Is it worth upgrading?

[Jinx79]

Hi

My current system is

MSI KT4V Motherboard
AMD XP 2000
512 MB DDR 333 memory (2 x 256)
Radeon 9600
40GB Hard drive ATA 100

I was thinking about getting a new processor (Barton XP2800) and Motherboard (MSI KTN2 Delta) so I can mach the fsb of the processor and memory and take advantage of Dual memory.

Apart from the performance increase I would see from having a faster processor will matching the fsb speeds and using Dual Memory give any real performance improvements?

Thanks

Jinx

 

[jrbarnett]

What sort of applications do you run on the system? (eg 3D games, multimedia editing, office apps etc?)
The actual performance boost you will get from the new system will depend on the applications that you run.

John

 

[Jinx79]

Sorry I should have said at the start. My PC is used for a number of different purposes. I do play 3d games and hope to be able to run Half Life 2 when it's released. I also use it to connect to my works network to carry out out of hours server work. Aside from that it's the usual web browsing and e-mail.

Jinx

 

[pmonett]

Dual-channel RAM management does give better overall performance. I have verified that on my own configuration.
I had an XP 2600 on an Asus A7V8X (mono channel) with a GF4 Ti4400 and 512MB DDR 333.
In order to be ready for Doom III, I changed to an Asus A7N8X deluxe, with an XP 3000, a Radeon 9800 Pro and two 512MB DDR400 RAM chips.
But, before changing the video card and CPU, I just changed the mobo and RAM and I tested that. In other words, I took an intermediate step where I had an XP 2600 on the A7N8X dlx with 512 DDR333 on dual channel. The rig tested rather well, but with the R9800 and DDR400, it literally flew pass the tests. You can check my stats here :

http://www.sharok.net.

Follow Hardware, then Sharok's Store and you'll get to my Benchmarks section.
One more thing, if your MSI mainboard can do SATA, think of getting a SATA converter for your hard disk. That way you can add another one without impacting performance. I've got 2 ATA100 disks on SATA and they work much better than when they were on IDE cables.
You know it counts.

Pascal.

 

[Jinx79]

Thanks for the reply. I think I'll start getting some prices together for the new kit. A Radeon 9800 would be nice but I don't think I can streach quite that far at the moment.

 

[jrbarnett]

My own take on upgrading is to only do it when you need to. So for example, if Jinx79's system is more than fast enough for what he uses it for at the moment, then why upgrade?
By all means consider upgrading components or replacing the whole system if it is to slow to run the software he wants to use on it, but remember that the faster components come with a price premium, and you have to balance the cost of the new components against the performance improvement you will get.
Speaking personally, my box is a 1GHz Athlon with 384Mb RAM, 30Gb disk, CD-RW, DVD-ROM, 32Mb Geforce2MX graphics with 2K and a laser printer, now nearly 3 years old, and it is more than adequate for my needs of access development, office apps, browsing the internet/email and basic website design.

John

 

[techkiwi]

Yeah, I agree with jrbarnett. Too many people seem to get sucked into the pit of "must upgrade". I use a 1.13 GHz Athlon with 128 MB RAM and it's fine. At work I use (besides my standard PC) a 486 running at 66 MHz with Windows 95 to monitor some of my lab equipment! Beat that!

Having said that, I aint into games in a big way, so don't know what you really need to run modern games well.

Of course I'm also married with 2 kids and 2 mortgages so maybe I'm just jealous cause I know the wife wouldn't let me buy a brand new rig...

 

[Jinx79]

Hehe I've also got the 2 kids, mortgage and wife to think about. There are a few reasons for the upgrade. The first is for newer games. From what I've heard the new generation of 3D games are going to be pretty hard on systems. Also it's kind of a hobby. Some people play with cars and this is my diversion. The final reason is my work. I'm a PC engineer and I like to try to keep up with the market. It's easier to fix things if I've used them before.

I do agree that constant upgrading is a costly hobby but it's cheaper that going out to clubs every weekend ;-)

 

[pmonett]

New games are always hard on the system. I was really ticked when I saw just how much Unreal 2 bogged my PC down at first. There was a patch issue, but Unreal 2 remains a hefty weight for CPU and GPU. Of course, I can always turn down the details from high to medium, but that just means I acknowledge that I haven't thrown enough money at the problem. As techkiwi says quite rightly, upgrading is a never-ending story - if you're into gaming, that is.
Any low-end PC sold today is more than enough to surf the web, do your home accounting and write a few letters. But if you get bitten by the gaming bug, you'd better make way for a big budget to treat the ailment ;-).
Doom III and Half-Life 2 are said to put all current hardware to shame at high settings. Given that there is no demo or benchmark package available yet, I have no way of knowing just how true that may be. Plus, they do say that details and settings can be toned down to adapt - but to adapt to what ?
My experience tells me that ATI Radeon is the only current hope for gamers right now. I have a friend that just got a new rig. XP 2800, 512 DDR333 on dual channel, and an FX 5600. Sounds nice ? It does. But his benchmarks are roughly half of mine - and I'm not kidding. So nVidia is no longer the king of the hill and ATI is what you need for gaming.

Pascal.

 

[jrbarnett]

techkiwi,

I know of two systems slower than your 486 still in use:
A 386-40 is in use at a local school as a word processor running Win3.1 and Word 6/Excel 5. It has a whopping 120Mb disk.
At a former employer of mine, there is a 386 running DOS 5 used for monitoring lab equipment.

John

 

[TheGoatMan]

Let me sum this up for you. The system you are running is more than adequate. If you slightly upgrade you aren't really going to feel a difference. I upgraded from a 1700+ with 512mb pc133 sdram, a fx5200 and a 20gb ata66 to a 2600+ with pc4000 ddr, a fx5900 and dual SATA raptor drives and the improvement wasn't that huge. So if you upgrade go all out and get a P4 with a gig of memory and a 9800xt. Also get scsi hard drives for max data transfer rate. Or just hold out until 64 bit gets better devoloped.