can a 6 year old p4 celeron with 2gb of ram

Tech Support Help Desk Forum
HangOver
Elite Member
Elite Member
 
Posts: 6594
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 8:00 pm
Location: Delray Beach
as this process is evolving i'm starting to favor the idea of just building a new gaming rig and using my current as the server. it would be overpowered for the job, certainly, but i could also maybe run a personal minecraft server for me and my brother lol.

i currently have two 8800GTS vid cards but they aren't pci-e 2.0 ... but they should still work in the pci-e 2.0 slots correct? that would save me some cheddar on the upgrade.

here's what i'm looking at.

ASUS M4A79XTD EVO AM3 AMD 790X ATX AMD Motherboard
AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition Thuban 3.2GHz Six-Core Desktop Processor
G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800)

combo price for the mobo and proc - $278.98 (plus a $15 MiR)
ram is $104.99

so just under $400 with shipping. i can handle that. i will SLI my 2 vid cards and that should give me a boost. then in another 6 months i'll splurge on new vid card. i already have an SSD for the drive and i'm gonna stick with my tried and true lian li case.

does that look like a decent build for a gaming rig? this thread is funny.

zel
Elite Member
Elite Member
 
Posts: 2442
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 8:00 pm
Location: Naples, FL

Re: can a 6 year old p4 celeron with 2gb of ram

Postby zel on Wed Feb 16, 2011 2:19 pm

See this is exactly why every time i think about building a seperate media server, I have to stop and just stick with using my gaming rig as a server. :P

Yes, PCI-e 2.0 slots are fully backwards compatible with PCI-e 1.0 cards.

You're running nvidia cards so you'd need an nvidia northbridge, that one had an AMD 790X northbridge which would work fine to CF some radeon cards. If you're considering switching over to Radeons in the future then you could go that route and stick with 1 card for now till you decide to get yourself an amd based gpu.

If you're sticking to nVidia then the Asus M4N98TD would be your best bet, two 16x capable PCIe 2.0 slots that work at x16/x16 when in SLI. MSI has a slightly better board available that allows up to 3 cards, but with 3 cards instead of 16x/16x it then becomes x16 / x8 / x8 and there is a built-in gpu, which on a performace board always bothers me. According to nVidia tho 3 cards yield a 2.8x boost vs. a 2x boost with 2 cards and you have to think about if your PSU can handle 3 gpus, so, theres something to think about.

It's going to set you back a total of 340 for the CPU+Asus MB so if you want to stay in the ~400 range then you might consider switching to these Corsair XMS modules. After MiR they'll cost you 70 bucks.

HangOver
Elite Member
Elite Member
 
Posts: 6594
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 8:00 pm
Location: Delray Beach
that asus board looks good. i've had good experiences with previous asus boards whereas my current mobo, MSI, has that pesky memory issue. that leaves me a little leery on buying MSI again (plus that MSI board is more expensive! heh) sadly the asus board is out of stock until the 20th but i can wait.

newegg has a promotion ending today on that g-skill ram for $30 instant discount if you enter a promo-code, so $74.99 with free shipping. so i went ahead and bought it. i'll pick up the proc and the asus mobo next week. i'm not worried about going over the $400 limit i just didn't want to spend $800 :)

i know this was discussed in the other thread but will i really notice a huge difference between the X6 and the X4 AMD chips? because the x4 has two options for as much a $60 savings. is the extra 2 cores worth it?

AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition Deneb 3.2GHz - $139.99
AMD Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition Deneb 3.4GHz - $159.99

-PC-Taishar
Elite Member
Elite Member
 
Posts: 2724
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 8:00 pm
Location: Camp Pendleton, CA
Refer to my PC building thread. AMD is cheap but man it just makes sense to go the Intel route right now.

[Creep]-Tyrant
 
Posts: 1833
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 2:47 am
Location: The Armpit of North Carolina
I do happen to have a couple sticks of 51mgb DDR ram, 2 of them are PC-3200 (ddr400) and 2 of them are pc3500 (slightly faster but will scale back to 400 no problem) all of them are 512mb each for a grand total of 4gb which is completely useless to me since my rigs are all full, I've been holding them in case a stick goes bad on me but my (and my son's) rig all have Corsair XMS w/ lifetime guarantee so it's not like it;s really an issue.

Lemme know if you think you might want. DAMN 1tb drives is sick, heh, I still use 2 120gb IDE drives and I recently snagged a 500gb USB drive at Wal-mart for $50, other than that my storage consists of a random assortment of ancient IDE drives ranging from 10gb to 40gb each, equalling approximately another 100gb. Damn I am so behind the times with my shit, haha. Hell my whole rig is prolly pathetic compared to your stuff, lol.

zel
Elite Member
Elite Member
 
Posts: 2442
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 8:00 pm
Location: Naples, FL

Re: can a 6 year old p4 celeron with 2gb of ram

Postby zel on Wed Feb 16, 2011 6:20 pm

I would say, in gaming, 2 extra cores won't help much. Perhaps later on down the road we might start stretching those limits but for now, the bulk of the work is on the GPUs. I currently run a Phenom 9850 2.5ghz x4 and when I check my cpu usage while playing its spread fairly evenly across all 4 cores and none of the cores max out. I'm sure you could save a bit on the CPU and run whatever so long as your GPU(s) can handle it. So will it use the cores? yea, i'm sure it will. Will you see the difference in-game? Not so much in my experience, GPU is where most of your money should go IMO.

Also keep in mind, I look at this through a budget. I'm not out to have the most badass PC out there pushing triple digit FPS numbers. If i'm above 60, i'm happy and I pretty much always am at 60 or above with my rig except when using IZ3D in some games but thats a different story. Since there are no IZ3D native games right now, the performance hit varies wildly.

HangOver
Elite Member
Elite Member
 
Posts: 6594
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 8:00 pm
Location: Delray Beach
zel wrote:Also keep in mind, I look at this through a budget. I'm not out to have the most badass PC out there pushing triple digit FPS numbers. If i'm above 60, i'm happy and I pretty much always am at 60 or above with my rig except when using IZ3D in some games but thats a different story. Since there are no IZ3D native games right now, the performance hit varies wildly.


i tend to agree with this as well. beyond 60fps you really can't tell a difference and i certainly don't need to spend the money on cutting edge tech.

20 minutes after placing the order for the ram (to get the $30 discount) i got an email auto-notifying me that the motherboard was in stock. hilarious. so i went ahead and ordered it. i also decided to go with the x4 3.2GHz chip. it will be more than good enough for me and it saved me some money. me = happy. in a few months, once i recover from this expense, i'll splurge on a nice vid card.

thanks for all the help! :)

zel
Elite Member
Elite Member
 
Posts: 2442
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 8:00 pm
Location: Naples, FL

Re: can a 6 year old p4 celeron with 2gb of ram

Postby zel on Thu Feb 17, 2011 9:53 am

Sounds good man :) funny how this thread veered off into upgrading gaming rig from resurrecting an old p4 as a media server lol

HangOver
Elite Member
Elite Member
 
Posts: 6594
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 8:00 pm
Location: Delray Beach
zel wrote:Sounds good man :) funny how this thread veered off into upgrading gaming rig from resurrecting an old p4 as a media server lol

heh yeah. i suspected that might happen when i started it lol.

HangOver
Elite Member
Elite Member
 
Posts: 6594
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 8:00 pm
Location: Delray Beach
up and running now. so far so good. i only put 1 vid card in initially and my windows score was 6.8 (the vid card had the lowest score) installed the 2nd card and enabled sli and that 6.8 went up to 7.1 ... not sure if that's a great jump for adding a 2nd card but we'll see how it handles crysis (dl'ing on steam now). my overall score is still only 7.0 because, oddly, the harddrive is my weakest link. i thought ssd's were supposed to score high :) oh well. i think 7.0 out of a possible 7.9 is respectable :)

[Creep]-Tyrant
 
Posts: 1833
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 2:47 am
Location: The Armpit of North Carolina
Heh, mine scores at 4.3 and that's my best rig, I shudder to think what my other one would score at (P3 800mhz).

I'm sure my son;s wouldn't score too high either, hehe

Someday though, someday....I'll have a nice rig that rocks the clocks, too bad I will be too old and blind to enjoy it!

HangOver
Elite Member
Elite Member
 
Posts: 6594
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 8:00 pm
Location: Delray Beach
as long as it can play! :)

cysis runs decent. if i put everything on extra high and 16x aa it, naturally, has horrible framerate. but i found a great balance that makes the game very playable and pretty. this is my first run through the game and i gotta say, i like it so far. wish i could see everything on the extra high settings but it still looks great :)

zel
Elite Member
Elite Member
 
Posts: 2442
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 8:00 pm
Location: Naples, FL

Re: can a 6 year old p4 celeron with 2gb of ram

Postby zel on Sun Feb 27, 2011 10:17 pm

Ya man, I know what you mean. I wish I could run a few games in 3D acceptably but my video card can't on some :/ BFBC2 would have been great in 3D but it has problems besides the performance. Apparently some objects don't reside in the z-buffer appropriately and thus, appear to "pop-out" way too much and it doesn't make sense when viewing. WoW actually taxes my GPU in 3D, where as Dead Space runs fine in 3D, weird....

My next purchase will be a good gpu :/

HangOver
Elite Member
Elite Member
 
Posts: 6594
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 8:00 pm
Location: Delray Beach
not that this is a new argument and i'm sure i'll get some flack but ...

i wish pc devs would take a hint from console devs in terms of working with tech limits. just because new hardware is constantly coming out doesn't mean you have to write software to push it. look what the devs for the xb360 and ps3 are able to do with the 5+ year old technology. it's because they are learning to work WITH it. it's a double edged sword of course but still, it sucks when a new AAA title comes out and you feel like you need to upgrade your gpu to see it in all its glory.

[Creep]-Tyrant
 
Posts: 1833
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 2:47 am
Location: The Armpit of North Carolina
Yea I have always found it so odd that one game will look absolutely sick, have great fps, play nice and smooth then another with seemingly less intensive graphics will tax the system so hard it is barely playable. Just goes to show how much difference efficient code really makes. Even though my system scores only that 4.3 it does play everything I want it too (well almost) acceptably, with some minor issues here or there, but I really think those are related to issues with the specific games themselves (LOL for example, tons of people on their forums report the exact same issues on much, much better equipment than my own, some getting even less performance even though their rig should smoke mine).

I have always been a stickler for 'cutting the fat' from Windows as well, I've found it really helps smooth out a lot of wrinkles. I take the time to shut down all services that I know my system is never going to use (did you know Windows actually has services running for tape backups for example). It may not seem like much, but every bit helps, especially on 'less-than-cutting-edge' equipment. Who needs interrupts being wasted to check for devices you don't even own? Or even 1k of ram being wasted for the same reason? I think that's why I get my crappy old rigs to run some of these newer games. That said, I am starting to hit that point where my rig is falling behind so much that there are a handful of games that simply will not be playable no matter what I do, and again, the coding is part of that because I already play some games that actually look better and they are fine. Two Worlds II is a pretty decent example of a game that looks graphically beautiful, with a lot of physics such as foliage that bends around the character and sways independently in the breeze, shadows that show each leaf of a tree and so forth. I guess the code must be pretty efficient because the game plays perfectly smooth, with all settings maxxed (except number of ambient shadows which I have at half). Crysis runs fine on here, though not maxxed out of course, but with everything at a mid-ish setting it is fine and still looks great. Farcry is decent as well, though there are a few wierd issues here and there. Though I beat those games a while back and never look at them anymore.

Anywho, I'd prolly see a nice jump in performance if I could just get my hands on a socket 939 dual-core processor since I am still running just a single core (Athlon 64 - 4000 @ 2.4ghz), and I do have a couple games that literally require at least dual core or they refuse to run (Dirt 2 for example). That and upgrade my video card, my 8600gts w/ 128Mb ram is definitely a bit out of date by now (although I gotta admit it's been damn faithful, and I'm not even an Nvidia fan but this was one of the best cards I have owned).
Last edited by [Creep]-Tyrant on Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

PreviousNext

Return to Tech Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron