What would I upgrade?

[Ace]

I was going ask "what would you upgrade?" but I figured I'd rather know what I should do, and what you all might recommend... instead of the other way around.

My Monarch PC is a couple years old now, and I've been considering 1 or 3 possibilities to "goose" the hardware in it.  Possibly:

1. Upgrade the CPU; I've got an AMD XP 1800+, and mobo will take up to a 3000+

2. Upgrade the memory (again); I've got 512 of Corsair 2700 (2 sticks) with room for one more 184 pin stick.

3. Upgrade the video card; I've got an nVidia GeForce4 Ti4200 in it, which was the cheapest of the "good" cards back then.  64mb memory (at the time, it was much cheaper and actually faster than the 128 mb).  

Everything is working fine, so no needs at present.  Would have to think I would struggle mightily with any really demanding new games; at this point I've got Madden 2003 (directX 9.0), Links 2003 on.  Will likely go with a Neverwinter Nights combo RPG (not visually demanding) and some shooter...  I'd figure Doom3, Far Cry, those sorta things would be beyond the hardware capabilities...

Would appreciate any thoughts on benefits, per item, plus risks involved.  I've swapped video cards, and memory before, but don't know what a CPU swap could entail as far as hassle, damage, etc.  

Ace; I know I'm not allowed in here.  I'll get out in awhile.  Just calm down, willya...

[pat]

Hmmm, you could always not upgrade and take me out for my dang margarita, dang-it.

Oops, wrong topic.

I seem to remember you have a Gigabyte motherboard but I don?t remember the model no.? Not that it?s real important, just curious.

Probably the first thing would be a new video card, I think you would see the most improvement there first.
You could add some more memory although 512 is certainly adequate for most applications.
I have 1 gig. of memory and the system sure seems to respond well with it.
A faster processor, XP2500+ would be a nice step up for a reasonable cost.

Do you have a budget?

The only risks I see are, what do you do with the old components?

[Nestor]

First off, just because the motherboard says it can support a better provessor, doesn't necessarily mean that it will, so  3000+ is probably out of the question, though a 2500+ is pretty realistic. I'm running Doom 3 with a 2500+ and it runs quite well. 512MB of RAM is enough to run high-end FPS games, I'm running Unreal Tournament 2K4, Doom 3, and Painkiller on 512, with no real noticable lag.

The biggest problem I see is video card. That's going to be the most expensive in terms of cost for upgrade. I recommend NVidia- haven't had a major problem with Nvidia in the past, and so they get my vote. The 5200 is all right, the 5600 is even better. Driver support is a snap, so don't worry. Think on processor and video card.

[Ace]

Danke, guys.  The motherboard is a Gigabyte GA7-VAX if I remember right.  Said it'll take up to 3 gb memory, up to a 3000+ cpu (at 333).  Video card capabilities should be ok for most anything...especially if it isn't state of the art.

I'd probably go $150 max per part.  No interest in a $600 video card or anything like that.  I'd like to avoid anything that requires additional power hook-ups or two card slots or anything like that... No need for dual monitor, TV connect, or any frills.  Just has to work in the PC.

Using the nVidia driver update online, it steered me to the latest drivers for the 6800 card (I discovered later!).  So I'm figuring that's why they glitched.  In looking further, I'll probably try a driver update from Gainward (the card's make) although it's sorta a hassle as you first have update the ExperTool and then it'll find them.  I'll probably stick with nVidia just to keep it consistent, and I've done ok with them.  

Any difficulty typically with removing a CPU and installing a new one?  Any tips?  I know CPU isn't the most key part, for performance, typically.  But figure goosing the horsepower wouldn't hurt, either.  Also; any thing weird with going with 3 sticks of 256 memory...?  Seems like it'd be a weird amount, is all.

Ace; I looked at the 5600 reviews, so will revisit that and the 5200.

[Chandler]

The Sapphire Atlantis 9800 Pro may be just in your price range, but make sure it's the 256-bit version.  It was a high -end card up until a few months ago, and handles things like Farcry in High Quality at 1024x768@32 with no problems.

The FX5200 would probably be a downgrade from your current card.

[Neon]

That is a fairly well-balanced system, and it's not badly outdated.

In what area do you think the system is most lacking?
If multitasking is your thing, then a memory upgrade would make sense.

The GF4 Ti card should hold up ok in Doom 3 and similar games - the developers spend a lot of time making sure that their games degrade gracefully and play well on mid-range cards, since that is what most people have. Now you might have to turn down some of the settings on that card to get acceptible framerates, so it comes down to how good do you want your gaming experience to look? The Ti4200 does very well against even the FX5600, except when DX8.1 or DX9 features are used, or when enabling antialiasing and/or anisotropic filtering. Thus, a mid-range card is probably not good bang for the buck. If you wanted to splurge and go for a Radeon 9800Pro or GF 6800 or 6600GT (when available), you should see a significant improvement.

The 1800+ is probably ok - try watching the CPU meter in the performance monitor while you are computering. If it is maxing out a lot, then maybe consider an upgrade. Otherwise, leave it. That is the most demanding upgrade, since you have to take the heatsink off and get it back on without crushing the CPU core or gouging the mobo.

Ah heck, just get a new wireless X10 camera, and have fun with that.

[Nestor]

the 1800 won't perform solidly with a high-end game such as Doom 3- A friend of mine has almost identical stats as my personal computer, except he's running a 2200+ and he's having impaired performance.

Doom3 actually has a built in utility that configures itself to work optimally with your video card.

[Ace]

This is sorta confusing, discussing stuff I might upgrade with stuff TGIF is upgrading.  I'm hoping I'll wind up with his computer, in the confusion.

Appreciate the Doom3 insights.  I know the game loses much of its appeal if you have to turn it down.. heck, it's all atmosphere, from what I've read.  I'm not ready for it yet, either as far as nerves or hardware.

My PC is doing fine.. just shopping, and bored.  I don't know what I'd do with any replaced parts, actually.  Nobody in the family has anything that could absorb an AGP card or AMD processor...  The memory would just be "more" and not replacing any.  It's ok to have a 512 stick, and two 256 ones, isn't it...?  I usually don't watch the performance meter.. will do.  Might try overclocking the card too, if it seems to drag with any new game.  That's another reason I got it, in that they did ok in that regard.

Ace; next, it'll be "Uh, my PC caught fire..."  

[pat]

Yes, two 256 and one 512 should be fine. Check your mother-bored manual first though, you may have to put the largest module in the first slot or perhaps not.

[Carskick]

If you want to play DX9 games such as Doom3, you will want to upgrade your video card, as the ti4200 performs terribly in these situations. If you aren't much of a gammer, than a CPU upgrade will provide a larger performance upgrade. A 2500+, for example, will step up the FSB, double the cache, and increace the clock.

[Neon]

That depends on your definition of "terrible". Doom3 will certainly run on a GF4 Ti4200, but to get acceptible frame rates, anisotropic filtering should be turned off, antialiasing may have to be lowered or turned off, and the resolution turned down to 800x600 - in other words, lower quality settings.

It doesn't sound like Ace is really into Doom3, but that doesn't mean he's not much of a gammer - more like a yammerer, actually.

The spare parts can go into another system or eBay or another trading forum such as [H] or Ars. There are plenty of folks that could use your vid card or CPU.

[Carskick]

That depends on your definition of "terrible". Doom3 will certainly run on a GF4 Ti4200, but to get acceptible frame rates, anisotropic filtering should be turned off, antialiasing may have to be lowered or turned off, and the resolution turned down to 800x600 - in other words, lower quality settings.

It doesn't sound like Ace is really into Doom3, but that doesn't mean he's not much of a gammer - more like a yammerer, actually.

The spare parts can go into another system or eBay or another trading forum such as [H] or Ars. There are plenty of folks that could use your vid card or CPU.

According to Anandtech, the faster ti4400 averages 13.4FPS @ 800x600 in Doom 3. I'd consider that terrible. Don't get me wrong, it's a great card. I know two people who own it. I was actually just talking to my friend a few days ago who has a P4 2.53ghz with a ti4200. He's beta testing World of Warcraft on his computer, and he says he has to keep the resolution at 800x600 with low settings to maintain descent framerates, and in areas, such as cities, it is unbarable. It's a great card, but for newer games, it just doesn't have the right architecture. If you don't play newer DX9 games such as Doom3 or WoW, then your ti4200 is probably fine, and I'd wait until you want to get into those games to upgrade the video card.

The other option is the CPU upgrade.

[Hoot]

You can still easily overclock the TI4400 with coolbits to TI4600 levels and above (easily) and thus get about 25-30 FPS @ 800x600 on (meduim) settings. not high be meduim. Makes it more playable. Or 1024x768 on low, bit I would  go 800x600 with low or meduim. I have the Humus hack on my ATI 9800p to get better FSP with Cat 4.8. Works.

[Carskick]

Remember, he has a ti4200. I was just using the 4400 as that's what Anandtech was becnhmarking with. It wouldn't be as easy to get a ti4200 to 4600 levels.

[Hoot]

I easily got most TI4200's to right at TI4600 levels (not 'past' reliably without artifacting but at nearly the exact TI4600 speeds). Easily. Key is having the right ones. I usually stocked XFX and leadtech for very good reasons. I did it with my own personal TI4200's (3 of them) and for a few others that couldn't manage to get that high (this is way back though). Power supply with your 12V and 3.3 is key, along with getting a PCI  slot cooler right under the card to draw away some heat and exhaust it out of the case. I didn't own an TI4400 since I was easily running the XFX Ti4200 @ Ti4600 speeds. Not every TI4200 will do that. And not every nVIDA card maker used decent thermal paste under the GPU heatsink, but XFX did, as did leadtek. However I don't do nearly as much overclocking on anythng like I used to - motherboards or video cards. Got tired of  the monitoring routine and dialing in the perfect overcllock. Once in a while but not often. But you're right, it's not 'easy' unless your very experienced with many facets overclocking in general. What card to buy, What fans to run on the GPU is aftermarket. What app to use to overclcock. How fast to go up. How to go up in stages. What drivers to use  How to exaust heat/ How to mod GPU cooling. To a very experienced overclocker it's very easy, but 'does' take alot of research and hands on experience do it well and fairly easily.

[Ace]

Hey, Cars and Hoot,

I've got a Gainward card.  Has the ExperTool to tweak settings, including overclocking.  Would overclocking within a "safe range" (they color code risk factor...) seem fairly risk free, without modification to the card or cooling?  Just looking for an intelligent guess; I realize the risk will be found as soon as it's done!

Ace

[Neon]

According to Anandtech, the faster ti4400 averages 13.4FPS @ 800x600 in Doom 3. I'd consider that terrible. Don't get me wrong, it's a great card. I know two people who own it. I was actually just talking to my friend a few days ago who has a P4 2.53ghz with a ti4200. He's beta testing World of Warcraft on his computer, and he says he has to keep the resolution at 800x600 with low settings to maintain descent framerates, and in areas, such as cities, it is unbarable. It's a great card, but for newer games, it just doesn't have the right architecture. If you don't play newer DX9 games such as Doom3 or WoW, then your ti4200 is probably fine, and I'd wait until you want to get into those games to upgrade the video card.

The other option is the CPU upgrade.

I read the Anandtech article also. Here is the link to the benchmarks in question:
Low End Tests: Last Man Standing
You can see that the Ti4400 does poorly at 800x600 on High Quality settings, but if it is dropped to 640x480 on Medium Quality settings, it has playable framerates. So it can play it, but with loss of some quality and smoothness. It does not indicate how the Ti4400 does at 800x600 on Medium Quality - probably somewhere in between.

The question is, do you want to play the game that way? For some folks, it may be acceptable; for others, it is just unbearable. I'll be the first to admit that my standards are probably lower than yours in that regard - my gaming days were back in the DOS era.

I'll leave the OC discussion to the experts.

[Hoot]

Well, to upgrade a video card under the premise that you can run one game at nice frame rates and resolutions is unfathomable to me. There will still be more games to come out that won't be pushing a new engine or writing bad code, or porting a game badly (halo). I see guys now on a few forums upset that they bought the new 6800GT when they now see that the R9800P was close in frames with a direct_X based game. The 6800GT is really nice, and handles ogl games with aplumb, but even slighly older ATI cards sneek up on nVIDA cards very fast the more you turn on the eye candy in DX based games. Also doom3 was at best mediocre to me. Way overhyped, dark, no gameply to really speak of. Nothing at all intriguing. So it stresses video cards. Where's the game that has been promised for years that will be "groundbreaking'? All of the better games, and most of the games for a year to come will play fine on lesser cards. FarCry absolutely owned doom3.

[Carskick]

I don't play either FarCry nor Doom 3. I was a DOS gamer as well, Neon. I can easily remember being 5-8 years old and playing games such as Doom 2, Transport Tycoon, Detroit, Eaction, Descent, and several others on my 486/66. Back then, a video card was basicly an ISA card with a D/A converter, and nothing else. Everthing was handled by the CPU. My first true graphics card appeared only a few years ago when I bought an MX420 for my P2. Although I was an avid doom 3 fan back in the day, a new version of the game doesn't excite me. The poor reviews of it don't help my enthusiasm either. I am more of an RTS and strategy gamer now than a FPS gammer. I also can't afford to spend $50 on a game to often. My next $50 game will be Gran Turismo 4, which I've long awaited. I'm sorry I'm getting off topic.

I'm just using Doom3 to represent how a card will do in a modern game enviorment. I think overclocking your card should be fine, Ace, as long as you know if you screw something up, you have to pay to fix it. Do it slowly and cautiously. I've inched up my FX5600Ultra before to about 420/840 from 400/800 with no problems. It won't let me go any higher, however. And I don't keep it at those speeds. Esspecially with my HP's low power PSU, and not so great airflow case, I don't think it is an optimal overclocking enviorment. Plus my card is generally fast enough for my games w/o overclocking. I can play WC3:TFT with no lag @ 4xAA & 4xAF, but any higher, and it gets a little sluggish.

[iansl]

I was sorta a DOS gamer, but it ws more learning programs and stuff like Dinopark Tycoon, so I don't think...oh yeah, and there was Megarace. It played slowly on my dad's 486/25 w\1MB oak video (maybe even less VRAM, 8MB of memory) but it was a dream on the ATI Rage 8MB (Integrated) with the Gateway. I don't know if I ever used it on my Win95 PC, probably because the CD drive sometimes didn't recognize and finally the floppy quit ::).

Anyways, if 15FPS is fine, then it's fine. If 30FPS is must-have, probably go with lower detail...as if I know about anything...all the 3D games I've used are Croc! Demo, some alien shooter game that I forgot about (alienware game contest, huge CPU req's), Need For Speed Texaco Demo, Motorhead Trial (old version), and 3DNA. On my Radeon 9200SE 128MB, moving around and such in that place took up 1\3 of my CPU cycles! I think it's probably because it's made w\Macromedia and not a lower-level language.