Looking to Beef up my build (Soon)

[satindemon4u]

Hello all. In the next couple of months I would like to give my desktop a little bit of a makeover that I feel it so badly needs. Right now, it does what I want it to do and it makes me happy. However like so many of us, you can never have too much of a good thing. Except for bacon. Onward!

Currently the setup looks like this....

A cheaper Rosewill case (forget the model)
AMD FX-8120
8GB RAM (2x 4GB)
1TB HDD
120GB OCZ Vector 150
ASUS M5A87 Mobo
Nvidia Geforce GTX 680


I know I wanna upgrade the motherboard as well as the processor but that's where I am stuck in the first place. Should I go Intel at this point since I am upgrading or stick with AMD? I have never run Intel in my own machine but have always had the itch to do so. If I do this, what should I go for? I mostly game on my PC but nothing super intense. The heaviest I get is probably something like Call of Duty or Battlefield.

What's everyones thoughts? I know that Intel is (or has) released the next level CPU (Skylake) But I don't think that will be in the budget lol. Trying to keep my little upgrade around a few hundred dollars.

 

[Toothless]

Even if you can't afford Skylake, get a 2nd hand 4690k and board and you shall see the power of the blue team.

 

[xvi]

Could you elaborate on what issues you're seeing (assuming there's something noticeable)? If there's nothing in particular, I fully understand needing to satisfy "the itch". Just curious to know if there was a particular reason.

It's not apples to apples, but I moved from a FX 8350 with a GTX 680 to a i7-3930k with a HD 7870 somewhat unintentionally. The Intel PC seems a little happier running WoW and seems about the same for other games. I plan on going back to the FX 8350 eventually. I brought it down for water cooling maintenance and have been too lazy to put everything back together. If I take much longer, I'll probably swap the GTX 680 to the Intel box.

Overall, my transition to Intel was pleasant, albeit costly from a price/performance standpoint like you mentioned. Toothless makes a fair point, going second hand wouldn't be a bad option at all. Even then, I don't think it'd be a major improvement versus, say, a new GPU. The cost wouldn't be too bad at all if you sold your current proc/mobo though.

If you're looking to crank up the eyecandy in games, I'd say pop in a newer GPU (GTX 970, if you like nVidia? Fury Nano once it comes out?). That AMD FX should hold up decently well.
If it's just an itch, that AMD FX and GTX 680 should still hold their own fairly well. Perhaps a newer/larger SSD or more memory?

Edit: Also, did you have a budget in mind?

 

[Toothless]

@xvi made some very good points, and I thank thee for that.

I ran a 6300/GTX660 combo for a good while until that board died until a 4790k came in and with that 660, I got pretty big FPS improvements in every single game I played. (Biggest in BF3)

If you could find even a 3570k and board for cheap, you can add a SSD and that'll add to the snappiness of the rig. SSDs do make a very noticeable difference as it did with my laptop. (500GB HDD to a 120GB SSD more than halved boot times and loading times for everything)

If you want more gaming power, then try overclocking that CPU and go for a 970/390.

 

[tabascosauz]

@xvi You had a 8350. This guy has a 8120. This thing is seriously slow at just about EVERYTHING. This thing gives me the shivers even when I think about it. 3.1GHz? And a core that's devoid of all of Piledriver's painstaking branch prediction improvements? Yuck.

The CPU that brought AMD to its knees. And honestly, that GTX 680 is still good. No need to replace, but this 800-series NB board needs to go and so does that Bulldozer, honestly. Maybe it'd do well in a file server.

I don't know about Skylake being worth the money, but there are plenty of options out there now that Haswell, Broadwell and Skylake are all on the table. Or you could, you know, wait for Zen...but that's a good ways off.

 

[Toothless]

@xvi You had a 8350. This guy has a 8120. This thing is seriously slow at just about EVERYTHING.

The CPU that brought AMD to its knees.

Wat.

I built two rigs with 8320s and they both are perfectly strong enough for gaming, daily use, and whatever else they can be used for. There isn't too big of a difference between the 8320 and 8120. It's the i7 920 to AMD.

 

[xvi]

I ran a 6300/GTX660 combo for a good while until that board died until a 4790k came in and with that 660, I got pretty big FPS improvements in every single game I played.

Honestly, I'd trust your results more than my own. The only game I played consistently between the two was WoW and I didn't pay attention to video settings or anything. I noticed some snappiness moving around the OS. These days especially (with work how it's been recently), it's mostly just sat at home being an electrically inefficient nightlight.
Edit: I will say that runs Project Cars fantastically for a HD 7870, although that may have something to do with it running on Windows 10.

@xvi You had a 8350. This guy has a 8120. This thing is seriously slow at just about EVERYTHING.

Hmm. Good point. Shouldn't be too bad though.

 

[ThE_MaD_ShOt]

I run a 8350 in my main rig with a 290x and it does anything I ask and then some. Also I own a 3930k based rig that I have dedicated to only crunching duties because I doubt I would see enough of a boost to warrant the trouble. Your board will run a 8350. I vote getting one of those and maybe a better gpu and you will be fine. And basically no down time on your rig and no os reload.

 

[tabascosauz]

Hmm. Good point. Shouldn't be too bad though.

Now that you mention it, I remember that MS rolled out some updates for Win 7 afterwards that was supposed to improve Bulldozer task scheduling. But @Toothless come on. You haven't forgotten about those dark days, have you? These days I'd recommend a FX-8320 any day as a budget choice, but Bulldozer was very, very different. Keep in mind that AMD worked very hard on beefing up individual cores and improving parallelism (is that the right term here?) within modules with subsequent Piledriver, Steamroller and Excavator, because BULLdozer was just that bad. A Pentium 4 pipeline, snail-slow cache and the branch prediction was more about missing and paying a stupidly severe penalty for it rather than actually getting it right - understandably, it was the first thing that AMD mentioned as an improvement with Piledriver.

8150 was the CPU that was beaten by P2 X4 and X6 in various games after launch, and that was the flagship clocked 500MHz higher. So unfortunately, the 8120 was not AMD's i7-920, as much as I hope it had been. It was literally AMD's turn at Pentium 4; they had nice K10 on their hands (Northwood) and they threw it away for Bulldozer (Prescott). Prescott forever burns a black mark into Intel's CPU history and Bulldozer did too for AMD. Fortunately, Intel turned it around with Core Solo/Duo and hopefully AMD will do the same with Zen. History repeats itself!

 

[xvi]

Now that you mention it, I remember that MS rolled out some updates for Win 7 afterwards that was supposed to improve Bulldozer task scheduling. But @Toothless come on. You haven't forgotten about those dark days, have you?

Oh, right. I'd forgotten. Each module would get bandwidth starved if the cores were loaded together. The fix was to alternate the cores work was given to, eg, 0, 2, 4, 6, 1, 3, 5, 7.

 

[satindemon4u]

Well I must say, I have learned a great deal from you two so I thank you for that haha. So then, in the end I think either way I will update my board. Now then, should I go with a used beefy i7? Or upgrade my amd? By what I have read between a few of you I should hold of on Skylake.

 

[ThE_MaD_ShOt]

Well I must say, I have learned a great deal from you two so I thank you for that haha. So then, in the end I think either way I will update my board. Now then, should I go with a used beefy i7? Or upgrade my amd? By what I have read between a few of you I should hold of on Skylake.

Your board will run a Fx8350. So you could just upgrade your cpu. You can also upgrade your gpu if you wanted.

 

[satindemon4u]

Your board will run a Fx8350. So you could just upgrade your cpu. You can also upgrade your gpu if you wanted.

I thought about doing the gpu but wasn't sure if I really needed to. I could always buy like a 970 and sell what I have, but would I see a decent jump?

 

[Toothless]

Do da Intel way.

 

[satindemon4u]

It's super tempting haha.

 

[xvi]

If you just plan on gaming, an i5 would be a nice proc and you'll see little to no improvement over an i7.
If you're doing anything compute/compression/heavily-multi-threaded, i7.
If you want an i7 because 7 is bigger than 5, that's an acceptable answer too.

I got an i7 because of my interest in distributed computing, but also because YAY THREADS!

 

[GhostRyder]

Based on my experience, the jump from AMD to Intel is not that great unless you do gaming at extreme settings (Like 144hz, 1440p, etc and even then they are still more GPU dependant). Personally for me the jump from a 9590 to my 5930K was noticed in some titles while others were pretty close.

If your thinking of upgrading and want to go blue, try getting an inexpensive Z170 board and an i5 6600K which you could do (Get a DDR3 board) and spend around 400 if you include a cooler like a Hyper 212.

 

[Bill_Bright]

...a little bit of a makeover...
...it so badly needs.

...it does what I want it to do...
...it makes me happy.

...I wanna upgrade the motherboard as well as the processor...

...keep my little upgrade around a few hundred dollars.

Motherboard and processor? Little bit of a makeover? Little upgrade? Understand a new motherboard is, for all practical (and legal) purposes, a new computer!

You say this makeover is "badly needed", yet in the very next sentence you say it "does what you want", and most importantly "makes me happy"!

If it does what you want and makes you happy, it is not badly needed - if needed at all. I think you should just wait and save up your money until it doesn't make you happy any longer.

As you already noted, you most likely will need to buy a new compatible CPU with a new motherboard, but you might also need to buy new RAM that is compatible too - cutting into your budget.

It is also important to remember from a legal standpoint, a "new computer" requires a new operating system license too, if your current license is an OEM/System builder license - and the vast majority are OEM. So that will cut into your budget even further.

What's left? You can carry over your case, drives, and graphics card, but if you want to upgrade your graphics too, you may also need to upgrade your PSU to support all this new hardware. So your "little upgrade" is no little expense regardless - IF you are looking for an upgrade in performance too!

I recommend you re-evaluate your position and if your computer really is doing what you want now, then hold off with this "little upgrade" until it doesn't do what you want any longer. If you have money burning a hole in your pocket, maybe look at upgrading your graphics.

Is your SSD your boot drive? If not, consider making it so as that will improve over all performance.

And if your current OS license is an OEM/System Builders license and you really do want this new computer within the next year, you might want to buy a W8.1 license now (because they are on sale and currently cheaper than W10 ) and then you will be eligible for a free W10 upgrade for 1 year.

 

[satindemon4u]

I am aware that a new motherboard and cpu is essentially a new computer, I am also aware that it is much cheaper than an entire new computer. As far as RAM compatibility goes I have no worries there and plan to check everything to be sure it will swap over. I call this a little upgrade because that's what it is. A major upgrade to me is rebuilding the whole thing or at the minimum level, upgrading existing components with super high end hardware.

 

[Bill_Bright]

Well, you can call it "little" if you want but with your stated intent to "beef up" your computer, it can be assumed you will be getting a "better" motherboard and better CPU (and maybe RAM too). Even if NOT "super high end hardware", that is still creating a new and more powerful computer - so it is still a "major upgrade". In fact, you can upgrade your CPU, graphics, RAM, drives, PSU and those would be minor or "little" upgrades. But as soon as you upgrade the motherboard, then it becomes a major upgrade as the motherboard is the heart of any computer.

I have no worries there and plan to check everything to be sure it will swap over.

Great! You may already know but note the motherboard's webpage will have links to their CPU and RAM QVLs - qualified vendors lists - of compatible CPUs and RAM. You must buy a listed CPU but there are too many RAM makers and models for them to test and verify all, so you must buy RAM with the same specs as listed RAM. That said, hopefully the RAM QVL will show your new board will support your current RAM.

 

[tabascosauz]

I am aware that a new motherboard and cpu is essentially a new computer, I am also aware that it is much cheaper than an entire new computer. As far as RAM compatibility goes I have no worries there and plan to check everything to be sure it will swap over. I call this a little upgrade because that's what it is. A major upgrade to me is rebuilding the whole thing or at the minimum level, upgrading existing components with super high end hardware.

"Need" is complicated. Do you play just fine with the GTX 680, or do you want 4K60fps?

It looks to be a little hard to justify anything except Skylake for someone upgrading right now, because DDR3's days are officially at an end, so if you're looking to upgrade, you'll need to throw RAM in there as well. Buying Haswell/Broadwell is kind of pointless unless you want a Celeron G1840 and a $50 board that you'll put somewhere else in 6 months' time. Same for AM3+; you'd be buying a new board that is actually ancient. If you don't want to upgrade so many items, you could just get a 8350 for the time being, but be careful with overclocking because your motherboard is not heatsinked.

 

[Toothless]

"Need" is complicated. Do you play just fine with the GTX 680, or do you want 4K60fps?

It looks to be a little hard to justify anything except Skylake for someone upgrading right now, because DDR3's days are officially at an end, so if you're looking to upgrade, you'll need to throw RAM in there as well. Buying Haswell/Broadwell is kind of pointless unless you want a Celeron G1840 and a $50 board that you'll put somewhere else in 6 months' time. Same for AM3+; you'd be buying a new board that is actually ancient. If you don't want to upgrade so many items, you could just get a 8350 for the time being, but be careful with overclocking because your motherboard is not heatsinked.

What are you talking about?

DDR3 is still mainstream and will be for a good while more, considering there isn't that big of a difference.

Haswell isn't pointless when people on Sandy Bridge are still rocking those old chipsets AND are keeping up with GPU/SSD upgrades. Given the 5-10% performance boost per tick-tock release, it isn't as big as most say.

OP could go with a 3570k, overclock it a tad with a decent cooler, and get a 970. That will be a big enough bump to justify an upgrade while not killing their wallet.

 

[satindemon4u]

I'm almost thinking I could keep my card, and go with a 4790k, used.

 

[tabascosauz]

I'm almost thinking I could keep my card, and go with a 4790k, used.

Good idea. Keep the card for now unless it really can't sustain your gaming.

 

[Toothless]

I'm almost thinking I could keep my card, and go with a 4790k, used.

YAAAAS JOIN THE I7 MASTER RACE.