• Looking for a new GPU - is my CPU and PSU good enough?
    72 replies, posted
So 2 years ago I bought a budget gamer pc, and its really starting to show since i cant seem to play newer games very well(dragon age inquisition runs pretty meh on lowest-medium settings), and ive been thinking of getting a new GPU. Im just wondering if i can get a good gpu with my system specs. [B]My pc specs;[/B] cpu; amd phenom(II) x4 965 gpu; gtx 650 8 ram memory PSU; xfs Pro xps 450w-sew (heres the website with all the info on this [URL="http://www.softmart.com/products/details.asp?breadcrumbs=&catID=263&itemID=6175715&from=ezsearch&backVal=5&expand=Specs"]http://www.softmart.com/products/details.asp?breadcrumbs=&catID=263&itemID=6175715&from=ezsearch&backVal=5&expand=Specs[/URL] since im pretty poor with understanding PSUs) windows 7 64 bit M5A97 R2.O motherboard (prob unnecessary to point out but just in case lol) Anyway my question is, are there any good GPUs i can get for this pc without upgrading my psu, or should i just get a 500w/550w PSU? At first the gtx 970 seemed nice but im p-sure its too much for my pc to handle,lol. Either r9 270 or gtx 760/770(?) would probably be good, but it seemed a bit mixed, some said its ok to have a 450w psu and some said you definitely need a 500w psu(like their product websites claimed) for a r9 270 and gtx 760/770. In case i do need a new psu, any recommendations on what brand/power? oh and is the cpu complete shite or can i manage to live with this for the next 2-3 years? Id rather not upgrade anything but the gpu, PSU in case theres no good gpus i could otherwise get and cpu rather not cos then i might as well get a new pc thx
The PSU can support a GTX 970 but the CPU is a pile of old scrotums.
Yeah, an upgrade like this would do you good: [img]http://i.imgur.com/vCdkshr.png[/img]
Sorry buddy, looks like you'll not only have to get a new cpu and power supply but also a new motherboard and at least 4 more gigs of ram as well. I'm pretty much in the same boat, no motherboard with a socket AM3/AM3+ cpu is gonna cut it anymore. Personally I'm planning on grabbing an intel cpu for the next few years but you could always look up an amd one, just make sure it's a quad core if you're just gonna be using it for gaming. Thermaltake PSUs tend to be DOA least often out of all the brands I've tried, look for a thermaltake Toughpower 750w, though you may want to get a more powerful one depending on the gpu you're getting. For the motherboard, look up a cpu first then find a mobo matching the socket, there are at least 3 different i7 sockets so you'll need to be careful. If you can, grab one with 2 pci-e slots so you can keep your Geforce 650 for PhysX. For the GPU, 770 2gb is perfect if you can't spend much, anything above is up to you. Go ahead and ask if you have any more questions.
[QUOTE=Lucien1337;46931481]Sorry buddy, looks like you'll not only have to get a new cpu and power supply but also a new motherboard and at least 4 more gigs of ram as well. I'm pretty much in the same boat, no motherboard with a socket AM3/AM3+ cpu is gonna cut it anymore. Personally I'm planning on grabbing an intel cpu for the next few years but you could always look up an amd one, just make sure it's a quad core if you're just gonna be using it for gaming. Thermaltake PSUs tend to be DOA least often out of all the brands I've tried, look for a thermaltake Toughpower 750w, though you may want to get a more powerful one depending on the gpu you're getting. For the motherboard, look up a cpu first then find a mobo matching the socket, there are at least 3 different i7 sockets so you'll need to be careful. If you can, grab one with 2 pci-e slots so you can keep your Geforce 650 for PhysX. For the GPU, 770 2gb is perfect if you can't spend much, anything above is up to you. Go ahead and ask if you have any more questions.[/QUOTE] What are you on about? Firstly, 8GB of RAM is enough for gaming, in fact, even 4 or 6 GB is good enough in most cases. The AM3+ socket isn't that great, but the processors like the FX 8350 are quite decent in most cases as well, and could be an option for OP since his motherboard supports it.
[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;46931608]What are [B]you[/B] on about. AMD hasn't been relevant except for making more cores a thing since the Athlon/Phenom 2s and the bulldozer architecture was a clear example of them being irrelevant. I know quite a few people who've had a FX8350, they don't run CSGO that great, they don't run Arma 3 that well at all, and Dragon Age Inquisition is frankily going to piss on it and still run sub par.[/QUOTE] Thanks for the useless anecdote. Here's a comparison of an overclocked 8350 and an overclocked 4770k: [url]http://www.techspot.com/review/712-arma-3-benchmarks/page5.html[/url] At the ultra preset, using the same graphics cards, the 8350 gets 53 FPS, whereas the 4770k gets 55FPS. Yea, you're right, they don't run ARMA 3 well at all.
[QUOTE=Troll;46931551]What are you on about? Firstly, 8GB of RAM is enough for gaming, in fact, even 4 or 6 GB is good enough in most cases. The AM3+ socket isn't that great, but the processors like the FX 8350 are quite decent in most cases as well, and could be an option for OP since his motherboard supports it.[/QUOTE] You need to take into account that he might want to have browsers and such open in the background while he's playing games. Right now i have chrome, alan wake and steam and it's using 5.4 of my 12gbs of ram, also some games - for example, COD advanced warfare - tank the absolute living shit out of your ram just because they can, so believe it or not 8gbs can be too low. And no, AM3 and AM3+ just aren't an option anymore. I know this because I'm using an am3 cpu that's not so different from his, and looking at am3 and am3+ alternatives they're far too weak for next-gen games, and since he's going to be playing DA Inquisition for some time he's gonna want to get something much more powerful. Just as an end note, I have to stress that whatever you're going for, [B]quad-core [/B]is the way to go if you're just gaming. Most video games won't be making use of those extra two cores, so take it as a money saving incentive.
[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;46931608]I know quite a few people who've had a FX8350, they don't run CSGO that great[/QUOTE] What are you talking about, i have an 8320 and i run CSGO at max rendering at 1440P and i still get 120+ FPS
[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;46931608]What are [B]you[/B] on about. AMD hasn't been relevant except for making more cores a thing since the Athlon/Phenom 2s and the bulldozer architecture was a clear example of them being irrelevant. I know quite a few people who've had a FX8350, they don't run CSGO that great, they don't run Arma 3 that well at all, and Dragon Age Inquisition is frankily going to piss on it and still run sub par.[/QUOTE] I'm gonna have to call some BS here. The FX8350 is beyond even the recommended requirements for all three games. If it can't handle CSGO, Arma 3, or Dragon Age Inquisition; something else is holding the systems back.
[QUOTE=Lucien1337;46931665]You need to take into account that he might want to have browsers and such open in the background while he's playing games. Right now i have chrome, alan wake and steam and it's using 5.4 of my 12gbs of ram, also some games - for example, COD advanced warfare - tank the absolute living shit out of your ram just because they can, so believe it or not 8gbs can be too low. And no, AM3 and AM3+ just aren't an option anymore. I know this because I'm using an am3 cpu that's not so different from his, and looking at am3 and am3+ alternatives they're far too weak for next-gen games, and since he's going to be playing DA Inquisition for some time he's gonna want to get something much more powerful.[/QUOTE] You must be running a ridiculous amount of bloatware. I have Windows 7 Pro, currently using 2.15GB with some Chrome tabs open, steam (which uses, what 50MB?). Do you have any evidence that having more than 8GB of RAM is beneficial? AM3+ is an option. Its definitely a cost-efficient option, and keeps up with its intel counterparts for a large amount of games. Saying they are far too weak for next-gen games is baseless. Back up your claims, because your personal experience doesn't mean anything [editline]14th January 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;46931702]And here come the AMD white knights.[/QUOTE] Dude, take your useless, baseless opinion elsewhere. [editline]14th January 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Lucien1337;46931665] Just as an end note, I have to stress that whatever you're going for, [B]quad-core [/B]is the way to go if you're just gaming. Most video games won't be making use of those extra two cores, so take it as a money saving incentive.[/QUOTE] The one he has is already a [B]quad-core [/B]....
[QUOTE=Troll;46931705]You must be running a ridiculous amount of bloatware. I have Windows 7 Pro, currently using 2.15GB with some Chrome tabs open, steam (which uses, what 50MB?). Do you have any evidence that having more than 8GB of RAM is beneficial? AM3+ is an option. Its definitely a cost-efficient option, and keeps up with its intel counterparts for a large amount of games. Saying they are far too weak for next-gen games is baseless. Back up your claims, because your personal experience doesn't mean anything [editline]14th January 2015[/editline] Dude, take your useless, baseless opinion elsewhere.[/QUOTE] Enough of this, stop arguing and post some recommendations. Just because I posted something doesn't mean it's written in stone. What I'm trying to do is get him an upgrade that will keep him upgrade free for at least 6 or 7 years, if you want him to have one that'll save him money but last a few years less that's your choice, I'm just showing him the options I've laid out for myself. And yes, I'm aware his current cpu is a quad core, I was talking about a [B]new[/B] one he could possibly get.
*People post rational arguments with linked benchmarks* [QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;46931702]And here come the AMD white knights.[/QUOTE] Mate this isn't Tumblr. If OP's motherboard can support an 8350 then go for it. I wouldn't ever recommend it for a brand new computer but it's a perfectly acceptable and cheap upgrade for the OP.
[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;46931785]Basically this. There is nothing wrong with getting a better quad core then an 8 core. More cores does not mean more performance.[/QUOTE] except the fact that OP has a motherboard suitable for an 8350, and buying a new mobo + cpu might be a worse option for him?
[QUOTE=Troll;46931812]except the fact that OP has a motherboard suitable for an 8350, and buying a new mobo + cpu might be a worse option for him?[/QUOTE] So recommend something already. I have based on what I'm planning to do - which is essentially a completely future-proofed overhaul of my current setup - now you give one. Instead of contesting the posts of 2 people in some sort of internet-correcting fury post what [I]you[/I] think he should use. Sorry spagetto, this is a lot of shit you're gonna have to sift through. eh might wanna start a new thread
Even if he gets the 8350, he will still pay about as much as he would for the Intel system, seeing as he'll also need a new power supply in that case He'll save maybe 50 euros at most by going with the 8350, at the cost of a system that runs warmer, and performs worse
[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;46931846] I don't like upgrading things that are years old. Which is where yes Luciens posts are actually good opinions. My AMD white knight posts was stupid and I'll apologize for that but calling my opinion baseless and useless is just as bad. [/QUOTE] Calling your opinion baseless and useless is as bad as saying "ooo AMD white knight XDXD"? You said "8350 can't run ARMA3" I posted a benchmark showing that the 8350 is keeping up with a CPU 2.5x more expensive. SO yes, your opinion is baseless. More cores is useful for some people. Just because you don't make use of it doesn't mean they are terrible. [QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;46931846] How is buying a i5 4660 + new motherboard worse then upgrading to a FX 8350? [/QUOTE] Because you have to spend $$$ for a motherboard? [QUOTE=Lucien1337;46931862]So recommend something already. I have based on what I'm planning to do - which is essentially a completely future-proofed overhaul of my current setup - now you give one. Instead of contesting the posts of 2 people in some sort of internet-correcting fury post what [I]you[/I] think he should use. [/QUOTE] I did? He is asking if his CPU would keep up with a new GPU, and I showed him a good CPU path to take.
Yea this got a lil awkward :v: But basically my cpu is bad, yes? Should i just get a new pc or try and upgrade this pc? GPU upgrading i could handle, but im completely inexperienced with building/replacing other pc parts, even if i have watched videos lol. But bottom line is, i cant/its not a good idea to just buy a new gpu cos my cpu is too shite/would ''bottleneck'' it, yes? And a new psu is useless cos the one i have is fine? In that case i guess its time for a helluva upgrade or new pc. dont buy budget PCs, i suppose :v: (unless u know if the parts are good)
[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;46931932]Point 1 What map did they use? I know some maps that would literaly destroy a FX8350 and that a Intel such as mine would thrive and do ok Point 2 What's wrong with upgrading to the new stuff?[/QUOTE] Try looking at the link I posted. Whats wrong with upgrading? Not everybody wants to spend money. And if they do, don't want to waste it.
My 8350 runs solid 300 fps, pretty sure it would go beyond that if not engine limitations. P.S - using cl_showfps 1
[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;46931949]But it isn't a waste.[/QUOTE] Depends on the person. Does he want to spend $300 on a new mobo+cpu which might be better on some games or just spend $130 on a cpu?
[QUOTE=Troll;46931962]Depends on the person. Does he want to spend $300 on a new mobo+cpu which might be better on some games or just spend $130 on a cpu?[/QUOTE] Except he'll, as I said, only save ~50 Euros* going with the 8350, which will consume lots of power and thus run very warm. This leads to him having to buy a new power supply for ~60 Euros, I.E, the cost of a new Intel motherboard. And in applications that don't fully utilize all eight cores (like 95% of all games) chances are he'll notice little to no difference at all compared to his current system. And in applications that use VERY few threads, he'll actually get even worse performance than his current one. * = The 8350 costs 170 Euros, the i5 4440 costs 220
[QUOTE=Rixxz2;46931998]Except he'll, as I said, only save ~50 Euros* going with the 8350, which will consume lots of power and thus run very warm. This leads to him having to buy a new power supply for ~60 Euros, I.E, the cost of a new Intel motherboard. And in applications that don't fully utilize all eight cores (like 95% of all games) chances are he'll notice little to no difference at all compared to his current system. And in applications that use VERY few threads, he'll actually get even worse performance. * = The 8350 costs 170 Euros, the i5 4440 costs 220[/QUOTE] How would be get even worse performance than the x4 965 with a 8350 in games with less threads (or any game for that matter)? Any proof to back that up?
[QUOTE=Troll;46932026]How would be get even worse performance than the x4 965 with a 8350 in games with less threads (or any game for that matter)? Any proof to back that up?[/QUOTE] Because the cores within the 8350 are very weak individually, the 965 obliterates it when it comes to single threading
[QUOTE=Rixxz2;46932039]Because the cores within the 8350 are very weak individually, the 965 obliterates it when it comes to single threading[/QUOTE] Firstly, the x4 965 is 125W part. The 8350 is also a 125W part. So I don't know why you keep repeating that getting a 8350 will make his system run hotter etc. Of course the wattage is not an amazing indicator of temperatures, but the 8350 runs relatively cool with a cheap 212 evo, even overclocked. Secondly, the 8350 has single thread performance that is better (or on-par with) than the x4 965 according to: [url]https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html[/url] [url]http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/770/AMD_FX-Series_FX-8350_vs_AMD_Phenom_II_X4_965_(125W__BE).html[/url]
Hm, I must apologize. The 8350 does seem to outperform the 965 in every thinkable scenario, but the 8350 still consumes more power (~150W during full load) than the 965 (~120W during full load)
[QUOTE=Rixxz2;46932214]Hm, I must apologize. The 8350 does seem to outperform the 965 in every thinkable scenario, but the 8350 still consumes more power (~150W during full load) than the 965 (~120W during full load)[/QUOTE] Yea AMD use much more power than intel, and thus are hotter, but really, with a decent cooler, it is definitely something you can overcome
[QUOTE=Troll;46932232]Yea AMD use much more power than intel, and thus are hotter, but really, with a decent cooler, it is definitely something you can overcome[/QUOTE] It's not really the warmth itself I worry about, that was more of a sidenote, but it's wasted energy, I wouldn't be comfortable using it with a 450W supply
While the FX is more powerful in multithreaded situations obviously, it just isn't worth the money for the upgrade. Clock for clock, the Phenom II is still nearly on par for most gaming, and both have subpar IPC. If I were you OP, I'd pick up a 970 and a cooler for your Phenom II to overclock it, if you cannot get a new board/proc. Power levels might be a bit tight with a decent OC though, so I'll take a look at some power scaling and get back here.
Anyway, I still recommend him to spend 50 euros extra on the Intel system
[QUOTE=Trekintosh;46931395]The PSU can support a GTX 970 but the CPU is the dog's bollocks.[/QUOTE] This post confused me.. in the UK to say "..is the dogs bollocks" is to say its really fucking good [url]http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Dog%27s+Bollocks[/url]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.