Next Upgrade

[terminal2]

What upgrade should I begin saving for next?  I just completed my planned build and I want to do piecemeal upgrades until I have another computer and this one can run ANY game in 1080 wide open with 60FPS.  Current rig:

 

ECS Essentials MicroATX MB

i3-4160 Dual Core @ 3.6GHz

8GB DDR3 1600MHz

1 TB 7200 HDD

Gigabyte R9 270

EVGA 1050GS PSU

 

Upgrades Im considering:

 

New ATX case and motherboard- Looking to move to a full size case and motherboard to facilitate cable management and expandability.  Need a new MB for RAID, overclocking features and eventually more SATA ports (I want to run 2 SSDs in RAID 0 and 4 HDDs in RAID 10)

 

i5 Devils Canyon or AMD 8-core FX processor- Looking for more cores for better handling of multi-threaded tasks.  Also looking to get my feet wet with CPU overclocking

 

250-500GB SSD- For faster OS boot and game loading

 

Aftermarket Cooling solution

 

 

So what should I do next?

[DarkBlade2117]

Do the new case and mobo first, then save up for a Xeon 1241v3 which will work like a i5 in gaming ( a locked one ) and an i7 in multi threaded application. Then get a SSD then a new GPU.

[Killervolt]

I would get the ssd first, then the CPU, then the new case and motherboard. RAID setups last.

[dizmo]

Hmm. I'd say case. Since upgrading the motherboard will result in a new case anyway.

 

A few questions though.

 

Why do you want more cores? Do you just plan on gaming on this system? If so, just get an I5. The FX is a pretty shite CPU now, tbh and there's no point in investing in a dead platform.

 

Why do you want RAID0? The speed increases are next to unnoticeable in day to day use, and it just creates many more points of possible failure.

It's similar performance, and cheaper, to simply get the next size up SSD.

 

Do the new case and mobo first, then save up for a Xeon 1241v3 which will work like a i5 in gaming ( a locked one ) and an i7 in multi threaded application. Then get a SSD then a new GPU.

The Xeon won't be as good at games as an overclocked I5 if he's not editing.

[terminal2]

Hmm. I'd say case. Since upgrading the motherboard will result in a new case anyway.

 

A few questions though.

 

Why do you want more cores? Do you just plan on gaming on this system? If so, just get an I5. The FX is a pretty shite CPU now, tbh and there's no point in investing in a dead platform.

 

Why do you want RAID0? The speed increases are next to unnoticeable in day to day use, and it just creates many more points of possible failure.

It's similar performance, and cheaper, to simply get the next size up SSD.

 

The Xeon won't be as good at games as an overclocked I5 if he's not editing.

On the subject of the CPU, I want quad core or greater processor for the simple ability to process tons of data fast.  The other day I noticed the first big difference from the quad-core third gen i7 I had in my laptop to the i3 I have now when I tried to decompress 5 gigs of data and it took nearly 10 minutes.  The dual-core to quad-core difference is less noticeable in games, but there is a huge difference in data heavy tasks like uncompressing files.  Second, and most importantly, my current CPU will bottleneck a top end graphics card right now.  After this round of upgrades, I'll upgrade the graphics card to a high end 980 ti or R9 380, the overall goal being to run ANY title at 1080p at 60 FPS with ultra settings.  My current R9 will go into the separate computer Im creating from spare parts.  

 

I was hoping to find i5-like performance on the FX at a sub 150 price point since you're not paying for the integrated graphics chip that comes with most CPUs now. 

 

 

On RAID, its simply to max read/write times for games.  I eventually plan on adding 2 more SSDs and running 4 in RAID 10.  I'll only be running the OS and Steam on them.  Things I can reinstall in a heartbeat with a download. 

 

Appreciate the input guys!

[dizmo]

 

 

I was hoping to find i5-like performance on the FX at a sub 150 price point since you're not paying for the integrated graphics chip that comes with most CPUs now. 

 

 

On RAID, its simply to max read/write times for games.  I eventually plan on adding 2 more SSDs and running 4 in RAID 10.  I'll only be running the OS and Steam on them.  Things I can reinstall in a heartbeat with a download. 

 

Appreciate the input guys!

You won't find that on the FX chips, unfortunately. Intel chips have them beat hands down in most every application. Even the base i5's do pretty well against them.

See, that's the thing. You won't see any real increase in performance in day to day use, and you'll just create more points of failure. You will not see an improvement in games. At all.

More often than not just getting the next step up SSD is a better choice.

[terminal2]

You won't find that on the FX chips, unfortunately. Intel chips have them beat hands down in most every application. Even the base i5's do pretty well against them.

See, that's the thing. You won't see any real increase in performance in day to day use, and you'll just create more points of failure. You will not see an improvement in games. At all.

More often than not just getting the next step up SSD is a better choice.

Thanks for the help.  The last time I had a desktop, it was during the time of the radeon X700 pro (The last Desktop GPU I had) and the intel/AMD dual-core wars.  So I'm out of the loop on the industry right now.  

[dizmo]

Thanks for the help.  The last time I had a desktop, it was during the time of the radeon X700 pro (The last Desktop GPU I had) and the intel/AMD dual-core wars.  So I'm out of the loop on the industry right now.  

Haha, yeah. As cool as RAID0 sounds (I've thought about it more than a few times) it just doesn't make sense from a usability standard.

Think of it like this.

You live in a crowded city. You own 2 Ford Pinto's. One has a 5.0L V8 shoehorned into it (RAID0), the other is stock (non RAID).

They both work, and theoretically the V8 is faster. But in real world use...

You get bragging rights, but no one see's it at a glance, and the speed is realistically the same.

 

I can't wait to build up a new rig as well, how do you find the one you have now runs?

It's actually quite close to my plan.

[terminal2]

Haha, yeah. As cool as RAID0 sounds (I've thought about it more than a few times) it just doesn't make sense from a usability standard.

Think of it like this.

You live in a crowded city. You own 2 Ford Pinto's. One has a 5.0L V8 shoehorned into it (RAID0), the other is stock (non RAID).

They both work, and theoretically the V8 is faster. But in real world use...

You get bragging rights, but no one see's it at a glance, and the speed is realistically the same.

 

I can't wait to build up a new rig as well, how do you find the one you have now runs?

It's actually quite close to my plan.

Its a nice balance, though I feel the i3 is somewhat outclassed by the 270.  Games run rock solid 30-60 FPS, except during heavy loading scenes where the CPU causes excess wait time.  Can't wait to get a quad core.  

 

The R9 270 is a monster for its price range.  I got mine for less than 120 refurbished from newegg.  You can find them used on ebay for 99 or less.  I was running rock solid 65-67 degrees with all settings maxed on the valley benchmark and MSI afterburner.  1050 Clock, 1500 MHz Memory, 120% Power Availability.  The card looks like an RMA.  Shows no signs of use.  Love gigabyte's use of two PCI 6-pin connectors, like its big brother the 270X.  Makes me feel better about giving it more power to work with.  (My 1050 watt power supply barely yawns under full load with this thing.)

 

Crysis 2, Farcry 2, Fallout New Vegas, Skyrim 60 FPS all day, except during forementioned loading scenes.  My TV only goes to 1366X760 though  I have the money saved for a new one, but Im waiting on black friday.  

 

If the R9 270 had 3GB of RAM VRAM it would be the perfect sweet spot card today.  

[dizmo]

Its a nice balance, though I feel the i3 is somewhat outclassed by the 270.  Games run rock solid 30-60 FPS, except during heavy loading scenes where the CPU causes excess wait time.  Can't wait to get a quad core.  

 

The R9 270 is a monster for its price range.  I got mine for less than 120 refurbished from newegg.  You can find them used on ebay for 99 or less.  I was running rock solid 65-67 degrees with all settings maxed on the valley benchmark and MSI afterburner.  1050 Clock, 1500 MHz Memory, 120% Power Availability.  The card looks like an RMA.  Shows no signs of use.  Love gigabyte's use of two PCI 6-pin connectors, like its big brother the 270X.  Makes me feel better about giving it more power to work with.  (My 1050 watt power supply barely yawns under full load with this thing.)

 

Crysis 2, Farcry 2, Fallout New Vegas, Skyrim 60 FPS all day, except during forementioned loading scenes.  My TV only goes to 1366X760 though  I have the money saved for a new one, but Im waiting on black friday.  

 

If the R9 270 had 3GB of RAM VRAM it would be the perfect sweet spot card today.  

Good to know. The VRAM issue is actually why I'm going for a 280(x) instead, I figure that should hold out for a little longer than a 2GB card will.

270x's go for around $80 on the used market here if you look hard enough. Pretty stellar deals.

 

Ahh, yes the games are a lot less demanding at that resolution. My dad's TV is 720p and he's still rocking a 560Ti and gets excellent frame rates.

 

My Black Friday is likely going to be spent clothes shopping with the lady unfortunately.

But I'm holding out to see what Pascal is like, so it's not a huge loss (Though I really want new toys!)

[terminal2]

Good to know. The VRAM issue is actually why I'm going for a 280(x) instead, I figure that should hold out for a little longer than a 2GB card will.

270x's go for around $80 on the used market here if you look hard enough. Pretty stellar deals.

 

Ahh, yes the games are a lot less demanding at that resolution. My dad's TV is 720p and he's still rocking a 560Ti and gets excellent frame rates.

 

My Black Friday is likely going to be spent clothes shopping with the lady unfortunately.

But I'm holding out to see what Pascal is like, so it's not a huge loss (Though I really want new toys!)

Took the limits off the card overclock and pushed it all the way to 1125 Core and 1600 MHz RAM before the driver started crashing in valley.  Temps never topped 68 degrees though.