Hi, I want to upgrade my sons computer for Christmas and need some advice. He wants his computer to be able to play ARMA 3 and Fallout 4. He currently has a GeForce GTX 750TI, ASRock 970DE3/U3S3 MOBO, AMD FX-8300 -3.3Ghz and 16 GB of RAM. What would the best thing to do, Just replace the GPU, or Just replace the CPU and MOBO? Or just up the RAM. Money is an issue, so I would prefer not to replace all of the components, just get some of the existing components working more efficiently. Thanks in advance for any and all advise.
Where's the Bottleneck?
- Thread starter emc3zach
- Start date
N3rdR4ge
Distinguished
- Jun 16, 2014
- 4,202
- 2
- 18,965
in this particular case, if you want the best performance right now, the gpu upgrade is the way to go hands down.
that will give you way more of a performance boost than cpu/mobo/ram. the fx processor will be a bit of a bottleneck, but worth keeping for a gpu upgrade.
Definitely GPU first. The CPU isn't great for gaming, but despite what goes around, those FX processors don't often effect your FPS if you're running a 60hz monitor. They're capable enough.
That 750ti on the other hand is an entry level gaming GPU.
What's your budget? Anything up to a GTX 970 would sit okay with a FX 8300. If you have a good PSU, you could also get an aftermarket cooler and OC that CPU.
That 750ti on the other hand is an entry level gaming GPU.
What's your budget? Anything up to a GTX 970 would sit okay with a FX 8300. If you have a good PSU, you could also get an aftermarket cooler and OC that CPU.
rolli59
Titan
- Oct 27, 2007
- 47,790
- 283
- 130,890
In FO4 he will still be disappointed with GTX970 because of the CPU http://www.techspot.com/review/1089-fallout-4-benchmarks/page5.html
GTX960 or R9 380 is as high I would go on a GPU with FX CPU.
If you can do an Intel i5 like the 4460 and a budget H97 or B95 board he would be ready for a GPU upgrade later!
GTX960 or R9 380 is as high I would go on a GPU with FX CPU.
If you can do an Intel i5 like the 4460 and a budget H97 or B95 board he would be ready for a GPU upgrade later!
TheNaitsyrk
Reputable
- Sep 2, 2014
- 235
- 0
- 4,690
I'll try to describe all the options possible:
I would personally upgrade everything as the motherboard you have doesn't support Intel CPUs and if your son would like to upgrade in the future, then yeah. If I were you (taking prices into consideration), I'd get Intel Core i5 4690K, Asus Z97-PRO Gamer (Quad-SLI support for low price) 1150 LGA socket to support the CPU and also GTX 970 (or used GTX 980). This will roon Fallout 4 easily 1080P 60 FPS and your son will be able to upgrade in the future.
If you'd like to improve it a little bit, I'd get 4790K processor which works almost as well as the new Skylake quad-core 6700K, GTX 980 (used, and if you wouldn't be able to find one) then brand-new EVGA 970 superclocked version perhaps? This would all cost about £540 and about £100 more if you'd like to get 4790K instead.
If you cannot get anything from above, I recommend GPU only option: GPU ZOTAC 970 Gaming Edition. http://www.scan.co.uk/products/4gb-zotac-gtx-970-gaming-ed-7010mhz-gddr5-gpu-1076mhz-boost-1216mhz-1664-cores-dp-dvi-hdmi it doesn't cost a whole lot and it should be enough (one of the cheapest 970 around) and ZOTAC is a decent company.
I would personally upgrade everything as the motherboard you have doesn't support Intel CPUs and if your son would like to upgrade in the future, then yeah. If I were you (taking prices into consideration), I'd get Intel Core i5 4690K, Asus Z97-PRO Gamer (Quad-SLI support for low price) 1150 LGA socket to support the CPU and also GTX 970 (or used GTX 980). This will roon Fallout 4 easily 1080P 60 FPS and your son will be able to upgrade in the future.
If you'd like to improve it a little bit, I'd get 4790K processor which works almost as well as the new Skylake quad-core 6700K, GTX 980 (used, and if you wouldn't be able to find one) then brand-new EVGA 970 superclocked version perhaps? This would all cost about £540 and about £100 more if you'd like to get 4790K instead.
If you cannot get anything from above, I recommend GPU only option: GPU ZOTAC 970 Gaming Edition. http://www.scan.co.uk/products/4gb-zotac-gtx-970-gaming-ed-7010mhz-gddr5-gpu-1076mhz-boost-1216mhz-1664-cores-dp-dvi-hdmi it doesn't cost a whole lot and it should be enough (one of the cheapest 970 around) and ZOTAC is a decent company.
The 8320E on that chart is still averaging well over 50fps, with minimums over 45. Sure we'd all love 60fps all the time, but I'm not sure classifying minimums of 45 fps as disappointing is quite fair. Still - the benchmark does point out just how CPU-dependent title Fallout 4 is... and we can put ARMA 3 into that category too, so you raise a good point. That does lessen the value of a 970. Perhaps the 970 was out of OP's budget anyway? I'd still be inclined to go a 970 myself if I had the budget, just because it is a much better of a card that will hold up for longer. But I take your point.
I really don't think going Haswell is a good option though. Even in Fallout 4 you'd be paying several hundred pounds for maybe 10 fps... that ain't worth it in my book.
- Jan 1, 2013
- 24,574
- 650
- 91,240
Absolutely 100% your first port of call should be a GPU upgrade.
The 8300 will perform well enough in fallout 4 with a gtx 950/960 or a r9 380.
Pairing an i5 with that 750ti will still give fairly weak gaming performance.
Get a decent GPU now & the option is there to carry it over into a new system in the future.
What country are you ?? What's your max budget ?
The 8300 will perform well enough in fallout 4 with a gtx 950/960 or a r9 380.
Pairing an i5 with that 750ti will still give fairly weak gaming performance.
Get a decent GPU now & the option is there to carry it over into a new system in the future.
What country are you ?? What's your max budget ?
- Jan 1, 2013
- 24,574
- 650
- 91,240
Rolli59 - I get your anti-amd - that's obvious.
But stop pushing that fallout4 bench every time , with the latest update I'm pushing close to 100fps at times with a minimum of low 50's.
This is on a 6300 (admittedly oc) on a $40 motherboard.
But stop pushing that fallout4 bench every time , with the latest update I'm pushing close to 100fps at times with a minimum of low 50's.
This is on a 6300 (admittedly oc) on a $40 motherboard.
This one is tough to call. Both those games are CPU limited and ARMA 3 is the one that is bad, if he's playing it in multiplayer.
This is single player: http://www.techspot.com/review/712-arma-3-benchmarks/page5.html
Multiplayer, by all accounts, is much worse.
With the GPU, you can always lower settings and maintain good FPS, but there isn't much he can do to help his CPU. While most games may improve more with the GPU, nothing is helping his CPU in those games.
This is single player: http://www.techspot.com/review/712-arma-3-benchmarks/page5.html
Multiplayer, by all accounts, is much worse.
With the GPU, you can always lower settings and maintain good FPS, but there isn't much he can do to help his CPU. While most games may improve more with the GPU, nothing is helping his CPU in those games.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Question Using cloning software for a dying HDD which shows only 10% health ?- Started by Mashuumatics
- Replies: 1
-
Question Wifi card speed fluctuating on my Lenovo Ideapad pro 5 16APH8- Started by sirdariush
- Replies: 6
-
News Windows 11 will reportedly display a watermark if your PC does not support AI requirements- Started by Admin
- Replies: 23
-
Question Recovering an old version of a Notepad file in Windows 10 ?- Started by MC72
- Replies: 2
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram