Would it be wise to upgrade this system?


I'd like to know your opinions on this system I got about 2 years ago. I'm a a gaming enthusiast, and I noticed some games were slowing down so I bought a new (fairly high end) graphics card, the GTX 570.

Core 2 Quad Q9400, 2.66 GhZ, 6MB L2 cache, 4 Threads
NVIDIA GTX 570 (if you need any other specs on this I can post them)
8 GB DDR2 Ram

Those are the "core" specs I guess. The reason I brought this up is because I was playing Dead Rising 2 and the FPS was really dipping down, to like mid-low 20 FPS which seemed very strange for me because at the time my machine was considered pretty good. I used to have dual 9800 GTs, and I considered if maybe they weren't up to snuff, so I decided to go out and get a really good graphics card (I wanted a card capable of DX11 anyways). I checked with NVIDIA as to whether my processor could handle it and they said yes. Even after the upgrade, the game dips down to 30 FPS outdoors and that's with settings at medium and some things flat-out turned off (motion blur.)

I've noticed everyone talking about DDR3 memory especially and I'm not sure if I'm going to be at a disadvantage with DDR2 and on the Core 2 processor family when Skyrim and BF3 come out. If anyone has any opinions on this, I'd really appreciate it. I'm an enthusiast like I said, so I'm not opposed to upgrading obviously, but I want to know if it's really worth it at these specs. Thanks.
12 answers Last reply
More about would wise upgrade system
  1. Assuming you have 8gb and not 8mb of memory ( :P ) it could be drivers, especially if you used the drivers that cam with the card.

    Id get the latest from nvidia before spending any money at least.
  2. You know I thought I had put 8mb down, but I got distracted with something else and forgot to change it.

    Also all drivers are up to date, it's one of the first things I do when I have problems along this line.
  3. hmm, that game should really not cause a problem for your system.

    Id say maybe your psu, but if you were running 2 9800s, thats most likely not it.

    Id OC the quad and just make sure windows update wasn't running in the background :P
  4. dont let one or two games push you into upgrading.

    if one game can do it and look good.. then the rest could too.
    i dont know the game, but i know it came out in september 2010.
    that release date suggests the game will have to work on a dual core processor.
    your quad core is double, and should help lift everything.

    a broken game can bring the fastest hardware to a 'weird' crawl.
    black ops has been doing it to the core i7 processors.

    obviously i would say again, dont let one game push you into upgrading.
    if it is your absolute favorite game and you want it bad enough.. you will go out there and do it anyways to provide relief to the problem.

    try some other games obviously.. see if they are showing weird slowdowns too.
    because if they are.. then we could start to analyze the situation as if there is something clogging your system.

    maybe it is because you are not on windows xp and trying to run a dx9 game?
    EVERYBODY has been complaining about vista and windows 7 making dx9 games slower.
    the only thing people have done to avoid it is go out and buy faster hardware to bring the numbers back up.

    made it pretty obvious to me..
    no playing dx9 games on a dx11 operating system.

    but i agree..
    overclock the processor or downgrade the operating system.

    you should really answer me though.
    does other games show 'weird' frames per second dropouts?
    that is the only thing that is going to suggest a bigger problem.

    the question of wise simply cannot be answered fully without the above requests answered.
  5. I'm running Windows 7 64-Bit

    As for other games running slowly.....Just Cause 2 did slow down a noticeable amount in certain spots. Arma 2 (which is a pretty intensive game if you're familiar with it) ran at about 30 fps but dipped down pretty low when stuff got really heavy. For that game, it's to be expected though.

    The future games such as Battlefield 3 and Skyrim are what I'm primarily concerned about. Obviously it's impossible to tell exactly how my system will run the games since they aren't out yet, but I'd like to get a general idea. If I had to upgrade anything serious (like the CPU) I would probably just buy a new system (saving the video card obviously...it did cost me 300 freaking dollars).

    I usually keep everything that's running in the background to a bare minimum.

    I will try to OC the processor. I've never oc'ed anything before, but what the heck it sounds like it'd at least be something interesting to do.
  6. OCing is something interesting, but you should do it at your own risk.

    Your CPU is the only thing that's holding you back. All other aspects for that rig is fine. Did you check the temperatures of both CPU and GPU ? Download HWMonitor and check your temps. See if any component is overheating.
  7. running a 775 quad is the problem it doesnt have the bandwidth to cope with a gtx 570 so you will get disparity in performance. you could try maxing out every setting.
    this may lower your top end fps but should rase your minimum fps as you will be offloading to the gpuand freeing up some cpu time.
    overclocking will help a little but your missing nearly 20 percent performance that an i7 could give. this 20 percent is what enables a 570 to run smoothly but even then on some games you will have to bump even in i7 up to 3.2 to remove a bottleneck that the latest gpus can inflict.

    as for downgrading the o.s. what a load of bollix windows 7 running dx9 games off a dx11 kernal is actualy more efficent than running the same game from a dx9.c o.s.
    the minor degradation in performance comes from the o.s. being 64 bit... but you run that same game on a 64bit xp and you would get a similar drop in performance.

    i run all my games on win 7 ultimate and i do it flawlessly. both mine and 90 percent of other windows 7 uses would agree that anwaypasible is cluless and is going of what he has read rather than experiancing the games first hand. if he had he would know that what he is spouting is flawed and just basically wrong...
  8. HEXiT said:
    agree that anwaypasible is cluless and is going of what he has read rather than experiancing the games first hand. if he had he would know that what he is spouting is flawed and just basically wrong...

    you are showing some signs of stress.
    dont you think you should ask me where i got my information from?
    i didnt read any stupid article claiming conspiracy towards the windows 7 ultimate operating system.
    as a fact, you insinuated it.. thus implied they exist.. leaving a chance that you are a hypocrite yourself.

    of the basic route, windows 7 ultimate is really the FULL version of windows 7.
    the rest of the versions would thus be TRIMMED versions.

    that means absolutely nothing for business orientation.
    i went on with my spout because i read business oriented features in the version comparison chart - straight off of microsofts website.

    you could really stop yelling or fighting with me and begin TEACHING other people who are scared to buy the ultimate version of windows 7.
    you would then be pushing the industry within the realm of my apprenticeship.. and that means you get absolutely zero reward for doing it.

    but seriously..
    if you pile on the features without the option to turn them off, they can get in the way for video games.
    this is as simple as 1+1=2 .. (or 1+2=3)

    now take that energy of yours and go on and on about how the ultimate version of windows 7 doesnt slow your game down.
    because there are about 100 articles on the internet that STATE the same thing - windows 7 is slower with dx9 when compared to windows xp.
    HELL.. there are youtube videos too!

    if you look here at an article about comparing a video game on each version of windows (windows xp 32bit/64bit .. windows vista 32bit/64bit .. windows 7 32bit/64bit)
    you will see the video game 'arma II'
    it proves to make everybody right and everybody wrong.
    sometimes the 64bit version of windows is faster than the 32bit
    sometimes windows 7 is faster than windows xp

    they use these operating systems to test:
    Windows XP Professional 32-bit w/Service Pack 3
    Windows XP Professional x64 w/Service Pack 2
    Windows Vista Ultimate 32-bit w/Service Pack 2
    Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit w/Service Pack 2
    Windows 7 Ultimate 32-bit
    Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit

    they use a NVIDIA GeForce GTX 275
    (single card and SLI)
    they also use a ATI Radeon 4890 1GB
    (single card and CROSSFIRE)

    you can end this nonsense about arguing with the different versions of the windows operating system by simply reading the article i linked to.
    but you cannot get me passed the facts about all of the newest video games being pathetic and boring.
    (many of the older games have been the same pathetic and boring)

    double-back reverse psychology if you must.
    lets stop comparing CPU's that score a maximum of 5,000 to the new i7's that scare a maximum of 11,000
    the newer processors are showing they are twice as fast.
    the video game requirements are saying 'quad core processor recommended'
    it didnt say anything about core2quad or core i7 quad.

    i think you need to see this chart and consider the power of CPU architechture and multi-threading:

    what dont they tell you?
    the power of the memory controller/northbridge - southbridge.

    that is because the government does a fine job to keep all of the chipsets well-endowed with the current series of processors that fit into the CPU socket.
    maybe game developers need to adopt the same level of responsibility.

    of course i will jump into a thread and demand my pardon, because there are a bunch of games out there with a high level of various performance results running on the same hardware.
    look at what it is doing..
    people are starting to think their hardware is too slow because the game code is bad.
    how dare a person or company come into your house and fill you up with false beliefs.
    the only thing that is going to save their butt is when people go out to buy faster hardware, and then the hardware manufacturers praise and reward the person or company that made the old hardware look slow.

    dont be blind to greed.. that is all i have to say about it.
    you can buy hardware and overclock it.. if the computer doesnt run like it did when it was new, you have a good reason to ask questions.
    when your computer is running fast and fresh.. then some game comes along to make you feel like your hardware is worthless, dont hesitate to second-guess the video game.

    dont be lazy and come running to a forum for somebody to tell you what life is.
    go get a different video game that looks the same and play it on the computer to compare the performance.
    compare your results with ARTICLES.. because articles can get sued if they post false information.
    if your results are very close to the articles.. then you have your final answer.

    tomshardware.com is dedicated to providing the information.
    if you dont read the information.. you are smacking them in the face.
    you waste a lot more bandwidth (as well as time) using their forum asking questions.
    we are supposed to be using the forum to have fun.. not for allowing people to act like mentally-retarded disabled people that cant put a spoon or fork to their mouth.

    if you are a cook, you dont care if the person uses a spoon.. a fork.. or a dull knife to eat the food.
    the food is supposed to taste and smell s.oO good that you would be willing to eat that food with your bare hands (or possibly off of the floor)

    that is gratitude and appreciation.
    you prove you dont appreciate tomshardware, and what do we get for answering stupid questions like 'how do you connect a speaker?'
    absolutely NOTHING.
    we should get something for listening to the same stupid questions over and over again.

    people who cannot put a spoon up to their mouth to eat.. these people do not deserve to be out in public without a dedicated nurse.
    if the dedicated nurse cannot be provided.. the person will be moved to a state hospital.

    some of these questions on the forum are extremely insecure, and people answer those questions.. making certain the insecure lazyness will happen again.
    i bet you didnt know how you were being rude to the closest provider :hello:

    dont get me wrong.
    i am not trying to be raging or have nothing to say that can help the original poster.
    'would it be wise to upgrade this computer' is a very serious question.
    sometimes a person in the business of creating new video games or new software.. they know already if the new games or software will run smoothly on the system.
    when they come here to answer the question.. other forum members show them absolutely zero respect.
    i see no reason why those high-class people would return to the forum, unless they seriously have nothing better obtainable within reach.

    let me take a moment to talk to the original poster about overclocking their processor.

    i have been running my system overclocked since ALMOST day one.
    it has been running perfect for about five years.

    all i did was use the CPU stress and RAM stress programs 'orthos' .. 'prime95' .. 'memtest86'

    you NEED a program that can monitor your CPU and chipset temperatures.
    if your temperature is too high.. you have to choose - less voltage or new cpu cooler

    if your lower your RAM speeds and run them 1:1 ... does the cpu stress test run for a faster overclock?

    my ram is supposed to run stock at 800mhz
    i lowered my RAM speed to keep my multiplier up as high as it would go.
    then i pushed the front side bus up as high as it would go before one of those cpu stress test programs said the overclock was unstable.

    dont think 12 hours is long enough.
    you need to let it run for 24 hours.

    here is the part when they say 'do this at your own risk'
    if these cpu stress tests tell you the overclock is stable.. your cpu or motherboard could still break if the hardware is defective.
    that means it was made imperfect at the factory OR the specifications lied to you about the maximum voltage (or the maximum heat allowed)

    start at the default settings and work your way up.
    it is safe to bump the overclock up 25mhz - 50mhz at a time to find your narrow sweet spot.

    i could run my front side bus at 1440mhz every single day and night, completely stable.
    i could also choose to run my front side bus at like 1700mhz that isnt as stable.. meaning sometimes the operating system might crash (or the video game might freeze).
    i dont ever EVER run the motherboard at 1700mhz because i dont want it to break.

    there is something called a 'overclock wall' between 1500mhz and 1650mhz that prevents the motherboard from booting up.
    how high you go depends on THREE things:
    1. the input voltage (dont go above maximum)
    2. the heat on the CPU and motherboard chipset processors (dont go above maximum)
    3. if the stress tests report the overclock is stable
  9. It doesn't look like anything is overheating...the motherboard is at 50 C and everything else (video card and cpu cores) are below 40 C.
  10. woah..

    the average room in america should be seeing all temperatures in the 30's or 40's

    your motherboard looks 10 degrees too high.
    my room has been 90 degrees F .. my temps still were not 50 C

    new cooling paste or a fan should fix those temps. (i would do both)

    maybe get yourself one of those small heatsinks with double-sided tape off ebay for like $2
    put that on your southbridge for some extra heat-release.

    you might want to browse some overclocking forums to learn if putting a heatsink on your southbridge is going to make things worse or better.
    (if nobody says anything about the heatsink making it worse.. it should be safe to do it)

    i try to keep a little bit of room for a rare chance the processor likes to stay warm instead of being cooler.
    i cannot afford to try both, so i read posts other people make.
    i hunt down the people who have the same motherboard and see what they say.
    and i leave the forum without ever registering.

    sometimes questions are too specific and you need to sign up to write out the question.

    overclocking is easy if you get it right and leave it alone.
  11. I upgraded my Q9650 that had 2 8800gt with a GTX 470. I run every game maxed. AA and AF I run at 8x. I would not worry about a core 7 with ddr3 ram. In a year or 2 or 3 maybe, but for now it’s sort of a waste. I mean it will cost around $500 to upgrade your board, chip and ram with an i7 but will you get $500 of satisfaction in gaming performance? If money is tight then I doubt it. If you have money coming out of your ears, then go for it. Upgrades are fun! Check out some of the toms hardware CPU charts. That Q9400 should still be a very capable CPU and should have a few years of life left at high graphics and high frame rates.

    The Q9000 run hot. Mine hits 60 while gaming all the time with a huge zalman on it. It will hit 75 while folding on all cores.
  12. I have seen funny things in the last couple weeks, my old C2Duo 6420 and 8800 GTX having higher FPS than a new I5 build with 560. I don't get it sometimes, nor do I try, it took me about 1 month of posting on here to finally get the componants I brought for my upgrade.

    I have read around about C2Duo's generally doing better than the Quads, but to me it is strange that that spec computer plays at 20FPS when my older rig was more like mid 30's average.

    Sorry I won't be able to shed light on this matter, I am more of part-timer at this and don't wan't to risk being called out by the keyboard warrior on this thread.
Ask a new question

Read More

PC gaming Video Games