Budget gamer, help needed

[Toro 45]

Yeah, I guess you're right. Get with the times Toro 45, and ditch XP for good. You seriously won't regret it!

Yeah, I've been dragging my heals on Win7 but just found this "Windows 7 Family Pack Home Premium Upgrade (3-User) for $80." I can do all three of our computers now!

 

[Toro 45]

The i3 2120 is a great jump from an E7xxx, not to mention it has HT so it can act like a lower end quad for most applications and games. I strongly suggest you do so and instead put the money into a nice video card.

Also Anonymous does have a point, however GW2 is purely DX9 so if that's the primary game this system is built around, holding on the 4850 can work out just fine if you turn down a few of the settings. Here's a thought, get a really nice base system and maybe an SSD and hold onto the 4850 since it's still decently strong. Then later on down the road when a bit more money is available/your son can't stand the 4850's performance you upgrade it to a newer card. Might be able to sell the old components for a decent amount too.

I had no idea that card had any life left in it, will the faster cpu/mobo/ram combo squeeze more power out of it or is the Core 2 duo E7200 already maxing it out, like I mentioned he only games at probably 1204 or 1280?

Micro Center has the 2500k for $159.99, if you live by a Micro Center...

http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0354589

Damn, I wish I did.

 

[lakedude]

I'm starting to get confused as to what you are trying to do...

Are there 2 systems or are we just talking about one current system and a bunch of possible upgrades?

If we are talking upgrades is there a reason not to reuse the old power supply? Newer hardware uses less power due to more efficient designs and smaller manufacturing process. For example my 3770/7850 system draws about 165 watts total in game. Running Linpack and Furmark (designed to stress the CPU and GPU) the system draws something like 255 watts according to my Kill-A-Watt... Darn near any half decent power supply will run that system...

 

[mfenn]

I had no idea that card had any life left in it, will the faster cpu/mobo/ram combo squeeze more power out of it or is the Core 2 duo E7200 already maxing it out, like I mentioned he only games at probably 1204 or 1280?

1280x1024 is a pretty low resolution these days. However, I would think that you'd be massive GPU limited in all but the simplest of games if you paired the 4850 with an i3.

 

[krnmastersgt]

If the main game this system is for is GW2 I think the 4850 will hold up for a little while. It's not the best use of the money right now but for the overall life of the system I think a quad + sticking with the 4850 and maybe throw in an SSD will hold up decently for GW2 at 1280x1024, when you either upgrade the monitor or save up enough money for another upgrade then you change out the video card.

The E7300 is definitely going to hold back the 4850 for GW2, I get some pretty high usage out of my 3570K during the beta so I would imagine the E7300 is struggling a bit with it.

Basically I present 2 options:
1. Keep the 4850, upgrade the rest of the system to true quad (i5) and an SSD which will help with load times for the maps (some can get pretty long on my mechanical drives).
2. Ditch the 4850, upgrade the CPU to an i3 2100 or so along with a 6870. This will return the best performance for right now.

Option 1 provides you with a stronger system for overall usage and if/when you upgrade the video card it will cruise through GW2. Option 2 gives you the best performance for the current budget with no plans of upgrading. I'm not sure how you'll be handling the system upgrades so either option works imo, but choose whichever better suits your upgrade cycle for the systems.

 

[lakedude]

Re: W7 upgrades...

It is generally a good idea to run hardware on the generation of software that was available when the hardware was made. Most every "improvement" in software has come with a huge efficiency penalty. Basically you need the new hardware to run the new software.

Worst case I ever saw was at a Senior Center around Kansas City. The machines were intended to have Windows 95 or 98 on them. Someone "upgraded" them to XP but the machines did not meet the min sys req for XP so they were SLOW! I mean slow now!!

Windows 98 would run on 16MB of ram but XP had a suggested minimum of 64MB. The systems must have had under 64MB RAM because they were in VRAM (hard disk) constantly. They took something like 30 minutes to boot! That hard drives sounded like they were going to explode.

Minimum system ram for 64bit W7 is 2GB!

Anyhow you shouldn't just try and put W7 on systems designed for XP unless those systems were really, really strong in their day. Simply put W7 will bog down an old computer.

 

[Durvelle27]

Intel Core i3-2120
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115077

BIOSTAR B75MU3+ B75 1155
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813138357

G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3 1600MHz
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820231314

XFX HD 6870
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814150561

CORSAIR Builder Series CX500 V2 500w
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16817139027

Windows 7 Home Premium SP1 64-bit - OEM
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16832116986

Total: $563 --- $513 AR

 

[lakedude]

Intel Core i3-2100
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819115078

BIOSTAR B75MU3+ B75 1155
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813138357

G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3 1600MHz
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820231314

XFX HD 6870
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814150561

CORSAIR Builder Series CX500 V2 500w
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16817139027

Windows 7 Home Premium SP1 64-bit - OEM
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16832116986

Total: $573 --- $523 AR

That looks pretty solid, much better than originally planned.

Just about perfect except that the 2120 is faster (3.3GHz vs 3.1) and cheaper ($109.99 vs $119.99) right now:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819115077

 

[Durvelle27]

That looks pretty solid, much better than originally planned.

Just about perfect except that the 2120 is faster (3.3GHz vs 3.1) and cheaper ($109.99 vs $119.99) right now:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819115077

great didn't see that there ya go a great build ?

 

[krnmastersgt]

Anyhow you shouldn't just try and put W7 on systems designed for XP unless those systems were really, really strong in their day. Simply put W7 will bog down an old computer.

It's not so much that the system itself doesn't work well with XP, just that XP introduced a lot more background processes and without enough RAM for it to cache all this data it had to constantly rely on paging files. That shouldn't be a problem in this situation.

Intel Core i3-2120
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819115077

BIOSTAR B75MU3+ B75 1155
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813138357

G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3 1600MHz
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820231314

XFX HD 6870
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814150561

CORSAIR Builder Series CX500 V2 500w
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16817139027

Windows 7 Home Premium SP1 64-bit - OEM
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16832116986

Total: $563 --- $513 AR

The above build is decent however a few changes:
1. Don't require the OS if you're able to obtain the family Upgrade pack.
2. Change out the RAM to this Crucial Ballistix 8GB Set for $35
3. Consider what features you want/need from the motherboard, the B85 chipset is great for those that want USB 3.0 and SATA 3 but don't need overclocking. However if you don't even need those features there are some cheaper H61 options, personally I'd go with the B75 and maybe change down to the cheapest ASRock model which is $10 less, only real difference being that it only has slots for 2 stick of RAM while the Biostar has 4.
4. I'd also consider the option of paying $15 more AR for this XFX Double D 6870 as while the stock clocks are the same, you'll be able to push the overclocks a bit more without having to worry as much about noise or temps.

 

[lakedude]

It's not so much that the system itself doesn't work well with XP, just that XP introduced a lot more background processes and without enough RAM for it to cache all this data it had to constantly rely on paging files. That shouldn't be a problem in this situation.

Are we even sure what "this situation" is? The OP is looking at a W7 3 pack is he not? Do we know anything about the 3 systems? I think we are working on one of the 3 systems and all we know is that it currently has a 4850, a Core2 and a 19" monitor.

I think it is entirely likely the W7 will cause these old systems to be slower rather than faster. I'm nearly certain that XP is faster than W7 when compared head to head. I know for a fact this is true with some of the BOINC projects I run.

 

[pandemonium]

Stay away from single fans for the 6870, particularly the XFX's model that was provided. That chipset really needs a dual-fan configuration for maintaining decent temperatures and low audibility.

That XFX card I actually tried and it was unbearably loud and ran very hot. Feel free to peruse the reviews on Newegg for it, a lot of them mention how loud it is. :/

Spending $20 more for a better HSF assembly that'll allow the card to last longer will be much more rewarding than the cheaper initial investment.

 

[krnmastersgt]

Are we even sure what "this situation" is? The OP is looking at a W7 3 pack is he not? Do we know anything about the 3 systems? I think we are working on one of the 3 systems and all we know is that it currently has a 4850, a Core2 and a 19" monitor.

I think it is entirely likely the W7 will cause these old systems to be slower rather than faster. I'm nearly certain that XP is faster than W7 when compared head to head. I know for a fact this is true with some of the BOINC projects I run.

And what do you mean by faster? Vista and 7 did a lot of pre-caching which is why Vista was known to be so memory hungry as it would observe what your most commonly accessed processes were and pre-cache the data so that they might load faster. In that regard it could be "faster" than XP.

But for general system usage XP is typically better for lower end systems in that it has a lot less to it in terms of features, security, and all sorts of other processes. This just means those systems with less RAM will typically load into the OS faster and be able to run higher memory consuming tasks more readily as it won't be loading processes to the paging file.

Personally I only have 1 system running off XP currently, I vastly prefer the networking options readily available for home networks that you gain in Vista/7. So yes some of the systems in the OP's house may operate a bit more slowly, but typically this can be solved with just a bit more RAM although DDR2 is rather expensive for the capacity it gives.

And as you said we don't know the OP's situation regarding the other 2 systems. One thing you should try to remember is that the load times are painfully bad powering the system on from a complete shut down when memory is severely lacking. However once inside many of the processes that the system constantly runs can be stored in the paging file, so if the system's are never shut off it would present slower usage for high memory programs but the rest wouldn't notice it all that much either.

 

[Toro 45]

No worries on my other systems, my sons comp is the slowest of the bunch

 

[lakedude]

No worries on my other systems, my sons comp is the slowest of the bunch

Do all three meet W7 minimum requirements?

If you want to run Windows 7 on your PC, here's what it takes:

1 gigahertz (GHz) or faster 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor

1 gigabyte (GB) RAM (32-bit) or 2 GB RAM (64-bit)

16 GB available hard disk space (32-bit) or 20 GB (64-bit)

DirectX 9 graphics device with WDDM 1.0 or higher driver

http://windows.microsoft.com/systemrequirements/

 

[lakedude]

I wonder what the terms and conditions are on the W7 upgrade. For example I wonder if you need a "full" XP licence rather than an OEM...and I wonder if you are going to have registration issues if you change out so much of a system...

Oh and I wonder if you can upgrade 32bit XP to 64bit W7...

 

[krnmastersgt]

I wonder what the terms and conditions are on the W7 upgrade. For example I wonder if you need a "full" XP licence rather than an OEM...and I wonder if you are going to have registration issues if you change out so much of a system...

Oh and I wonder if you can upgrade 32bit XP to 64bit W7...

As for W7 "reqs" pretty much anything can pass that, especially if the system in question is the weakest of the lot.

The 32 Bit to 64 Bit actually does raise an issue that I had forgotten for upgrades, you are typically locked into whichever the original install was, 32 or 64. I'm not sure if that's set in stone for all upgrades but I believe for the most part if you buy an upgrade license and you're upgrading from a 32 bit, you're upgrading to a 32 bit again.

 

[WiseUp216]

The i5-2300 can be had fairly cheaply. Around $130-140, I think. I haven't looked in a little bit.

I have the Asrock Z77 Extreme4 that you specified and it will run the 2300 @ 3.5 Ghz without even changing the BCLK.

Personally, I would take that over a dual core i3 at any price.

 

[mfenn]

The 32 Bit to 64 Bit actually does raise an issue that I had forgotten for upgrades, you are typically locked into whichever the original install was, 32 or 64. I'm not sure if that's set in stone for all upgrades but I believe for the most part if you buy an upgrade license and you're upgrading from a 32 bit, you're upgrading to a 32 bit again.

The license doesn't actually specify which bitness you are entitled to use. It's interchangeable between 32-bit and 64-bit. In-place upgrades are the only place where you have to keep the same bitness. It's not (to my knowledge) possible to do an in-place upgrade from XP to 7 anyway, the best you can do is not format the C: and have Windows XP moved into Windows.old. Here's Microsoft's official document on the matter.

 

[mfenn]

Also, I cannot believe that we're even having the "will Windows 7 run OK" discussion. The OP is planning to upgrade the CPU, mobo, and memory on the system. Windows 7 will be fine.

Hell, I can't believe that people are even doubting that a Core 2 will run Windows 7 well. It most definitely will. Remember that Windows 7 came out in 2009. Not everybody was rocking a Nehalem so soon after release and you sure as hell didn't hear an uproar over Windows 7 performance when it came out. To the contrary, everybody was quite pleased.

 

[lakedude]

Also, I cannot believe that we're even having the "will Windows 7 run OK" discussion. The OP is planning to upgrade the CPU, mobo, and memory on the system. Windows 7 will be fine.

When the subject came up we knew nothing about the systems in question. It was only after the subject came up that we gained knowledge about the OP's systems.

 

[mfenn]

When the subject came up we knew nothing about the systems in question. It was only after the subject came up that we gained knowledge about the OP's systems.

Check out post #15.

 

[lakedude]

Check out post #15.

Yes I did.

Now you check out post #26 where he mentions a 3 pack...

It was entirely possible that Toro 45 had a system that would meet XP requirements yet fall short of W7 min sys req.

XP:

Pentium 233-megahertz (MHz) processor or faster (300 MHz is recommended)
At least 64 megabytes (MB) of RAM (128 MB is recommended)
At least 1.5 gigabytes (GB) of available space on the hard disk
Keyboard and a Microsoft Mouse or some other compatible pointing device
Video adapter and monitor with Super VGA (800 x 600)or higher resolution

W7:

1 gigahertz (GHz) or faster 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor
1 gigabyte (GB) RAM (32-bit) or 2 GB RAM (64-bit)
16 GB available hard disk space (32-bit) or 20 GB (64-bit)
DirectX 9 graphics device with WDDM 1.0 or higher driver

 

[lakedude]

In fact we still no very little about any of the 3 systems as currently configured. We only know what some of the possible new hardware might be, and yes certainly the new hardware will run W7 just fine.

Toro, if it is not too much trouble please post your systems specs, or at least verify that they all meet W7 requirement...

 

[pandemonium]

What are you guys so worried about? Where did all of this fear of running 7 come from? Is this 2002 and someone brought 7 back from the future?