i5 2400 Still have enough juice for the next few years?

[Vudue Priest]

So my gaming rig, I rarely get to use, is quite old by the elitist standard.

i5 2400
AsRock Z77 Extreme4
EVGA GTX 770 sc acx/ MSI GTX 770 N770-2GD5/OC in SLI
16GB Corsair DDR3-1333Mhz
Cooler Master 212 EVO/ Arctic Silver
WIN 8 Pro on SSD
WD Raptor 10k RPM for games/ media
3x Viewsonic VP191B

I am obviously not the type to go all out, I don't hardcore game at max settings. I just want something better than a console. With that in mind, how do you folks feel this setup will hold up over the next couple years?

 

[TMTOWTSAC]

As long as you're gaming on a single monitor at 1280x720, I can't see any problems. Very few game companies are going to be willing to require higher than a quad core sandybridge i5 for some time. If you upgrade to a 1080p monitor you'd probably want a new GPU as well. And worst case, you can still upgrade the CPU to an i7 sandy.

 

[dangus]

it's getting old but it's still capable of doing 1080p for sure. you're just not going to be maxing games out. you're not going to be playing at 60fps most of the time. its still not a bad system though for sure

 

[Vudue Priest]

As long as you're gaming on a single monitor at 1280x720, I can't see any problems. Very few game companies are going to be willing to require higher than a quad core sandybridge i5 for some time. If you upgrade to a 1080p monitor you'd probably want a new GPU as well. And worst case, you can still upgrade the CPU to an i7 sandy.

Where are you getting your screen rez suggestions from? with all three monitors in surround I was pushing 3840X3072 over 60 fps in most games on decently high settings on just one 770 let alone I'm in SLI now. Am I missing how the CPU fits into all of this?

 

[Vudue Priest]

it's getting old but it's still capable of doing 1080p for sure. you're just not going to be maxing games out. you're not going to be playing at 60fps most of the time. its still not a bad system though for sure

I kinda figured, I don't generally pay attention but 3.2-3.5 Ghz quad isn't really that bad, and I'm pretty sure my utilization is rarely over 50%. Just wasn't sure if the community was seeing a dramatic shift in CPU utilization in game specs.

 

[TMTOWTSAC]

As long as you're gaming on a single monitor at 1280x720, I can't see any problems. Very few game companies are going to be willing to require higher than a quad core sandybridge i5 for some time. If you upgrade to a 1080p monitor you'd probably want a new GPU as well. And worst case, you can still upgrade the CPU to an i7 sandy.

Where are you getting your screen rez suggestions from? with all three monitors in surround I was pushing 3840X3072 over 60 fps in most games on decently high settings on just one 770 let alone I'm in SLI now. Am I missing how the CPU fits into all of this?

Sorry, I completely missed that you were running dual 770's rather than a single. I thought the 2 GB of VRAM would be limiting at 1080p given how ram hungry textures and supersampling have gotten in the last few years. The i7 was just a theoretical for future games that take better advantage of additional threads.

 

[Vudue Priest]

Sorry, I completely missed that you were running dual 770's rather than a single. I thought the 2 GB of VRAM would be limiting at 1080p given how ram hungry textures and supersampling have gotten in the last few years. The i7 was just a theoretical for future games that take better advantage of additional threads.

I have been looking for i26 or 2700ks. I don't know of any games using hyper threading but it would be nice none the less. The only goal is to out last this generation of consoles. I didn't really think about the ram usage on three monitors... Kind of curious how big a difference when I was running a single 770 on three monitors.

 

[TMTOWTSAC]

Some back of the napkin math here. If I looked up your Viewsonics right, they display at 720p.

1280x720 = 921600 pixels.

3 1280x720 screens (3840x720, or 3x921600) = 2764800 pixels.

1080p = 1920x1080 = 2073600 pixels.

So 3 720p screens is only 33% more pixels than 1080p.

1440p = 2560x1440 = 3686400 pixels.

So 1440p is 400% more pixels than 720 (hence quad high def) and 78% more pixels than 1080p.

Looks like 3 720p screens is reasonably close to 1 1080p screen. Some games have huge texture packs now, but that seem to affect loading times moreso than fps. The biggie is anti-aliasing, especially supersampling schemes that render at a higher resolution and then downsample to your actual screen size. And it's much less of an issue at higher resolutions anyway.