› ›

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Quick Links

Upgrades?

David_LopanDavid_Lopan Member UncommonPosts: 813
in Hardware

My current set-up:

i5 750 oc 3.4 ghz

p55 ftw evga mobo

8 gb ram 1333

2 - 1TB mag drives (going to get a 830 Sammy SSD and ghost my OS and games)

1 - 570 gtx

850 watt Thermaltake (not the best at all but its been doing fine)

_______________________________________________________________________

Besides my HD going SSD what should i upgrade in the near term.

I got about 500-600 bucks to spend. I plan on creating a new rig at the end of next year.

 

Was thinking about a couple of things besides the SSD:

1. one more 570 GTX in sli + a better PSU; Corsair 900+ or the like.

2. one 7970

3. one 670 4gb (for future sli) or one 680

____________________________________________________________________________

What do you guys think, especially you Quiz?

I have never used sli/crossfire but another 570 looks pretty good in performance compared to the 670 / 7970 / 680.

A little concerned about bottlenecks but i can crank my cpu up a bit yet (i have a watercooling system that works pretty well, i never have seen my i5 oc at 3.4 ghz go over 58c).

Comments

  • RidelynnRidelynn Member EpicPosts: 7,383

    I don't really see any red flags that need to be upgraded - it's all still pretty decent equipment.

    Do you have specific instances where you are having performance issues? That would tell more than just "I want to spend more money, how should I spend it?"

    Having played with SLI before, I can say it is a certifiable pain in the ass. When it works, it does work, but most of the time it doesn't - either game doesn't support so you only see a ~10% increase, game only works with SLI in full screen mode (no alt-tabbing out), game runs worse with SLI, game profile has to be tweaked every time a patch comes out, weird texture issues when running with SLI, SLI profiles that have to be updated separate from drivers, more computer noise, etc. And if your only driving a single 1080 screen, then what's the point going from 87fps to 117ps?

    Unless you are talking top-end cards to push multiple monitors at very high resolutions, or trying to make a killing with bitcoins or folding, I don't see much point in SLI/CFX at all.

  • David_LopanDavid_Lopan Member UncommonPosts: 813
    Originally posted by Ridelynn

    I don't really see any red flags that need to be upgraded - it's all still pretty decent equipment.

    Do you have specific instances where you are having performance issues? That would tell more than just "I want to spend more money, how should I spend it?"

    Having played with SLI before, I can say it is a certifiable pain in the ass. When it works, it does work, but most of the time it doesn't - either game doesn't support so you only see a ~10% increase, game only works with SLI in full screen mode (no alt-tabbing out), game runs worse with SLI, game profile has to be tweaked every time a patch comes out, weird texture issues when running with SLI, SLI profiles that have to be updated separate from drivers, more computer noise, etc. And if your only driving a single 1080 screen, then what's the point going from 87fps to 117ps?

    Unless you are talking top-end cards to push multiple monitors at very high resolutions, or trying to make a killing with bitcoins or folding, I don't see much point in SLI/CFX at all.

        Yean, sorry about that. I max out everything in games like a lot of people do, but in GW 2, with everything maxed (but no AA, doesn't effect fps anyways) i get 27-49 fps in game. Perfectly acceptable, it looks and plays great. However I am a computer geek and game lover. I'd like to get 60 fps (or very close to it minimum).

    There are other reasons too, just the most recent.

  • RidelynnRidelynn Member EpicPosts: 7,383

    Originally posted by Aquazen
    Originally posted by Ridelynn I don't really see any red flags that need to be upgraded - it's all still pretty decent equipment. Do you have specific instances where you are having performance issues? That would tell more than just "I want to spend more money, how should I spend it?" Having played with SLI before, I can say it is a certifiable pain in the ass. When it works, it does work, but most of the time it doesn't - either game doesn't support so you only see a ~10% increase, game only works with SLI in full screen mode (no alt-tabbing out), game runs worse with SLI, game profile has to be tweaked every time a patch comes out, weird texture issues when running with SLI, SLI profiles that have to be updated separate from drivers, more computer noise, etc. And if your only driving a single 1080 screen, then what's the point going from 87fps to 117ps? Unless you are talking top-end cards to push multiple monitors at very high resolutions, or trying to make a killing with bitcoins or folding, I don't see much point in SLI/CFX at all.
        Yean, sorry about that. I max out everything in games like a lot of people do, but in GW 2, with everything maxed (but no AA, doesn't effect fps anyways) i get 27-49 fps in game. Perfectly acceptable, it looks and plays great. However I am a computer geek and game lover. I'd like to get 60 fps (or very close to it minimum).

    There are other reasons too, just the most recent.

    GW2 is heavily CPU-bound. Video card does very little for it.

    I cna't find any great numbers comparing anything inside of Intel's family to each other in GW2 - the earliest reliable numbers only go back to Sandy Bridge. Based on this post:

    http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1614809

    I would guess you would see about 10% increase going from your Lynnfield to Sandy, and another 10% going on up to Ivy at similar clock speeds - so going from 27-49FPS to 32-58FPS, using the best available CPU (there would be almost no difference between a Core i5 3570k or an i7 3770k, as GW2 doesn't see any appreciable benefit for core counts past 4). Those are very rough estimates based on a lot of assumptions - I don't have any hard evidence.

    Now if you go taking into account overclocking, then it skews things a bit. Lynnfield wasn't a bad overclocker, Sandy was typically a very good overclocker, and when taken to extremes even beat out Ivy. So there you muddy the waters a bit, and it very much depends on the exact silicon you have and exactly how far your able to push it - a gamble, to say the least, as nothing is guaranteed when OCing.

    If that is worth the $200 for the CPU and another $150 for the motherboard, I don't know - it still won't get you to that mythical 60fps all the time with the graphics on Best Appearance.

  • jdkskipjdkskip Member UncommonPosts: 120
    I personally, wouldn't do anything to your current rig, besides the SSD, if you'll be doing a rebuild next year. What I would recommend now is a UPS if you don't have one yet. Something simular to this http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16842102070 would be nice and you can save the funds to put into your next build.
  • BetaguyBetaguy Member UncommonPosts: 2,629
    Originally posted by Ridelynn

    I don't really see any red flags that need to be upgraded - it's all still pretty decent equipment.

    Do you have specific instances where you are having performance issues? That would tell more than just "I want to spend more money, how should I spend it?"

    Having played with SLI before, I can say it is a certifiable pain in the ass. When it works, it does work, but most of the time it doesn't - either game doesn't support so you only see a ~10% increase, game only works with SLI in full screen mode (no alt-tabbing out), game runs worse with SLI, game profile has to be tweaked every time a patch comes out, weird texture issues when running with SLI, SLI profiles that have to be updated separate from drivers, more computer noise, etc. And if your only driving a single 1080 screen, then what's the point going from 87fps to 117ps?

    Unless you are talking top-end cards to push multiple monitors at very high resolutions, or trying to make a killing with bitcoins or folding, I don't see much point in SLI/CFX at all.

    I have had SLI my whole life, its a pain in the ass. Can't use multiple displays while running in SLI which is my biggest piss off.  Always having to enable and renable... and there is no point in you going crossfire unless you do a spider system all the way....

    "The King and the Pawn return to the same box at the end of the game"

  • BetaguyBetaguy Member UncommonPosts: 2,629
    Originally posted by Aquazen
    Originally posted by Ridelynn

    I don't really see any red flags that need to be upgraded - it's all still pretty decent equipment.

    Do you have specific instances where you are having performance issues? That would tell more than just "I want to spend more money, how should I spend it?"

    Having played with SLI before, I can say it is a certifiable pain in the ass. When it works, it does work, but most of the time it doesn't - either game doesn't support so you only see a ~10% increase, game only works with SLI in full screen mode (no alt-tabbing out), game runs worse with SLI, game profile has to be tweaked every time a patch comes out, weird texture issues when running with SLI, SLI profiles that have to be updated separate from drivers, more computer noise, etc. And if your only driving a single 1080 screen, then what's the point going from 87fps to 117ps?

    Unless you are talking top-end cards to push multiple monitors at very high resolutions, or trying to make a killing with bitcoins or folding, I don't see much point in SLI/CFX at all.

        Yean, sorry about that. I max out everything in games like a lot of people do, but in GW 2, with everything maxed (but no AA, doesn't effect fps anyways) i get 27-49 fps in game. Perfectly acceptable, it looks and plays great. However I am a computer geek and game lover. I'd like to get 60 fps (or very close to it minimum).

    There are other reasons too, just the most recent.

    The game is only as good as its coders, some games... because of poor coding will not achieve higher than 30-50FPS in certain areas of any game.

    "The King and the Pawn return to the same box at the end of the game"

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,351

    Why are you looking to upgrade?  Is there some situation where it doesn't perform well enough?  If it runs all games that you play smoothly at the settings you want, then the best you could hope for from an upgrade is that it still runs all games that you play smoothly at the settings you want.

    Which power supply is that?  Thermaltake makes power supplies of widely varying quality, ranging from pretty good all the way down to a danger to your system.

    An SSD is certainly a worthwhile upgrade.  It's not clear that anything else is.

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,351
    Originally posted by Aquazen

        Yean, sorry about that. I max out everything in games like a lot of people do, but in GW 2, with everything maxed (but no AA, doesn't effect fps anyways) i get 27-49 fps in game. Perfectly acceptable, it looks and plays great. However I am a computer geek and game lover. I'd like to get 60 fps (or very close to it minimum).

    There are other reasons too, just the most recent.

    What happens if you max almost everything, but selectively turn off a few things?  For example, SSAA.

  • karmathkarmath Member UncommonPosts: 904
    GW2 is pretty badly optimized, the engine their using is a modded gw1 engine so its pretty poop in general. Personally I wouldnt throw money at it but you wouls see some difference with a current gen gpu or wait till jan and get one of the new ATI cards, rumor has it the cheapest card in the lineup is faster than a gtx 680.
  • David_LopanDavid_Lopan Member UncommonPosts: 813
    Thanks for the replys folks, I will just hold off on upgrades for awhile.
Sign In or Register to comment.