Upgrade, what will I need.

Was planning on doing a full system but money issues means it will have to be an upgrade instead. Im thinking I mainly need a new cpu more then anything, and a new case which Iv pretty much decided on which one already, and probably a new gpu in the near future. Anyway here's my current system. 

CPU: AMD Phenom II X4 965 3.4GHz

Mobo: Asus M4A89TD PRO USB3

GPU: VTX3D HD 6950

RAM: 8.00GB Dual-Channel DDR3

PSU: Coolmaster GX 750W

Case: Thermaltake Soprano (had to cut some of the hdd drives out as it just wansnt big enough for new GPU's, The reason why im getting a new case)

OS: Microsoft Windows 7 Professional 64-bit

So as I said Im thinking my cpu may be the thing i need up upgrade the most. Im hopping that because Im not changing my Motherboard my copy of win7 pro will work with the new stuff I get. would it be worth getting another 8gb of ram to take advantage of the win 7 Professional copy I have? what about the gpu, will I need to upgrade it to continue playing on High settings for new games. Basically Just tell me anything that would be a good upgrade to last me another few years. I guess the budget is about $500 not including the gpu, if it will last me till the end of the year I'll be able to drop roughly $600 on that alone when the time comes.

Your motherboard doesn't really support a processor that is much better than what you have.

The phenom ii's are actually faster clock for clock then AMD FX series CPU's.

The processor is a black edition/the motherboard is pretty nice so I would actually just get a $30 CPU cooler like a hyper 212 EVO and overclock the CPU to 3.8-4.2ghz (A phenom 2 at a high clock rate is actually pretty decent). Not alot of games take advantage of a ton of cores so a quad core phenom at close to 4gz will do wonders.

In terms of GPU its up to you. Most modern games are running on 2-3 year old engines so if your playing games at 1080p or lower than your current card should do decent. If you really need a GPU upgrade then I wouldn't go lower than a 7970boost (which runs about $300). A 7970boost should give you a 40% increase over your current card which is great (I wouldn't settle for anything lower than a 7970/770 given the fact that your current GPU is decent).

You can get a GPU now or wait and see if the 9000 series is legit (its rumored for an october release). Keep your CPU and overclock it since not alot of games are CPU intense and the AMD FX series is actually slower than the phenom ii clock for clock.

You could technically upgrade to an intel i5 and get more raw CPU power but I don't think it would be worth it right now (i5 with motherboard is going to cost you at least $250 and I don't think you will see much performance boost over an overclocked x4 in most games).

Right, I havnt overclocked before, so I wouldnt have any idea what I would be doing, But i guess the worst thing that happens is I fry the cpu, end up with a decent cooler and just buy a new cpu which i figured Id have to do anyway. I'll give it a shot and see how it goes.

Since your CPU and motherboard support overclocking then you might as well try it out. As long as you overclock in small intervals while running stress test (along with monitor temps), then you shouldn't fry anything.

If you do buy a good cooler (such as the 212 EVO) then make another thread on this forum asking for help. Users on this board can recommend you tutorials to read/watch and can talk you through the process if you get stuck on something (overall overclocking isn't that bad). If you spend like an hour watching/reading tutorials and ask a few questions here, you should have absolutely no problems

alright so seems my girlfriend insists on me buying a new cpu so she can steal my current one for her computer. Would an FX-8350 be much of an improvment over what Iv currently got? Or Are the FX-9370's worth the extra cost?

alright so seems my girlfriend insists on me buying a new cpu so she can steal my current one for her computer. Would an FX-8350 be much of an improvment over what Iv currently got? Or Are the FX-9370's worth the extra cost?

Kamuikankatsu

they won't work in your motherboard

well damn, I never even noticed that. Figured being the same socket type and the 140w support it would work, but I seems they dont. This makes things little more difficult. I guess I'll need to look into a new Motherboard now too. Would that meen I wouldnt be able to use my currently copy of windows 7 aswell?

Had selling some of the parts you have already occured to you? If sell your cpu and gpu than you can upgrade.

Perhaps 4670k or 8350 + new mobo, and hd 7950 or newer gpu later this year.

i5 4670k

MSI Z87 M power

GTX 770/Radeon 7970

I had thought of selling bits, but a big modivational point in doing this upgrade was my girlfriend needed an upgrade also, and in order to save on having to upgrade both our computers she was going to get parts of mine which were still somewhat decent, while I'll get some new more current parts. So really I cant use the old parts for selling. I may just need put off getting stuff for another few months while I save some extra cash.

I had thought of selling bits, but a big modivational point in doing this upgrade was my girlfriend needed an upgrade also, and in order to save on having to upgrade both our computers she was going to get parts of mine which were still somewhat decent, while I'll get some new more current parts. So really I cant use the old parts for selling. I may just need put off getting stuff for another few months while I save some extra cash.

Kamuikankatsu

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-290-AS

lol @ 670 recommendation

I recommend you get an intel mobo, lga 1150 or something like that, and a core i5 4670k, that should set you back $350.  Thats all you really need, give your old cpu and mobo to your gf and keep the rest.

lol @ 670 recommendation

 

I recommend you get an intel mobo, lga 1150 or something like that, and a core i5 4670k, that should set you back $350.  Thats all you really need, give your old cpu and mobo to your gf and keep the rest.

blaznwiipspman1

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

lol @ 670 recommendation

 

I recommend you get an intel mobo, lga 1150 or something like that, and a core i5 4670k, that should set you back $350.  Thats all you really need, give your old cpu and mobo to your gf and keep the rest.

AMD655

not only that, the 7950 is faster than a 670 at stock speeds, 3gb and 384 bit is icing on the cake.  Only a duche bag would go for a card with 2gb vram and 192bit bus IIRC, the crap that is the 670, which will be outdated early next year as it hits the memory bottleneck.  You could have at least recommended a 760 instead, that card puts up a much better fight.

[QUOTE="AMD655"][QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

lol @ 670 recommendation

 

I recommend you get an intel mobo, lga 1150 or something like that, and a core i5 4670k, that should set you back $350.  Thats all you really need, give your old cpu and mobo to your gf and keep the rest.

blaznwiipspman1

not only that, the 7950 is faster than a 670 at stock speeds, 3gb and 384 bit is icing on the cake.  Only a duche bag would go for a card with 2gb vram and 192bit bus IIRC, the crap that is the 670, which will be outdated early next year as it hits the memory bottleneck.  You could have at least recommended a 760 instead, that card puts up a much better fight.

Oh,forgot that you will probably talk about the 7950 boost

[QUOTE="AMD655"][QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

lol @ 670 recommendation

 

I recommend you get an intel mobo, lga 1150 or something like that, and a core i5 4670k, that should set you back $350.  Thats all you really need, give your old cpu and mobo to your gf and keep the rest.

blaznwiipspman1

not only that, the 7950 is faster than a 670 at stock speeds, 3gb and 384 bit is icing on the cake.  Only a duche bag would go for a card with 2gb vram and 192bit bus IIRC, the crap that is the 670, which will be outdated early next year as it hits the memory bottleneck.  You could have at least recommended a 760 instead, that card puts up a much better fight.

You recall wrong.  The GTX 670 has a 256-bit memory bus.  The GTX 660 and 660 Ti have the 192-bit bus.  

The phenom ii's are actually faster clock for clock then AMD FX series CPU's.

The processor is a black edition/the motherboard is pretty nice so I would actually just get a $30 CPU cooler like a hyper 212 EVO and overclock the CPU to 3.8-4.2ghz (A phenom 2 at a high clock rate is actually pretty decent). Not alot of games take advantage of a ton of cores so a quad core phenom at close to 4gz will do wonders.

mastershake575

however there are no phenom II's that can exceed 4ghz on air

ionusX

Theres plenty of reviews and videos online of people getting 4ghz+ on a zalmann/coolmaster CPU (usually around 1.4v). I don't understand where this statment came from ? (I could of easily gotten 4+ghz if I had used a better cooler and theres plenty of users online getting 4ghz+ with nice air heatsinks).

[QUOTE="ionusX"]

however there are no phenom II's that can exceed 4ghz on air

mastershake575

Theres plenty of reviews and videos online of people getting 4ghz+ on a zalmann/coolmaster CPU (usually around 1.4v). I don't understand where this statment came from ? (I could of easily gotten 4+ghz if I had used a better cooler and theres plenty of users online getting 4ghz+ with nice air heatsinks).

I had my 955 at 3.8 but my 4ghz 8350 is definitely faster.

[QUOTE="AMD655"][QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

lol @ 670 recommendation

 

I recommend you get an intel mobo, lga 1150 or something like that, and a core i5 4670k, that should set you back $350.  Thats all you really need, give your old cpu and mobo to your gf and keep the rest.

blaznwiipspman1

not only that, the 7950 is faster than a 670 at stock speeds, 3gb and 384 bit is icing on the cake.  Only a duche bag would go for a card with 2gb vram and 192bit bus IIRC, the crap that is the 670, which will be outdated early next year as it hits the memory bottleneck.  You could have at least recommended a 760 instead, that card puts up a much better fight.

[QUOTE="ionusX"]

however there are no phenom II's that can exceed 4ghz on air

mastershake575

Theres plenty of reviews and videos online of people getting 4ghz+ on a zalmann/coolmaster CPU (usually around 1.4v). I don't understand where this statment came from ? (I could of easily gotten 4+ghz if I had used a better cooler and theres plenty of users online getting 4ghz+ with nice air heatsinks).

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

[QUOTE="AMD655"] Let me guess, get a Radeon only, because 3GB and 384 bit? Inb4 your butthurt.hartsickdiscipl

not only that, the 7950 is faster than a 670 at stock speeds, 3gb and 384 bit is icing on the cake.  Only a duche bag would go for a card with 2gb vram and 192bit bus IIRC, the crap that is the 670, which will be outdated early next year as it hits the memory bottleneck.  You could have at least recommended a 760 instead, that card puts up a much better fight.

You recall wrong.  The GTX 670 has a 256-bit memory bus.  The GTX 660 and 660 Ti have the 192-bit bus.  

interesting, well either way the 760 would have been better recommendation, even if I was wrong about the bus. 

To monsieurX, the 7950 clocks much much higher than that, we both know that.  The 670 auto boosts by itself, hell even the 700 series auto boosts so most of the benchmarks are very misleading when comparing the radeon cards which do not auto boost, yet have a higher overclocking potential.  Hell, the benchmark thread proves that point.

If I were in the market today for a video card, and my choices were a 7950/70 or a 760/770, id still get the 7950/7970 because it has more vram and a bigger bus, plus overclocks better.  Not to mention the 7950 has dropped in price to almost $200 which is ridiculous.  Overall, bigger is better.

[QUOTE="mastershake575"]

[QUOTE="ionusX"]

however there are no phenom II's that can exceed 4ghz on air

GummiRaccoon

Theres plenty of reviews and videos online of people getting 4ghz+ on a zalmann/coolmaster CPU (usually around 1.4v). I don't understand where this statment came from ? (I could of easily gotten 4+ghz if I had used a better cooler and theres plenty of users online getting 4ghz+ with nice air heatsinks).

I had my 955 at 3.8 but my 4ghz 8350 is definitely faster.

bulldozer is superior to thuban and deneb aint no doubt about it. you is just mad and need to see the light again :P

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCCd5Qh3OtQ

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

 

not only that, the 7950 is faster than a 670 at stock speeds, 3gb and 384 bit is icing on the cake.  Only a duche bag would go for a card with 2gb vram and 192bit bus IIRC, the crap that is the 670, which will be outdated early next year as it hits the memory bottleneck.  You could have at least recommended a 760 instead, that card puts up a much better fight.

blaznwiipspman1

You recall wrong.  The GTX 670 has a 256-bit memory bus.  The GTX 660 and 660 Ti have the 192-bit bus.  

interesting, well either way the 760 would have been better recommendation, even if I was wrong about the bus. 

To monsieurX, the 7950 clocks much much higher than that, we both know that.  The 670 auto boosts by itself, hell even the 700 series auto boosts so most of the benchmarks are very misleading when comparing the radeon cards which do not auto boost, yet have a higher overclocking potential.  Hell, the benchmark thread proves that point.

If I were in the market today for a video card, and my choices were a 7950/70 or a 760/770, id still get the 7950/7970 because it has more vram and a bigger bus, plus overclocks better.  Not to mention the 7950 has dropped in price to almost $200 which is ridiculous.  Overall, bigger is better.

Im thinking I'll wait with the gpu and see how the 9000 series turns out. As for the intel stuff people have been sugesting, is it really worth the extra money over getting the 8350. Its roughly $170 cheaper to get the amd stuff from where I'll be buying my gear from.

Im thinking I'll wait with the gpu and see how the 9000 series turns out. As for the intel stuff people have been sugesting, is it really worth the extra money over getting the 8350. Its roughly $170 cheaper to get the amd stuff from where I'll be buying my gear from.

Kamuikankatsu

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

 

not only that, the 7950 is faster than a 670 at stock speeds, 3gb and 384 bit is icing on the cake.  Only a duche bag would go for a card with 2gb vram and 192bit bus IIRC, the crap that is the 670, which will be outdated early next year as it hits the memory bottleneck.  You could have at least recommended a 760 instead, that card puts up a much better fight.

blaznwiipspman1

You recall wrong.  The GTX 670 has a 256-bit memory bus.  The GTX 660 and 660 Ti have the 192-bit bus.  

interesting, well either way the 760 would have been better recommendation, even if I was wrong about the bus. 

To monsieurX, the 7950 clocks much much higher than that, we both know that.  The 670 auto boosts by itself, hell even the 700 series auto boosts so most of the benchmarks are very misleading when comparing the radeon cards which do not auto boost, yet have a higher overclocking potential.  Hell, the benchmark thread proves that point.

If I were in the market today for a video card, and my choices were a 7950/70 or a 760/770, id still get the 7950/7970 because it has more vram and a bigger bus, plus overclocks better.  Not to mention the 7950 has dropped in price to almost $200 which is ridiculous.  Overall, bigger is better.

The 670 is still a good choice, I just bought one yesterday because the retailers are trying to shift left over stock. You can currently get a 670 cheaper than a 760 and they're slightly faster.

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

 

You recall wrong.  The GTX 670 has a 256-bit memory bus.  The GTX 660 and 660 Ti have the 192-bit bus.  

kraken2109

interesting, well either way the 760 would have been better recommendation, even if I was wrong about the bus. 

To monsieurX, the 7950 clocks much much higher than that, we both know that.  The 670 auto boosts by itself, hell even the 700 series auto boosts so most of the benchmarks are very misleading when comparing the radeon cards which do not auto boost, yet have a higher overclocking potential.  Hell, the benchmark thread proves that point.

If I were in the market today for a video card, and my choices were a 7950/70 or a 760/770, id still get the 7950/7970 because it has more vram and a bigger bus, plus overclocks better.  Not to mention the 7950 has dropped in price to almost $200 which is ridiculous.  Overall, bigger is better.

The 670 is still a good choice, I just bought one yesterday because the retailers are trying to shift left over stock. You can currently get a 670 cheaper than a 760 and they're slightly faster.

id say both cards are about even, but 760's will get better support, and i think they use less power than a 670 as well.  Either way, the 670 at a lower cost than a 670 is a good choice IMO.

no point really no games require anything better than an fx-4300 anyway :lol: ionusX

[QUOTE="ionusX"] no point really no games require anything better than an fx-4300 anyway :lol: Postmortem123

pretty sad, how the 4300 is slower than the 980 BE.  The 980 BE is at 3.7 ghz while the 4300 supposedly turboes to 4.3 ghz.  AMD somehow managed to take a step back.  Didn't think that was possible, but they did it.

[QUOTE="Postmortem123"]

[QUOTE="ionusX"] no point really no games require anything better than an fx-4300 anyway :lol: blaznwiipspman1

pretty sad, how the 4300 is slower than the 980 BE.  The 980 BE is at 3.7 ghz while the 4300 supposedly turboes to 4.3 ghz.  AMD somehow managed to take a step back.  Didn't think that was possible, but they did it.

Skyrim CPU performance was fixed in the 1.4 patch IIRC and most benchmarks were done before then so can't be trusted

That review was done way after the 1.4 patch.

That review was done way after the 1.4 patch.

Postmortem123

[QUOTE="Postmortem123"]

That review was done way after the 1.4 patch.

kraken2109

[QUOTE="kraken2109"][QUOTE="Postmortem123"]

That review was done way after the 1.4 patch.

Postmortem123

[QUOTE="Postmortem123"][QUOTE="kraken2109"] Can you link it?GummiRaccoon

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

[QUOTE="Postmortem123"] http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/57615-amd-vishera-fx-6300-fx-4300-review-12.html Oct 2012 apparently.AMD655

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE

i love how people call 40+ fps "unplayable" here now. back in my day 20fps was "unplayable". ya'll have become a bunch of sissies in fact your more sissy than my exBF who was a hardcore femboy

Back in your day? Aren't you in your early 20s? :P

And yes for me 40fps is unplayable, but whatever floats your boat.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE

GummiRaccoon

[QUOTE="AMD655"][QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]They are one of the idiot sites that do "clock for clock" bs.  Automatically makes anything else they do suspect.

GummiRaccoon

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

[QUOTE="AMD655"] Well, that means every review for CPU performance in Skidrim is all wrong, as they are all the damn same...AMD655

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE

Nope, neckbeards bitched and moaned and provided crappy videos.

He hasn't been debunked.  Also it's funny because everyone at teksyndicate uses intel except for one person who uses the 8350 they tested.

[QUOTE="AMD655"][QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE

GummiRaccoon

Nope, neckbeards bitched and moaned and provided crappy videos.

He hasn't been debunked.  Also it's funny because everyone at teksyndicate uses intel except for one person who uses the 8350 they tested.

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

[QUOTE="AMD655"] And he has been tea-bagged.debunked/ slaughtered across many forums for doing false benchmarks.AMD655

Nope, neckbeards bitched and moaned and provided crappy videos.

He hasn't been debunked.  Also it's funny because everyone at teksyndicate uses intel except for one person who uses the 8350 they tested.

They also get paid advertisements from intel.

[QUOTE="AMD655"][QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

Nope, neckbeards bitched and moaned and provided crappy videos.

 

He hasn't been debunked.  Also it's funny because everyone at teksyndicate uses intel except for one person who uses the 8350 they tested.

GummiRaccoon

They also get paid advertisements from intel.

[QUOTE="AMD655"][QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]They are one of the idiot sites that do "clock for clock" bs.  Automatically makes anything else they do suspect.

GummiRaccoon

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE

I watched that review months ago.  That guy is a massive D-bag who uses terrible testing methodology to draw false conclusions.  He doesn't know what he's doing.  

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

[QUOTE="AMD655"] Well, that means every review for CPU performance in Skidrim is all wrong, as they are all the damn same...hartsickdiscipl

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE

I watched that review months ago.  That guy is a massive D-bag who uses terrible testing methodology to draw false conclusions.  He doesn't know what he's doing.  

Back in your day? Aren't you in your early 20s? :P

And yes for me 40fps is unplayable, but whatever floats your boat.

Postmortem123