Need help upgrading my computer!

**joebloe12** · December 21st, 2008, 06:57 PM

OK, I have not been on this forum or checked PC hardware prices in YEARS! Because I basiclly am happy with what I have.

But when I wanted to get GTA IV for PC, the box said that the MINIMUM requirement was for a dual core chip and motherboard.

To tell you the truth, I am so far behind in my computer I may need a complete overhaul!

Here are my specs (Sad to say they are WAY, WAY out of date as far as keeping up with hardware...even minimum hardware as it goes)

WIN XP SP3
1-CRT Xflat monitor
1- Asus A7N8X-E Deluxe Motherboard
1- AMD Athlon single core chip XP 3200
2-gigs of PC 2700 RAM (Samsung I think)
1-LG DVD 20x Burner
1-Lite on 20x DVD Burner
1-zip100 drive (NOW you know how OLD my computer is)
1-3.5 floopy drive (NOW you REALLY know how old we are talking)
1-Soundblaster Audigy 2 soundcard
1-Radeon X1300 series Video card
1-5 hub PCI 2.0 card
1-80 gig Western Digital Hard drive WD800JB
1-PCI TV card with tuner 7130
1-ATX case with 4 bins for DVD drives and two bins for 3.5 and 4 bins for hard drives

Again....I know all of this is out of date BADLY! But what would you suggest?

I DO NOT WANT a PRE BUILT SYSTEM! Because a lot of companies like dell and others cripple their BIOS and other things you may need to get into on a regular system you built yourself and you just can't on those,so I would rather NOT go down the "pre-built" road.

I would rather have my own built by someone. Can you suggest a decent system withouyt breaking the bank?
If I just need a motherboard, chip and RAM, I have a friend that could put those in...IF theytwould work with all my older hardware. But that is another problem....the video and sound cards are WAY out of date and probably would need to be updated as well.

I absolutely hate upgrading my computer, but I am so far behind that I guess it is time.

So what could I build at a reasonably low cost to replace my aging computer. I love AMD processors because they are cheaper, but could go with intel if they are cheap enough. I am looking for some way I can future proof my computer...if only for a short while. While staying on a budget.

I don't know WHAT to say my budget will be, but I was hoping to be able to use some of my old stuff if I can, if not,I will just get a new case, motherboard chip and ram and go from there.

So what would some of you more experienced users that have been building for awhile suggest? Completyely start from scratch, or try to save what I can? Again, I KNOW my computer is old and out of date, but I just put off upgrading for as long as I could. Now it has caught up with me.

**mountain_rage** · December 21st, 2008, 08:41 PM

If I were you I would upgrade the entire machine. You could keep some of the parts, but most of them should be replaced. Keep the burners, tuner card, and if you think you will use them Floppy and zip drive. You can definitely get cheaper if you are interested, but this would be a decent rig.

Almost any machine costing $500 and up will definitely play the game. If you want to play it with good speeds you may need to upgrade the video card.

**Drew Wilson** · December 22nd, 2008, 01:14 AM

I seem to have a habit of holding off until a complete system-wide crash before I wind up on the market for a new computer. So you are far from alone for feeling you are behind on the scene.

I know a programmer who was still running on Windows 95 (we're talking about a hard drive that was a whopping 500MB - 2GB!)all the way up until early this year. Just imagine how far behind he felt when he upgraded to XP! :)

**joebloe12** · December 23rd, 2008, 12:22 AM

Well this is what I ended up with if anyone is interested.

http://cgi.ebay.com/INTEL-QUAD-CORE-...3A1|240%3A1308

**1cooldude** · January 28th, 2009, 05:48 AM

not bad. The key parts are all well suited for heavy gaming power. You should be alright for a little while. :)

**Signa** · January 28th, 2009, 01:04 PM

When I upgrade in May, I'm going to get one of the new Intel i7s. It looks like their performance is over the top.

My brother is an AMD fan, and I can say that they aren't bad chips by any means, but looking at the charts, I can see they aren't for me. I see that AMD chips are GREAT for playing games, because their price is so low compared to the performance they put out. However, for me, I do a lot more than games with my PC. I'm constantly converting videos, shrinking DVDs, and all sorts of other "number crunching" processess that the AMDs fail at.

Do you find yourself much more of a gamer, or do you use your PC as a multi-purpose tool? If you are using your PC for more than just games, you may want to consider an Intel. Just look at the charts on www.Tomshardware.com if you want to see how well the processors are performing.

**w31n3r** · January 28th, 2009, 11:35 PM

the i7 has me drooling too, but i'm hard pressed to find a real reason to upgrade anytime soon. my main rig uses an E7300 and i have it bumped to almost 3Ghz, it gets all my work done without pain and i never even once seriously considered the C2Q lineup. a cheap but good option for those who're planning to upgrade within a tight budget.

**Atheist Icon** · January 29th, 2009, 07:07 AM

Honestly Intel is giving AMD a hard time to compete. But then again, when you own 80% of the market, you would too.

The Core i7 is a great processor, but it has limited overclocking unless you buy the big dog. I shudder at the idea of having to spend a grand on a processor just so that I can overclock it. On top of that, you have to buy DDR3, which is still expensive, and an expensive MoBo.

I would rather go the AMD way. AM3 will fit into an AM2 board and you can use DDR2 or DDR3(if the MoBo is equipped). AMD is going about the upgrade process the right way, IMO. When I built my PC 6 months ago, I went AMD. I have it overclocked without a problem, albeit not as much as you can push some Intel variants.

9850BE OC to 3.02
Biostar a770 AM2+ Free w/CPU
Crucial Ballistix Tracer DDR2 800 OC to 966 (I believe, any higher will not post, MoBo issue)
80GB SATA Seagate (WinXP) free
80GB SATA Seagate (Win7) free
750GB SATA Seagate
Antec 850 Watt PS
Antec 900
ATi 2400Pro clearance 15.99 at BX

Just added 2 weeks ago:
Sapphire 4850x2 2GB OC 695/1123

Everything but the Video card cost me $635 after rebates. I used the rebates to offset the cost of the video card ($299.99). For a grand, I think I have a pretty decent computer. Not the greatest, but I refuse to spend 700 on just cpu, mem, and mobo from Intel.

**1cooldude** · February 1st, 2009, 03:40 AM

there are some great computer auctions around my area and one can get a great deal if you just wait..:icon_salu

**mungopw** · February 1st, 2009, 11:59 AM

i7 all the way...ive been waiting for new development in pc technology and this is it now i gotta wait for the prices to drop..lol

**notbob** · February 1st, 2009, 12:16 PM

i use a pentium 3 1.14mhz with a pci video card, 128mb of video ram i think, with 512MB ram. i built it from leftover basement scraps at least 6 years ago, maybe 8. does what i want it to. it has a 1.96GB HDD for c://, with apps installed on another drive. when it dies, i'll probably move to a pentium 4

**mountain_rage** · February 1st, 2009, 12:22 PM

Originally Posted by notbob

i use a pentium 3 1.14mhz with a pci video card, 128mb of video ram i think, with 512MB ram. i built it from leftover basement scraps at least 6 years ago, maybe 8. does what i want it to. it has a 1.96GB HDD for c://, with apps installed on another drive. when it dies, i'll probably move to a pentium 4

Wonder how much extra power this machine sucks up compared to new machines. If you can figure it out and calculate the cost over the year, it may actually be cheaper getting a newer machine.

**notbob** · February 1st, 2009, 02:01 PM

while newer machines are more efficient, they are also more powerful, so the efficiency/power draw basically even out. it also uses less fans because it doesn't get that hot, so it draws less there and also is quieter. we aren't talking about a 20 year old refrigerator here. power supply efficiency hasn't changed all that much in 10 years. quality has dropped, price has dropped, but efficiency has only gone up modestly (if at all)

plus, it's recycled, so it has paid its debt to society, unlike the disposable computers today

this is the case it's in, a 1997 vaio, might have a newer p/s, i'm not sure, it hasn't been apart since probably 2003(?) (when i put in the dvd burner)

http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Pr...056/index.html
Sony Global - Press Release - Sony Introduces VAIO Series PCs Leading-edge multimedia desktop and notebook PCs for the home

i've got one of these too http://windowsitpro.com/article/arti...ation-410.html
Dell Precision WorkStation 410

they stayed on this long (power outage ended the run) http://www.zeropaid.com/bbs/showpost...6&postcount=62

**1cooldude** · February 1st, 2009, 02:20 PM

Fortunately, this is one of those exceptions where old is better than the new equipment (not in efficiency rating) because today's mammoths are power hungry machines and you would never survive on 200W psu's. Granted they are slow and small in storage but compared to today's pc's ( dual core or even quad core cpu's) their cpu's survived on 50W to 60W of power. With huge processing power came a lot of improvements and also higher power requirements for psu's. Most psu's are now in 400W to 500W range. You're correct about psu's efficiency ratings; they have improved marginally if at all but due to the speed of cpu's there are more ways to load that cpu/gpu and that requires electric power. In relation to P3 of 866 MHz and say P4 duo core of 2 GHz, the power consumption is about equal.