640


I've been recommending the heck out of this deal:

http://www.microcenter.com/product/440775/Radeon_R9_280_BOOST_3GB_DDR5_Video_Card

XFX R9 280 for $165 after rebate.

That said, while I love my R9 280, you may want to consider spending a bit more if you can, just to "future proof". The R9 280 right now is the best deal in performance per dollar, and if this is your budget I can't recommend it enough, but The R9 285, 290, or 290X all are available (if you search) for decent deals right now (the 290X being about $300-$310) and will have support for some new features that the 280 and 280X will not. Whether they matter to you is a different story, but just something to keep in mind if you want to buy a card to build a future gaming PC off of.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

SithLordDahlia

Reputable
Dec 26, 2014
36
0
4,530


That's a great deal. How much of a difference is the 280 vs 285 vs 290 vs 290X
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Rogue Leader

Rogue Leader

It's a trap!
Moderator
Dec 22, 2014
32,727
2,807
113,640


The easiest thing to do is check out a benchmarking site like this:

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html

You can find all 4 in there and you can see the scores vs eachother.

Here is another good comparison as well:

http://www.futuremark.com/hardware/gpu

Looking at this, the 660ti is not that far off of the R9 280, so yes while you will get better performance, you may want to consider something a bit more robust for the future. Especially if you're unhappy with the 660ti. The 290 for example is a 7000 point jump over your 660ti, thats what you really are looking for.

This is a good one for a good price:

http://smile.amazon.com/MSI-Computer-Corp-290-GAMING/dp/B00HPS4AFG/ref=sr_1_1?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1427399700&sr=1-1&keywords=r9+290

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

SithLordDahlia

Reputable
Dec 26, 2014
36
0
4,530


I might as well go all the way then. So it's between 970 and r9 290x
I can't decide which one since all sources keep flip-flopping

videocardbenchmark says 970
futuremark says 290x
Some sources say 290x is only good for really high resolution (I play at 1360 x 768 + two other monitors at 1280 x 1024)
Some sources (probably outdated) say 970 is cheaper and others say no (amazon says no, newegg says no, tomshardware says yes)

What do you think is better for both quality and money? 970 vs r9 290x?
Also, what would be the better brand of the two? I notice there can be a lot of other versions of each graphics card.

Or, should I go with 960 sine it's relatively the same price as 280x?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Rogue Leader

Rogue Leader

It's a trap!
Moderator
Dec 22, 2014
32,727
2,807
113,640


I'm an AMD man so of course I would say the 290X, In reality you can't go wrong either way. If you are going to go 280X you are better off with the 285 due to the new features. The disadvantage of the 280/280X is they are based on an older chip design than the 285/290/290X. If you can swing it you will be better off with a 970 or 290X.

As for brands, everyone has an opinion but MSI and XFX are good, the Sapphire Tri-X is really good but may be a bit more money. It has the best cooling though. Also these take up about 12 inches of space, make sure you do have it clear behind them.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

SithLordDahlia

Reputable
Dec 26, 2014
36
0
4,530


So, I just went out and got an EVGA 970 Geforce GTX. Jesus is there a difference.

But one strange thing, my games are running a lot smoother, but the fps is still the same.

Forces of Coruption ran at 15-20fps (according to FRAPS), but it FELT like it was 30fps most of the time. Is FRAPS not a reliable way to monitor fps?

Also, the fps/feel of The Old Republic hasn't changed at all
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Rogue Leader

Rogue Leader

It's a trap!
Moderator
Dec 22, 2014
32,727
2,807
113,640
As long as they play the way you want them. If you want a true comparison I would download 3D Mark and try it with the old and the new card, there you will see the true difference. Now some games are processor intensive, they will probably run almost the same. However this by far was a better value for upgrading than your original plan, and now you can build from here.

I've never used FRAPS, I would run a true benchmark comparison, as every game is different, and I don't know how reliable FRAPS is.

EDIT: forgot to mention 3D mark will give you comparable scores to people with different systems as well. That will clue you in to if there is an issue of some sort.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

SithLordDahlia

Reputable
Dec 26, 2014
36
0
4,530


This is my result with 3d Mark and the 970 -Fire: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6397619 Air: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6398003

I will try out with the 660ti later.

Did 3d Mark use 1 processor or two? I also noticed that the maximum turbo core clock is 1994mhz for Fire Strike. Shouldn't it be 2666mhz?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Rogue Leader

Rogue Leader

It's a trap!
Moderator
Dec 22, 2014
32,727
2,807
113,640


Thats a great score. As for the processors, I can't say for sure but I believe it uses both, it has a pretty wide design to cover every possible system setup. As for the clock, I'm not totally familiar with how the 970 runs, but I'm sure someone who knows can chime in here and help.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

SithLordDahlia

Reputable
Dec 26, 2014
36
0
4,530


Maximum turbo core clock refers to the processors. I'm guessing that since it's using higher graphics, it also uses less processing power? I ran a couple games and now they run better on Ultra, worse on Med. Odd.

Thanks for all your help man!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom