# Question about buying a new build...



## LyRiKaL (Jan 15, 2007)

Hi everyone,

I'll try to make this quick since I know it's easy to give too much info when it comes to these types of things, so here goes.

I've had my desktop for about 5 years now, aside from adding a new HD and a new PSU in the past couple years, so it's had a good run. The PC is getting very sluggish, and I've recently started to get into gaming again, but it turns out that, aside from the very slow response time is basic functions, some of the game I'd like to get into just won't run properly with my set up. After doing a bench test, it turns out that my CPU is definitely the main thing that needs to be upgraded. (apparently my GPU is still decent)

So I went to my local shop and they said that it's not worth buying a new CPU to put on my MOBO and that I basically need a new tower. The quote I got was around the $1000 (canadian dollar) mark, not including a HD and PSU obviously. That's a little much for some intermediate level gaming.

I guess my question is, what can I do to ensure that it's the hardware and not software that's slowing the system down, and if it's running at its peak or not? Can I get "acceptable" performance by getting the best CPU available for my MOBO as well as maybe add more RAM? Or do I need to just suck it up and go all in and spend the thousand bucks?

My build:
*Gigabyte GA-EP43-UD3L MOBO
Intel Core2 E6300 1.86GHz CPU
Nvidia GTX 460 768MB GPU
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 1TB HD
4GB DDR2 400MHz RAM
500W PSU*

Suggested build:
*MSI H110M Gaming Socket 1151 Intel H110 Chipset MOBO
Intel Core i5-6500 Quad-Core 3.2GHz CPU
MSI GeForce GTX 1060 3GT OC GPU
G.Skill Ripjaws 4 8GB DDR4 DRAM 2133MHz C15 RAM
*

*I'm also gonna add that I just managed to bring the price down to $650 by downgrading the CPU to an *Intel Core i3-6100 Dual-Core 3.7GHz* ($120 less) and GPU to a *Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1050 D5 2G* ($125 less) and keeping my old tower ($65 less).

Any advice is much appreciated of course!:smile:


----------



## JimE (Apr 16, 2009)

A dual core cpu will be limiting factor for most current heavy usage. Newer cpus are mostly all quad cores. So yes, I'd say it's time to upgrade, and replacing all of the hardware is the most cost effective way to go.

Check the system requirements of the games that you intend to play and see how your hardware (both old and new) compare.

A basic upgrade would be the motherboard, cpu and RAM. Everything else can be re-used and upgraded later as needed.

I will point out that you should take a look at the power supply (you didn't mention the brand/model). First and foremost, a quality unit is the best way to go. While you do need a unit that meets the size requirements, quality is more important than the rating. I recommend Seasonic. Refer here for more information: PSU tier list 2.0 - Components - Tom's Hardware


----------



## LyRiKaL (Jan 15, 2007)

JimE said:


> A dual core cpu will be limiting factor for most current heavy usage. Newer cpus are mostly all quad cores. So yes, I'd say it's time to upgrade, and replacing all of the hardware is the most cost effective way to go.
> 
> Check the system requirements of the games that you intend to play and see how your hardware (both old and new) compare.
> 
> ...


Thanks for your reply.

So you're thinking tha the extra money for the quad over the dual is worth it then? Okay, fair enough.

My GPU meets the minimum requirements for any of the games that I pulled up, hence why I figured it wasn't great but is still very usable for the near future.

As far as the PSU goes, it's actually a 600W (not a 500W) Seasonic SS-600ET, about 2 years old. Is there a way to test its performance or life span?


----------



## Masterchiefxx17 (Feb 27, 2010)

> So you're thinking tha the extra money for the quad over the dual is worth it then? Okay, fair enough.


You're not going to want the i3 for the downgrade price, the i5 is far superior, especially for gaming.



> My GPU meets the minimum requirements for any of the games that I pulled up, hence why I figured it wasn't great but is still very usable for the near future.


The current GPU is getting old, if it was a 560, I'd say keep it. The recommendation on a GTX 1060 will keep you going for a long time and I recommend that one over the underpowered GTX 1050.



> As far as the PSU goes, it's actually a 600W (not a 500W) Seasonic SS-600ET, about 2 years old. Is there a way to test its performance or life span?


That's a great PSU with some good power. It will last for quite a while and no need to test or upgrade it.


Have you thought about building this PC yourself? It's quite easy to do and will save you some good money. You'll also have better components. See these two guides here:

http://www.techsupportforum.com/forums/f255/tsf-hardware-teams-recommended-builds-2017-a-668661.html

http://www.techsupportforum.com/for...ld-and-troubleshoot-your-computer-918754.html


----------



## LyRiKaL (Jan 15, 2007)

Masterchiefxx17 said:


> You're not going to want the i3 for the downgrade price, the i5 is far superior, especially for gaming.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's a lot of info, thanks!

Just to clarify when you also suggested the recommended parts, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but you mean the third of the price doesn't justify the difference in specs? For example the 0.5GHz between the CPUs and 190MHz in base memory on the GPUs, etc... The ratios are minimal, or is this not how these units are measured?


----------



## JimE (Apr 16, 2009)

The cpu (GHZ) rating is the speed of a single core. While that can matter in some instances (like older games) because as in the old days, a 3ghz cpu is faster than a 2ghz cpu, there is more to how they function than just the core speed. You can find a hierarchial chart and benchmark chart here: Gaming CPU Performance - Hierarchy Chart - Intel vs. AMD

As for gpu's, the RAM speed is also just part of the picture. Basically, the faster the gpu, the more data that it can push through the RAM, and the higher performance it can achieve. A slower gpu, won't need RAM as fast as it can't utilize it.


----------



## Rich-M (May 2, 2007)

Just to agree with Chief here you definitely do not want to downgrade from the i5 to an i3 you suggest as that will seriously defeat the whole idea of a new build.
In your new suggestions you don't mention a psu and where you do you mention only wattage which suggests it was not good quality to begin with, so I want to caution you that buying a good quality new psu might be the most important thing you failed to mention. Seasonic 550 watt or EVGA same wattage would be a great idea.


----------



## LyRiKaL (Jan 15, 2007)

JimE said:


> The cpu (GHZ) rating is the speed of a single core. While that can matter in some instances (like older games) because as in the old days, a 3ghz cpu is faster than a 2ghz cpu, there is more to how they function than just the core speed. You can find a hierarchial chart and benchmark chart here: Gaming CPU Performance - Hierarchy Chart - Intel vs. AMD
> 
> As for gpu's, the RAM speed is also just part of the picture. Basically, the faster the gpu, the more data that it can push through the RAM, and the higher performance it can achieve. A slower gpu, won't need RAM as fast as it can't utilize it.


Okay, in that case I'll pay the extra for the quad core, I didn't realize that was the GHZ "per" core, makes sense.

How about the two GPUs I mentioned? The difference between the 1060 and the 1050... Can I go the cheaper route without sacrificing that much performance between those two cards?


----------



## LyRiKaL (Jan 15, 2007)

Rich-M said:


> Just to agree with Chief here you definitely do not want to downgrade from the i5 to an i3 you suggest as that will seriously defeat the whole idea of a new build.
> In your new suggestions you don't mention a psu and where you do you mention only wattage which suggests it was not good quality to begin with, so I want to caution you that buying a good quality new psu might be the most important thing you failed to mention. Seasonic 550 watt or EVGA same wattage would be a great idea.


I did mention afterwards that I actually do have a Seasonix 600W PSU which I failed to put in my original post, but thanks for the heads up!


----------



## Masterchiefxx17 (Feb 27, 2010)

LyRiKaL said:


> Okay, in that case I'll pay the extra for the quad core, I didn't realize that was the GHZ "per" core, makes sense.
> 
> How about the two GPUs I mentioned? The difference between the 1060 and the 1050... Can I go the cheaper route without sacrificing that much performance between those two cards?


I'm of the mind set that if you can pay the cost for the GTX 1060, go for that one. It's a better card.


----------

