Video Card Upgrade for Starcraft II

[seanhland]

My current PC is a lil less than two years old. Im looking to upgrade my Video Card. I rarely play many games right now but I am quite excited for Starcraft II to come out so I am getting my box ready to play it. I will mainly be playing that and Left 4 Dead II. The pc specs are below, however its important to note a couple things. First this PC is acting as a HTPC. It is hooked into my receiver to play surround sound and the monitor is my 42" Philips HDTV. 2nd I have been mainly using it for playing music on Pandora, watching movies and tv shows, web browsing and occasional Left 4 Dead games. It has a fairly clean (under 30 days) install of Windows 7 pro 64bit on it. Specs are

AMD Phenom 9600 2.3 Quad Core
GIGABYTE GA-MA78G-DS3H AM2+/AM2 AMD 780G
CORSAIR XMS2 2GB PC800 (yes I know I need more/faster RAM) thats coming next
SAMSUNG Spinpoint 500GB SATA 3.0 HDD
Current Video Card: SAPPHIRE 100226L Radeon HD 3850
Powered by:OCZ StealthXStream OCZ600SXS 600W
Inside of a Lian Li Case

I am trying to get the most bang for the buck in a new video card. I've been lookin at the 5770, the 5830 and the new GTX 460. I would like to be spend $150 or around there for a new card. I will mainly be playing Starcraft II, and some Left 4 Dead II. Suggestion? Ideas?

 

[toyota]

thats a pretty pokey cpu so dont expect to get anywhere near official benchmarks in many games when you get a much faster card. that being said I am not familiar with Starcraft II at all but the gtx460 is the better gpu choice for overall gaming. a 5830 makes no sense anymore since the gtx460 is better in every way for the same price. a 5770 is an okay card for around $150-160 since it looks like you are not really wanting to spend the $200-$230 for a gtx460.

 

[happy medium]

That game is a cpu hog!

A 5770 will play it at ultra detail though. And should play Left for Dead 2 at high detail also.

 

[toyota]

yeah his cpu is going to be pretty slow if using Ultra settings. a Phenom 2 X4 lowered to 2.0 would still be faster than his 2.3 Phenom 1 X4 and can only muster 24 fps with a 5850. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/blizzard-entertainment-starcraft-ii-benchmark,2611-9.html

 

[TurtleCrusher]

I don't think Phenom 2 is THAT much faster than a Phenom 1. The only tangible changes were a bump in HT speeds and more L3 cache. L3 cache doesn't make a huge difference. Real world 2-10% at best, with special cases near 20%. If it was L2 (so much faster) then I can see the changes being dramatic. Wasnt there a thread here that showed Phenom is awfully close to Phenom 2?

However, the Phenom X4 9600 suffers from the TLB bug and more sadly the TLB fix. I can see that CPU being a dog in single threaded applications.

OP, I'd see if you could sell you current Phenom and break even with buying a newer Athlon X4 @ 3ghz. Assuming your 780g board could support it. It would be worthwhile. You could probably fetch $80 or so due to people with AM2+ only boards wanting a quad.

Edit: http://www.anandtech.com/show/2702/9

Phenom 2 is only 2.9% to 10.2% faster clock for clock in gaming, 3d creation and video encoding. Only in Excel and WinRar does Phenom 2 really bust it out with noticeable double digit increases. Not saying those are insignificant, but most people who game use their computer for other multimedia purposes, such as encoding a video.

 

[toyota]

in gaming the Phenom 2 is usually 15-20% faster than Phenom 1 clock for clock in most cases.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

in gaming the Phenom 2 is usually 15-20% faster than Phenom 1 clock for clock in most cases.

Did you read the link I posted?

Even if we pretended all things were equal such as cache and HT-link (which the Phenom 2 has an advantage) the scaling is nearly linear with clock speeds with the Phenom architecture. As long as the same video card is used, you can certainly compare the two.

You can find out how many mhz it takes to make one FPS in a game by dividing the clock speed of the processor (9950: 2600) by the average amount of frames per second the processor was able to push in said games. Then do the same with the Phenom X4 920. The results are surprising to say the least.

Phenom 2 is NOT tangibly faster per clock in gaming. It just has higher clock speeds and OC's way better. It excels in well, excel and WinRAR. Higher volume cache-centric applications.

 

[seanhland]

I didnt think that the processor was THAT much slower. Im glad you all brought that up. Yes it is the original Phenom 9600 with the TLB problem. However this brings up a interesting situation. I am planning on building ANOTHER box to be a server, AKA Server1. So there will be my current rig, PC1, PLUS another box to act as a server, Server1. I need something to put Windows 2008 server, Hyper V and some other things. The server, Server1, doesnt need to be fancy. I just need something with alot of ram and decent processing power. I could move my 2.3 into the server and then put a new processor AND video card into PC1. So then if I were to refresh PC1, what would you recommend? Sounds like you are all suggesting new processor and video card. Suggestions for the processor then?

Edit, was looking at this processor:
AMD Athlon II X4 635 propus 2.9
ADX635WFGIBOX

Ive sorta been outa the gaming thing for a few years so Im a lil behind, but trying to read t catch up

 

[3DVagabond]

Hardware Canucks has done a GPU perf review of SCII. From their testing the 460 is the "sweet spot" performance wise. Also, for the time being, only nVidia does AA w/SCII.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...-starcraft-ii-gpu-performance-comparison.html

 

[TurtleCrusher]

Does the Phenom 1 support virtualization? Hyper V is for virtualization, right?

If a yes for both, I can see the Phenom 9600 being a solid server CPU for may years. Especially if it's just a data server (or even a router) the 9600 could almost be overkill. I would underclock (undervolt at least) and save power.

If you have a little cash to burn, I'd defintely get the X6 1055t for $200. It has turbo mode to 3.3-3.5ghz? and will not be a CPU you will need to upgrade for at least a few years for bleeding edge performance. I look at it as the second coming of the Q6600, but that's an opinion. The multithreaded performance is incredible and it overclocks very well.

If you plan on it being a drop in, make sure your motherboard can support it.

You could also go with a X3 720 is you only game and don't mind upgrading in a year or two. The clock speed alone will provide just that much more power and they too overclock very well.

 

[seanhland]

I did not see that new article, thank you for that link 3DVagabond. I read through it and it sounds like Nvidia is DEFINATELY the choice to go with for SCII performance. I am leaning toward getting the 1gb 460 card now. Thank you for that link. It was EXACTLY what I was lookin for.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

The 460 is a great GPU to go with. It would be a decent match with your phenom. A CPU upgrade would still do you wonders though.

 

[seanhland]

According to Gigabyte the motherboard supports up to the Phenom II X6 1090T.

And yes the CPU does support virtualization.

Thank you for the idea for the X3 720. I am leaning toward buying the GTX 460 1GB along with the X3 720. I think that would give me the best performance for the $.

 

[Ancalagon44]

Although there may not be much of a clock for clock difference, Phenom 2's do clock much higher than Phenom I's. I mean, the highest stock Phenom I was 2.6 Ghz, the highest stock Phenom II is 3.4, and they can reach over 4.0GHz depending on setup. Not possible with a Phenom I.

So, if I was the OP, instead of spending all of my money on a graphics card, I'd spend half on a new CPU and half on a GPU. End result - much better StarCraft II performance.

 

[Sylvanas]

Hardware Canucks has done a GPU perf review of SCII. From their testing the 460 is the "sweet spot" performance wise. Also, for the time being, only nVidia does AA w/SCII.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...-starcraft-ii-gpu-performance-comparison.html

Thanks for the link, I was looking for something like this aswell. Decisions decisions....

 

[beginner99]

Thanks for the link, I was looking for something like this aswell. Decisions decisions....

IMHO SC2 is hard to use as benchmark because it will depend on the amount and type of units visible. min fps should be measured with 200 visible zerglings or something similar.
While it's not common it will give worst case performance. On so called moneymaps or fast maps in sc1, tons of units are pretty common.

But yes in general it will be a game where cpu is probably more important than gpu.

 

[MrK6]

The GTX 460 would be the way to go for a video card upgrade. Did anyone suggest overclocking his current CPU and seeing how that improves gameplay performance? If not, I would try that before sinking cash into a new CPU, you have a lot of untapped power there.

 

[Anubis]

That game is a cpu hog!

A 5770 will play it at ultra detail though. And should play Left for Dead 2 at high detail also.

funny graph, Based on the GTX 260 strong showing im curious where my GTX285 would fall

 

[BlahBlahYouToo]

Hardware Canucks has done a GPU perf review of SCII. From their testing the 460 is the "sweet spot" performance wise. Also, for the time being, only nVidia does AA w/SCII.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...-starcraft-ii-gpu-performance-comparison.html

i wish they had some older cards like the GTX2xx and 48xx series.

 

[RussianSensation]

i wish they had some older cards like the GTX2xx and 48xx series.

Basically any modern graphics card is going to tear SC2 apart

http://www.legionhardware.com/articles_pages/starcraft_ii_wings_of_liberty_beta_performance,4.html

Notice how min are very close to avg - this means smooth performance even at 35 fps!

 

[Anubis]

Basically any modern graphics card is going to tear SC2 apart

http://www.legionhardware.com/articles_pages/starcraft_ii_wings_of_liberty_beta_performance,4.html

Notice how min are very close to avg - this means smooth performance even at 35 fps!

nice look at the 285 go
lol

 

[Face2Face]

I played SC2 beta with my current slow rig @ 1080 and it played great with everything maxed out. Blizzard is not going to release a game that will punish everyone's PC to the max. Your 3850 will be fine for LFD2 and SC2. Save your money!

 

[3DVagabond]

Looking at Guru3D's review and it doesn't even look like ATI has even tried to optimize drivers for the game.

http://www.guru3d.com/article/starcraft-ii-wings-of-liberty-gpu-graphics-performance/

 

[dalearyous]

my 9800gtx runs its great

 

[bryanW1995]

Does the Phenom 1 support virtualization? Hyper V is for virtualization, right?

If a yes for both, I can see the Phenom 9600 being a solid server CPU for may years. Especially if it's just a data server (or even a router) the 9600 could almost be overkill. I would underclock (undervolt at least) and save power.

If you have a little cash to burn, I'd defintely get the X6 1055t for $200. It has turbo mode to 3.3-3.5ghz? and will not be a CPU you will need to upgrade for at least a few years for bleeding edge performance. I look at it as the second coming of the Q6600, but that's an opinion. The multithreaded performance is incredible and it overclocks very well.

If you plan on it being a drop in, make sure your motherboard can support it.

You could also go with a X3 720 is you only game and don't mind upgrading in a year or two. The clock speed alone will provide just that much more power and they too overclock very well.

hardware canucks is the best thing to come out of canada since terrance and phillip