RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes

LeCard · **08-05-2013, 04:42 PM**

This is my current rig:
System:

Windows 8 64-bit (6.2, Build 9200) (9200.win8_gdr.130531-1504)
Intel® Core™ i3-3220 CPU @ 3.30GHz
8153.059MB (RAM)
NVIDIA GeForce GT 640 (VRAM 4042 MB) 9.18.0013.1106

I am looking to upgrade both the graphics card and the processor, but with limited funds I will need to prioritize them. Which do you think would upgrade my performance more? I think it would be the processor, but I want some other voices bouncing around in my head(it gets lonely in here).

Has anyone done a similar upgrade recently? if so please let me know what you noticed. (also I would like to avoid the very expensive graphics cards, yes they are amazing but so is the heart attack I would have when my bank account slaps me for spending that much.)

Freyar · **08-05-2013, 06:09 PM**

Would help to know your budget.

Because it's an 1155 socket, you're in a really good place to really go anywhere. The Core i3 series is a dual-core processor, so you can get a huge benefit for getting up to a quad-core setup. (higher end i5's or any i7).

When I decided to build my rig, I opted for the i7-3770k simply because I wanted the freedom, in the future, to overclock for longer use of the CPU. Combine that with a good aftermarket CPU heatsink and that would do wonders. Â It may be overkill for you, but some food for thought. CPUs are expensive to replace usually, so it's best to overspend and eventually replace other components since the CPU is central.

GPU wise, you're Â on the extremely low end for the 600-series family. While power consumption is very low (~60 watts), that comes at a cost of performance, and this is critical for Final Fantasy XIV since it is absolutely GPU hungry.

Core i7-3770k 3.5Ghz (Newegg) $319
Core i5-3570k 3.4Ghz (Newegg) $219 (Core i5 variant. Will have less performance, but can be an alternative.)
MSIGTX 660 TI (2GB) (Newegg) $284

-----
If you're looking to upgrade SOLELY for FFXIV, I'd run a few benchmarks, likely with MSI AfterburnerÂ running to see GPU/CPU usage (you can monitor CPU usage through Resource Monitor on Windows 7) and figure out what features cost more performance wise. Â Final Fantasy XIV seems to be very GPU intensive, and not that sensitive to CPU (as long as it isn't an old architecture.)

My old machine (used this while playing version one, and during open beta for Planetside 2) had massive issues with a whole lot of newer games since it used a Q9550, an old quad-core CPU. The i7 architecture is nice and provides a lot better performance as a result. The i3-and-5 series are equally as good, especially Sandy and Ivy Bridge setups. (Haswell is new, so I can't tell you how those perform.)

Performance has improved as the beta for Final Fantasy XIV has gone on, so you'll want to keep that in mind as well. My benchmarks can show that.

(Click for Full View)
[Image: 20130805150329-4368dec0.jpg]

Overall, it depends on what you're trying to make your upgrade for. FFXIV specifically? Or in general? You should watch your CPU usage while running the newest benchmark and see how stressed it is, determine if you do need to move to a quad-core before you put the cash down on it, otherwise look at a new GPU that will provide better performance.

Also, consider your power supply. With a 640 and an i3, it may not be strong enough to handle higher-performance parts.

Edda · **08-05-2013, 06:29 PM**

Like Freyar said, I would recommend upgrading both. I would go for the i5s if money is a concern - it has good cost/performance while still being a nice improvement over what you have now. If you don't do much heavy gaming other than FFXIV I see no reason to get anything more fancy than the i5, although you might have to upgrade your CPU sooner than if you were to get an i7, which is something you'll have to think about. Since most games these days feed off your GPU rather than your CPU, you should be set for a good while with a moderate CPU upgrade.

With that being said, I'd definitely look more into upgrading your GPU if both is not an option. To be honest, I really don't know too much about nVidia cards, so I can't really point you in the right direction there. Just find the card that has the best cost/performance ratio and you should be okay, right? Just be careful it doesn't burst into flames (figuratively) like mine did! Thank the Gods that ARR is so much better optimized, even my old toaster can run it.

Freyar · **08-05-2013, 06:43 PM**

660's are the "good deal" at the moment on nVidia's side.

LeCard · **08-05-2013, 07:30 PM**

(08-05-2013, 06:09 PM)Freyar Wrote: -----
If you're looking to upgrade SOLELY for FFXIV, I'd run a few benchmarks, likely with MSI AfterburnerÂ running to see GPU/CPU usage (you can monitor CPU usage through Resource Monitor on Windows 7) and figure out what features cost more performance wise. Â Final Fantasy XIV seems to be very GPU intensive, and not that sensitive to CPU (as long as it isn't an old architecture.)

Thanks for the MSI, I think that answered my question. My CPU was running at 50% and my GPU was slamming 98%+ the entire time the benchmark was running. I suppose that is an easy view of where my bottleneck is. I may wait till I can afford a gen4 intell chip (which would include a MoBo upgrade being needed) for the processor.)

Right now I am scoring 4k on the benchmark(with everything running in the background at that.(at max settings)

Freyar · **08-05-2013, 08:56 PM**

(08-05-2013, 07:30 PM)LeCard Wrote:
(08-05-2013, 06:09 PM)Freyar Wrote: -----
If you're looking to upgrade SOLELY for FFXIV, I'd run a few benchmarks, likely with MSI AfterburnerÂ running to see GPU/CPU usage (you can monitor CPU usage through Resource Monitor on Windows 7) and figure out what features cost more performance wise. Â Final Fantasy XIV seems to be very GPU intensive, and not that sensitive to CPU (as long as it isn't an old architecture.)

Thanks for the MSI, I think that answered my question. My CPU was running at 50% and my GPU was slamming 98%+ the entire time the benchmark was running. I suppose that is an easy view of where my bottleneck is. I may wait till I can afford a gen4 intell chip (which would include a MoBo upgrade being needed) for the processor.)

Right now I am scoring 4k on the benchmark(with everything running in the background at that.(at max settings)

One thing to note is that while everyone who is into benchmarking is running at "maximum" pre-sets, that doesn't mean we'll all be playing at maximum presets. For example, I'll turn on Occlusion Culling and disable FXAA (FXAA mainly for taste, I hate it's blur behavior), as well as turning on LOD (because it's far enough to not be an issue) to also boost performance a little.

LeCard · **08-05-2013, 09:20 PM**

(08-05-2013, 08:56 PM)Freyar Wrote:
(08-05-2013, 07:30 PM)LeCard Wrote:
(08-05-2013, 06:09 PM)Freyar Wrote: -----
If you're looking to upgrade SOLELY for FFXIV, I'd run a few benchmarks, likely with MSI AfterburnerÂ running to see GPU/CPU usage (you can monitor CPU usage through Resource Monitor on Windows 7) and figure out what features cost more performance wise. Â Final Fantasy XIV seems to be very GPU intensive, and not that sensitive to CPU (as long as it isn't an old architecture.)

Thanks for the MSI, I think that answered my question. My CPU was running at 50% and my GPU was slamming 98%+ the entire time the benchmark was running. I suppose that is an easy view of where my bottleneck is. I may wait till I can afford a gen4 intell chip (which would include a MoBo upgrade being needed) for the processor.)

Right now I am scoring 4k on the benchmark(with everything running in the background at that.(at max settings)

One thing to note is that while everyone who is into benchmarking is running at "maximum" pre-sets, that doesn't mean we'll all be playing at maximum presets. For example, I'll turn on Occlusion Culling and disable FXAA (FXAA mainly for taste, I hate it's blur behavior), as well as turning on LOD (because it's far enough to not be an issue) to also boost performance a little.

hmm, good point. i am mostly doing the upgrade becuase I want too and not becuase i feel it needs it. I have been playing the beta with no problems(my room mate was even on his ps3 playing and I continually had to wait for him with load times, so it certainly isn't a need).

but onto the fun topic. I think this is about where I am looking at for a new card.
Card Link

let me know if you think this would give me the boost I am looking at or if I am over estimating the card and there is something better (for apprx. the same price)

Freyar · **08-05-2013, 11:16 PM**

That's a decent card. I run a 670 myself. Can't say I like TigerDirect, but everyone has their own stories with them (both good and bad.)

3GB of RAM is a good thing. While most games won't push over 2GB, you'll be set in the future (especially if texture replacements start showing up.)

LeCard · **08-05-2013, 11:35 PM**

(08-05-2013, 11:16 PM)Freyar Wrote: That's a decent card. I run a 670 myself. Can't say I like TigerDirect, but everyone has their own stories with them (both good and bad.)

3GB of RAM is a good thing. While most games won't push over 2GB, you'll be set in the future (especially if texture replacements start showing up.)

Sounds good. I personally use Tiger because they have a physical store practically next door to me. Though I still look around for the best price(if it is low enough I might be able to wait for shipping, but if I need it now tiger usually has a good price, at least at my store)

good thing to know about the amount of ram a game normally would use. Thanks for all the help. I sadly got way out of date on this info during my last four year of B.A. degree and need to get caught up on alot of stuff at one time.

Asyria · **08-06-2013, 10:34 AM**

All I can say is i7 quad rocks ^^
Mine is like 2 years old and it runs like a charm.
I don't really know much about anything else. Tongue

Freyar · **08-06-2013, 01:58 PM**

I absolutely love my Core I7-3770k. Just moving to a modern architecture from the older Q9550 CPU was amazing in it's own right. Clock-speed difference was only 200Mhz per core, but all in all, architecture is what it's at right now.

system upgrade question

RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes